11/05/2007 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION November 5, 2007 APPROVED 92 93 Economic Development Coordinator Divine explained that the original development 94 agreement called for 450 homes with the 60/40 homeowner/rental but this would 95 basically reverse that to 40/60. 96 97 The two projects are brought forward separately. The senior project the developers are 98 confident they can do. They plan to ask for plan changes to facilitate development of the 99 rental building in the future. If they are asked to retain a condominium/townhome 100 project, they are doubtful that is something that could be brought forward within the next 101 24 months. 102 103 When a council member pondered the possibility of delaying the development, the 104 developers explained that it would not be wise because holding costs will remain and 105 escalate. They would like to move forward with a viable plan. 106 107 One council member expressed concern that the change in plans means the city isn't 108 getting what it was originally promised. If mixed use is not viable but was presented as a 109 selling point for the development, was it ever a good idea? Also it is disappointing to see 110 the increase in rental — that was not the original vision. There could be a shift in the 111 market sooner than later and a decision to change may be premature. 112 113 The Hartford Group representatives stated that they will be in a position to attract the 114 retail when the market makes that possible. The inclusion of retail was a part of the 115 original development plans dating back before Hartford's involvement but they still carry 116 the vision. Success for that mixed use can be created by bringing people into the area. 117 118 Another council member noted the importance of retaining a project even with some 119 changes. The senior component that is being requested is welcome. 120 121 A council member questioned how much parking is truly needed for senior housing since 122 cars become less used with a senior lifestyle. Staff explained that they do recognize that 123 nuance and generally would require less parking for senior housing. The developer has 124 experience from previous projects and feels comfortable they will be able to work with 125 city staff to get an appropriate parking ratio. 126 Community Development Director Grochala reviewed the proposed modifications in 127 detail. Staff will be working with the developers on technical issues brought about by 128 changes; staff is supportive of the senior housing component but not supportive of 129 changing some of the original plans, including all of the townhome portion. Overall it is 130 necessary to recognize and confront the market situation. 131 One council member expressed support for the inclusion of life cycle housing; it is an 132 important and growing area of the housing market. 133 The developer is hoping for a January 2008 submission requesting formal city approval 134 of the plans for the senior element. • 135