Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/05/2000 EDAC Minutes 1 APPROVED CITY OF LINO LAKES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES DATE: Thursday, December 7, 2000 MEMBERS PRESENT: H. Juni, B. Rehbein, T. Vacha, J. Schwartz, J. Milbauer, D. Gorowsky R. Jensen MEMBERS ABSENT: F. Chase OTHERS PRESENT: M. Divine, B. Johnson, B. Wessel, D. Carlson (part) GENERAL/MINUTES The October 5, 2000 minutes were approved with one correction. EDAC APPOINTMENTS Ms. Divine explained that there were four EDAC openings. Mr. Rehbein, Mr. Vacha and Mr. Milbauer were up for reappointment. Kathy Hansmann, Curt Martinson and Elaina Carlson were additional applicants. Ms. Carlson said Elaina was her daughter, but she would not be voting for her to avoid appearances of impropriety. All candidates will be interviewed. TOWN CENTER UPDATE Ms. Divine updated members on the Village Plan, and the series of refinements that Carolyn Krall of Studioworks is doing on the Fefercorn/Duffy proposal. She also explained that the Livable Communities Advisory Committee recommended to the Metropolitan Council that Lino Lakes receive $450,000 in grant funding for the Village, rather than the $1.5 million that was requested. This grant has a condition that the money be used for the element of mixed income housing. This will not enable the project to move forward as hoped, since the Tagg property cannot be secured. Options will be studied to decide how the project can keep moving forward. Mr. Gorowsky said the condition of using it for rental housing is somewhat inconsistent to doing the project in a planned approach as was presented to the committee. Mr. Milbauer suggested the city could purchase the Tagg property on a Contract for Deed 2 with the $450,000 as a down payment. Mr. Wessel said an economic development feasibility study will be completed by Al Rolek, city finance director, to look at the options. If it is not feasible to complete a transaction with the Taggs, the city needs to move ahead with developing the land it owns. Ms. Divine explained other conditions were placed on the grant, including completion and approval of the Comp Plan, a traffic light installed on Lake Drive that was planned but never implemented, and the exception of Village housing from the annual building cap. Ms. Carlson asked for more information regarding refinements to the plan. Mr. Wessel said receiving funding puts the city in a position to go back and ask for more, because of the commitment to have it move forward. However, the competition is greater every year. The Village project is the only developing suburb that received funding. Mr. Gorowsky said if the city demonstrated a commitment and a phased approach, it would make the city a natural candidate for follow-up funding, especially if the Comp Plan is in place. Ms. Carlson indicated council would approve the Comp Plan in the first quarter of next year. Mr. Milbauer asked if the developers in the Village were dealing with the Taggs. Mr. Wessel said they had dealt with the Taggs. Ms. Carlson said they had not made the Taggs a solid offer. Ms. Carlson said the council is concerned about increasing the tax rate. The city has land contracts to pay off. The feasibility study should have been done before this decision had to be made. The city doesn’t have design standards or a plan. Mr. Wessel said it is the right time to move ahead with a feasibility study. The Village needs to be looked at in the context of the proposal on the north quadrant. Mr. Wessel said the development team of Fefercorn and Duffy has strong collateral with the grant decision-makers and are capable of doing the project. At the time this collaboration was put together, no “deep pocket” developers had surfaced. Since the Target project surfaced, the development momentum is stronger. Some alternative proposals are possible. DELLWOOD LLC Mr. Wessel said the Target proposal was public. Dellwood LLC is the developer, Ryan Companies is developing with them, and Target is the Superstore prospect. They want to break ground May 2001 and be operational in July 2002. Some contingencies must be satisfied, including approval of a second entrance off of Lake Drive. TKDA and the developer are doing a traffic impact study. The county has consistently said no additional access to the site. This is just one of a series of road issues, including Highway 49, that need must be dealt with jointly with the county, and have impacts on the Lake Drive interchange area and the funding attached to it. Mr. Milbauer asked about the city moving ahead without the county’s blessing. Mr. Wessel said cooperation is necessary when dealing with county roads. Mr. Wessel said the design standards are stalled, have not gone to the P&Z for a hearing. With the Target proposal, the city is waiting to see how it develops. The council seems to 3 have suspended its concern that the city implement the letter of the design standards, because the Dellwood project does not qualify. Ms. Divine said the obvious problem was a huge merchandiser taking up half the site. A main street environment is difficult. This project is a conventional suburban development. Staff is working with the development team to provide architectural character and pedestrian streetscape that will complement the Village site. Mr. Wessel said the developers have been receptive in looking at pedestrian ways, etc., but they will ask for a subsidy to create the quality the city is seeking. The city has made compromises already, but the next question is what to do with the standards in the Village now. Mr. Gorowsky said this possibility was clear that the standards were more mandatory in the Village and potentially relaxed on the north side. Mr. Milbauer asked if the standards have impeded the development of the Village. Mr. Wessel said no, it’s a timing issue. The Traditional Neighborhood Development has growing interest, developers want the standards so they know the rules. Ms. Divine said developers have backed away because of the land cost. The standards will impede a certain type of development, but that is the intent of the design standards. But we are looking for the kind of developer who wants to do Traditional Neighborhood Development. They are still in the minority but interest is growing, even becoming mainstream in many areas of the country. It may still be early for the market in Lino Lakes, but once the opportunity is gone, it cannot be recovered. Mr. Milbauer said nothing has happened on the site, and wondered why it hasn’t. Ms. Divine said no zoning ordinance is in place, so the standards have not impeded development. If the standards were in place, the bank would have been built differently. Mr. Milbauer said a modification of standards might be necessary. Ms. Divine responded that the only development proposal that has come forward is the current one. The Taggs have had offers for the land, but no development of any kind has been proposed to the city. Mr. Rehbein said the largest impediment for the site is the price of the land. If the Rehbeins had asked for their land what the Taggs were asking, Target would not be interested. He added that he doesn’t believe that developers will do the design standards without assistance. The potential for $1.5 million brought the Fefercorn team in. Nothing will happen without public incentive unless the Taggs lower their price. Mr. Jensen said the site will develop when Target comes in and creates the market. Now is the opportunity to do the Village as planned. Mr. Rehbein said he doesn’t believe, with the price of the land where it is, that developers will meet the design standards at market rates. Ms. Divine said the funding still opens up opportunities, and it’s important to move ahead. Staff will negotiate with the committee regarding flexibility regarding the use of the funds. Mr. Jensen suggested the funds be used to extend the utilities. Mr. Gorowsky said the question is whether the modification of the design standards on the Target site positively or negatively affects the Village. Mr. Divine said it was not 4 unexpected that the north quadrant would develop as more auto oriented. The city started with the Village and expanded the scope to include the north side. With the design standards, the city has a clearer picture of what it wants and it makes it easier to work through the issues on the north side. The question is whether this development makes it even more important to have standards on the south so the city does not lose its goal for a town center. EDAC could consider recommending to the council what it considers the best course. Mr. Rehbein said the recommendation should be if the city wants the standards, will the city commit to subsidizing those standards? Mr. Gorowsky said this may be the economic driver on both quadrants, but to a larger degree on the south side. Mr. Wessel said the economic feasibility study can identify sources for providing subsidy and the city’s ability to do so. Mr. Rehbein said the council told him they were looking for creativity and expertise in EDAC. Mr. Johnson suggested that EDAC recommend which parts of the standards are the most important, and maybe should be subsidized. The less relevant standards can be more open to negotiation. Ms. Divine reminded the group they endorsed the standards with the understanding they may be modified before they became an ordinance. Mr. Johnson said P&Z had concerns, and it would be helpful to know where EDAC stands. Mr. Gorowsky said he does not think EDAC is recommending the city subsidize the development. After discussion, Mr. Milbauer moved that EDAC recommend the city council consider modification of the design standards on the north quadrant to provide flexibility as it relates to the development of the Dellwood LLC project and/or subsequent developers of similar quality. Mr. Rehbein seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Wessel suggested that Mr. Rehbein may have a conflict of interest when voting on issues regarding the Town Center. Mr. Rehbein agreed he had not considered that and should be abstaining. Mr. Gorowsky clarified and restated the motion with Ms. Schwartz seconding the motion. Members revoted with Mr. Rehbein abstaining. Mr. Juni said that as part of the economic evaluation consideration should be given to subsidy to implement the design standards. Mr. Rehbein said he is not endorsing subsidy, he is just hearing from developers that subsidy will be needed. Other discussion concluded that this is a timing issue, and subsidies will stimulate the quality of the development. Mr. Milbauer moved that EDAC recommend that as part of the economic development feasibility study the council should consider and evaluate the ability to provide subsidy and/or flexibility to both quadrants to facilitate implementation of development with the design standards. Mr. Juni seconded the motion. Motion passed with Mr. Rehbein abstaining. 5 Ms. Divine asked EDAC if they wanted to consider their position on the Metropolitan Council’s condition that the housing in the Village be exempt from the annual housing limit. Mr. Rehbein said not exempting the Village would hamstring developers of the project. Mr. Jensen said he thought the council had moved beyond limiting housing. He moved that the Town Center housing be exempt from the annual limitation on housing starts in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Milbauer seconded the motion. Motion passed with Mr. Rehbein abstaining. Mr. Milbauer moved to recommend that the city council make its best effort to meet the conditions of the Livable Communities grant and do what is necessary to obtain the funds so the city can be in the position to receive the $450,000 in funding in 2000 and be in the position to obtain additional funding. Ms. Schwartz seconded the motion. Motion passed with Mr. Rehbein abstaining. Mr. Milbauer asked for Mr. Rehbein to clarify his abstaining because of company involvement in the projects, not because of lack of support of the issues. Mr. Rehbein agreed that even on the Village site there is a contract for deed with the Rehbeins, so there is a potential conflict of interest, but that he does support the recommendations. Meeting adjourned.