The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSeptember 23, 2026 City Council Workshop Meeting MinutesC CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS City Council Workshop City Hall 2077 \Nest Larpenteur Avenue MINUTES September 23,2026 5:00 P.M. A. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M. B. ROLLCALL:GUSTAFSON-X- MAY-X- MIELKE X MOGEN X WASSENBERG X STAFF PRESENT: LINEHAN X POLICY ITEMS: 1. Visioning Exercise - 1,407 Larpenteur - Get Pressed Redevelopment Goals Linehan introduced the item, noting that this workshop was a continuation of the July 22,2026 session held with Kristin Prososki of Kansas State University's Technical Assistance to Brownfields (TAB) Program. The City had acquired the 0.5-acre former Get Pressed dry-cleaning site at 1407 Larpenteur Avenue West earlier in the year at appraised value. The purpose of this session was to further discuss redevelopment priorities and potential uses-park, commercial, or residential-and to consider next steps including community engagement. Prososki provided a brief recap of the July session and outlined the goals for the evening: to identify and rank site priorities, discuss the considerations for each of the three reuse options, and determine whether sufficient direction existed to guide next steps. Prososki then summ arized key considerations for each option. Park reuse would add a green amenity to a quadrant currently lacking city park space and would give the City flexibility over its own timeline, but would involve significant public cost, including the initial investment, park development, and ongoing operations and maintenance- and would offer fewer viable cleanup grant opportunities. She noted that a park application would likely not compete well for DEED or Met Council cleanup grants, though Ramsey County remained a possibility. Commercial reuse aligns with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Corridor Plan, which showed approximately 95% of respondents favoring small neighborhood-scale business. Commercial use would increase the tax base, create potentialjobs, and would be the strongest fit for available cleanup grant programs. However, uncertainty around the specific type of commercial tenant and the time needed to find the right development partner were noted as challenges. 4 Residential reuse was described as the most developer-friendly option given the volume of residential developers and prior interest in the site. It fits some cleanup grant programs and would generate a tax base increase, though smaller than commercial use. Prososki noted it would be a "middle of the road" option across most criteria. Mielke identified neighborhood compatibility as her top priority, explaining that the site's location-at the end of a residential street and near an elementary school- made uses that would generate significant additional traffic problematic. She indicated that residential or park use seemed most fitting, and expressed skepticism about commercial viability given recent vacancies in nearby commercial space, including at Town Square and along Larpenteur. Mogen questioned whether commercial space was actually not neighborhood compatible, and Mielke clarified that she was not commenting on commercial use, only stating her top priority was neighborhood compatibility. May raised the broader question of how the Council assesses community need across all three categories. She acknowledged the lack of park space in the northeast quadrant as a documented need, while also recognizing the broad regional need for housing. She noted that the commercial space at Town Square had seen increasing vacancies-including PizzaHut and a pediatric office-and questioned whether new commercial construction at this site made sense when existing nearby commercial space remained unfi lled. Mogen offered a different perspective, arguing that Larpenteur Avenue, as a major thoroughfare, should be developed in a manner that supports transit, pedestrian activity, and density. He expressed concern that low-density residential or park use on a Larpenteur-facing parcel would represent a long-term missed opportunity, and ranked commercial first, residential second, and park third. He acknowledged uncertainty about what specific commercial use would be viable, but emphasizedthat development along the corridor should reflect its character as a transit-connected arterial. Wassenberg questioned whether park use was truly compatible with the physical characteristics of the site-O.5 acres immediately adjacent to a busy county highway-and noted that unlike Curtiss Field, this site lacks the buffering afforded by a frontage road or waterway. He expressed concern about the fiscal responsibility to taxpayers, estimating the cost of a park scenario at $600,000 to $800,000 or more when accounting for the foregone sale proceeds, remediation costs unlikely to be grant-funded, park construction, and the absence of ongoing tax base contribution. He noted that figure represented approximately $300-$400 per household. May, while acknowledging the cost considerations, pushed back on framing park investment purely as a financial loss, noting the City had invested millions in parks citywide and that even small parks-like Curtiss Field on the much busier Snelling Avenue-provide meaningful community benefits, fostered neighborhood interaction, and likely improved surrounding property values. She advocated for seriously 5 considering park use, particularly given that this site represents an exceedingly rare opportunity for the City to acquire land in the northeast quadrant. The Council discussed how and when to engage the broader community. There was general consensus that an open house-style event, likely held at the neighboring elementary schoolto maximize neighborhood participation, would be appropriate. All three reuse options would be presented with factual information-including honest cost and trade-off information-displayed on informational boards to solicit structured feedback. Mogen raised concern that an open-ended public preference exercise without sufficient context would likely produce an overwhelming preference for park use without residents fully understanding the fiscal implications. Prososki suggested that facilitated table discussions, rather than simple dot-voting, could elicit more nuanced feedback. May emphasized that the community engagement should ask questions the Council is genuinely prepared to act on, and that the City's well-educated and engaged population can be trusted to grapple with the trade-offs if presented clearly. Linehan suggested targeting early January for a community engagement event, noting timing constraints around the December newsletter cycle and the Human Rights Day event. He confirmed that the City would not publish the item in the upcoming newsletter given that nothing definitive was yet in place, but would look to include updates in regular communications once a direction was clearer. In regards to discussion about interim use of the space, Linehan noted that the existing structure has been condemned as unfit for human occupancy following a fire marshal assessment, and cannot be reused without significant investment. A demolition estimate of approximately $60,000 was previously obtained, which could potentially be recouped through grant funding if demolition is part of a consecutive redevelopment effort. However, standalone demolition in advance of a long-term plan may complicate grant eligibility. Mogen proposed an interim use of the site-following demolition-as an electrified food truck pad with picnic tables and canopies, leased to food vendors on a seasonal basis. A few Council members responded positively to an interim use as a way to generate modest revenue, activate the site in the near term, test market interest in food-oriented commercial use at the location, and avoid leavingavacant condemned structure in place for years. It was noted that the existing asphalt and concrete slab could serve as a functional base and act as a contamination cap, though staff indicated it would be prudent to consult with the MPCA before proceeding with any site activity. Wassenberg indicated that taking the building down was not a personal priority in the near term, as the site currently appears relatively clean, and he preferred preserving the option to have a grant fund the demolition as part of a broader redevelopment package. 6 Staff were directed to continue developing cost estimates for demolition, explore the interim food truck concept, and work with TAB to design community engagement materials and a facilitated format for the proposed neighborhood open house in early 2027. D. ADJOURNMENT: 7:04P.M Mayor Gustafson motioned to adjourn the workshop; Approved 5-0 DISCLAIMER: City CouncilWorkshops areheldmonthly as an opportunity for Council Members to discuss policy topics in greater detail pior to a formal meeting where a publichearing may be held and/or action may be taken. Members of the public that wouldlike to make a comment or ask questions about an item on the agenda for an upcoming workshop should send them to mail@falconheights.org prior to the meeting. Alternatiaely, time is regularly allottedfor public comment during Regular Gty Council Meetings (typically 2nd and 4thWednesdays) during the Community Forum. Dated this 14ft day of October,2026 Randall C.Mayor City Administrator 7