Loading...
City Council Minutes 12-22-2003 JointMINUTES JOINT MEETING - CITY COUNCIL, HRA, DAT AND PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, December 22, 2003 - 5:30 p.m. Council Members Present: Roger Carlson, Glen Posusta, Robbie Smith, Brian Stumpf and Bruce Thielen. HRA Members Present: Steve Andrews, Brad Barger, Bill Fair, Dan Frie DAT Members Present: Cindy Anderson, Ron Hoglund, Dennis Sullivan, Susie Wojchouski, Planning Members Present: Richard Carlson, Rod Dragsten, Dick Frie, Lloyd Hilgart and Dave Reitveld Mayor Bruce Thielen called the joint workshop to order at 5:30 p.m. He explained the purpose of the workshop was to get input on a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan affecting Block 52. The members of the various boards in attendance were introduced as well as the property owners and developer who were in attendance at the meeting. Steve Johnson who is proposing a development for Block 52 stated that requirements of the Downtown Revitalization Plan did not make development feasible. After working for some length of time they found a firm (Walgreens) who would be interested in developing Block 52 as a site for their store. Steve Johnson stated that they have been working with the developer to mesh as much as possible the requirement of the Downtown Revitalization Plan with the criteria Walgreens has set out for development of their stores. Bob Cunningham from Toll Development spoke regarding the proposed development. He indicated his firm was one of several that did development work for Walgreens. He noted his firm has done Walgreen stores both in the metro area and outside the metro area. His firm develops the site, constructs the building and leases it back to Walgreens. Mr. Cunningham stated that Walgreens has not yet approved this site for development. He stated that as the developer of the site he understands the issues of the community and tries to mesh it with the standards and criteria that Walgreens has in store development. The main issue with this site is the zero setback requirement. He noted that zero setback construction is more expensive. He also pointed out that the developer does not have the parcels of land affected by the proposed development under contract. He stated that the traditional type of construction for the Walgreens store is a free standing store with a drive through area that wraps around with storage area in the rear and a field of parking. Brad Barger asked what it was about Monticello that attracted the interest of Walgreens. Bob Cunningham replied that the location is at the intersection of two main roads and the growth of the Monticello area were primary points of attraction. Steve Andrews asked if they had a contingency plan for another site in Monticello if this one fell through. Bob Cunningham stated they did not, at least not at this time and that the only site Toll Development is discussing is the Block 52 site. Cindy Anderson brought up the proposed access to the site and stated that turning left onto TH 25 would be difficult. Bruce Thielen asked if the developer had discussed the proposed access for the site 1 Joint Meeting Minutes - 12/22/03 with either Wright County or the Mn Dept. of Transportation. Bob Cunningham stated they have not had discussions with either entity regarding access for the site. Cindy Anderson asked if the type of design used by Walgreens at the 49' and France site couldn't be utilized here. Mr. Cunningham stated that Walgreens no longer goes with that type of design in any location. Bob Cunningham concluded by stating he felt the Walgreens development would be a good addition to the downtown area but noted that there is much work that remains to be done before the development can happen. Bruce Thielen asked if Walgreens would consider a zero setback on Broadway. Bob Cunningham replied that there was a similar situation on a Walgreens site in Hutchinson and the site was rejected. Steve Grittman, City Planner, reviewed the Downtown Revitalization Plan, the process that was followed to come up with a plan that reflected the needs of the community. The question was raised whether the City's Comprehensive Plan was viable. In looking at what other communities are doing, Steve Grittman noted there is strong trend in redeveloping a traditional downtown area. Communities are interested in preserving the downtown area and those communities without a traditional downtown area are trying to establish one. There is the policy issue of whether the Downtown Revitalization Plan adequately provides for the preservation of the downtown area and whether the suburban design of the proposed development is appropriate for the downtown. Even if Monticello feels the suburban design model is reasonable, there are also practical issues with the proposed development that need to be addressed. One issue of primary concern is access for the site. Steve Grittman noted that it is not likely that the site would get access off of Broadway. The only access would be off of Pine Street with a right in and right out. Another issue is the property owners affected by the development. Not all of the property owners are in agreement with the proposed development and there is also considerable amount of city owned land that would be affected. The redevelopment aspect of this presents another issue as what is being proposed is less in square footage than what currently exists. Steve Grittman emphasized that this development would be difficult to do even if the City changes its policy. Mayor Thielen stated he had received a number of e-mails from property owners regarding the proposed development. At this time, the Council provided an opportunity for the business owners and others in the audience to comment. Rory Zitur asked about the 3-4 parcels of property that need to be obtained in order for this project to proceed and whether the City would go on record as to whether they would be willing to condemn those properties in order for this project to proceed. Bob Cunningham responded that they did not ask the City to look at condemnation of any properties as it was their hope that they could negotiate with the affected property owners. Rory Zitur noted that some of the property owners have stated their issues with the proposed development and their unwillingness to sell, so the City would have to make a decision on whether they would consider condemnation. Bruce Thielen stated that based on the information presented at this time he was inclined to say the City would not condemn affected properties. Rory Zitur asked if TIF was being considered. Steve Andrews replied that he didn't know what the gap is between what is there and what is being built so they didn't have any number on the amount of TIF needed. Steve Johnson indicated that property acquisition costs would be an item that would look to 4 t l Joint Meeting Minutes - 12/22/03 TIF assistance for but at this time the cost information is very preliminary. Rory Zitur stated in discussions with the Mayor, the statement was made that the City cannot make exceptions to policy because it sets a precedent and now the City is being asked to make a change in policy that various city boards and commissions are not in favor of. Bruce Thielen noted that because groups are not in favor of the proposal the City felt there was a need to hear all sides and hence the workshop meeting. Rory Zitur noted his concern with access points for the development. Bruce Thielen stated that although access for the site is a concern that is not the issue that needs to be addressed but whether the Comprehensive Plan needs to be amended. Kathleen Froslie a property owner in business in Monticello for 18 years talked about how the downtown area struggles each year. She felt a Walgreens would help the downtown area and the existing businesses. This development would be important to the survival of the existing downtown business. Gary Kjellberg, owner of Monticello Carpets stated that the proposed development would limit the ability of trucks getting through to his property. Susie Wojchouski from the Chamber of Commerce stated that the Chamber had done an informal straw poll about the development and 19 responses were favorable to the development and 1 was opposed to it. Scott Douglas noted there are currently four drugstores in the City now with the potential for two additional stores if Target and Wal-Mart come in. jHe questioned whether it was necessary to have another one if it means driving out of existing businesses. Scott Douglas felt if the City was patient, development will take place. Kathleen Froslie said the downtown area needs a drawing card and so far this is the only developer that has expressed any interest in locating in the downtown area. Glen Posusta questioned whether the development would close existing business. Brian Stumpf stated that the developer would have to negotiate with the property owners. Scott Douglas also noted there is limited time frame for the TIF financing and that window of time is closing. Robbie Smith stated the Council's decision on the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan has nothing to do with whether the development takes place or closing out other businesses. It is not the Council's position to try to stop free enterprise from taking place. For business to survive they must learn to compete. Rory Zitur noted that with the property owners not willing to sell and the possibility of having to condemn to obtain the property, the City could find themselves in a situation similar to that of the City of Richfield and the Walser/Best Buy development. Bill Fair responded that it would be unlikely that the City would make any decision without legal consultation. Bob Cunningham added that Best Buy and not the City of Richfield paid the cost of that judgment. Al Loch asked Bob Cunningham if in areas where Walgreens has situated has there been an increase in growth and development in the area. Bob Cunningham stated that there has been some additional development in areas adjacent to Walgreens and he cited Chaska as an example. While adjacent growth is not universal it is a trend. Rory Zitur asked if there was information on traffic volumes generated by Walgreens. Bob Cunningham indicated that he didn't have that information with him but he could provide it. Lee Fick owner of Crostini's felt that this was development was needed to generate more traffic in the downtown area. He said it was ironic that on the day after Thanksgiving, 3 0 Joint Meeting Minutes - 12/22/03 one of the busiest shopping days, there was virtually no activity in the downtown area. Keith Kjellberg commented that many of the projects taking place in the downtown area do not have adequate parking which he felt compounded the problems for the downtown area. Mr. Kjellberg also stated that he wanted it on record that he did not want sell his property. Mayor Thielen then closed the public input portion of the meeting and took a consensus of the representatives of the board members. Dick Frie of the Planning Commission didn't feel you would ever see a traditional downtown in communities anymore. Existing businesses have to do something to help bring activity into the downtown area. The Comprehensive Plan has to be flexible in order for that to happen. Dick Frie stated he had many calls about the project and they were positive. Richard Carlson, Planning Commission, felt that the downtown cannot survive today's economy. Richard Carlson suggested working out some type of compromise. Rod Dragsten, Planning Commission, noted that the Planning Commission was not in agreement on this item. He stated that things will happen in the downtown area as long as it is the right fit. He didn't know if a big box development like Walgreens would add to the downtown area. Dave Reitveld, Planning Commission supported the proposed amendment as he felt the Walgreens would be a good draw for the business that are currently located in the downtown area. Lloyd Hilgart, Planning Commission, stated he didn't feel the discussion should be on Walgreens but whether the Comprehensive Plan was a good plan to have. He stated by changing the setback requirement of the Comprehensive Plan it doesn't insure that Walgreens i will go through with this location. He felt the City should stay with the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan at least with the zero setbacks on Broadway. Dick Frie asked Steve Grittman to indicate where there was land zoned that would fit the suburban design that Walgreens was proposing. Steve Grittman stated there are areas of B-3 and B-4 zoning along TH 25 and south of I-94 which would accommodate the suburban design. Steve Grittman added that Walgreens would be a permitted use in the downtown (CCD) district. Bruce Thielen asked Rod Dragsten how he felt about retaining the zero setback along Broadway. Rod Dragsten indicated he would be okay with that. The Design Advisory Team was polled. Ron Hoglund agreed with the zero lot line on Broadway and the setback on Pine Street (TH 25) and felt if Walgreens did not go in, this area would develop eventually. Susie Wojchouski indicated that when working on the Comprehensive Plan, the City of Anoka was looked at because they had a strong thriving downtown business area. Anoka had a strong initial re -investment in the downtown area and the rest of the development came after that. She noted that traffic was a huge concern with this development. She felt the development should be setback from TH 25 but the zero lot line be retained along Broadway. She added that the purpose of the Design Advisory Team is to support the Downtown Revitalization Plan. Dennis Sullivan felt the Downtown Revitalization Plan was to be pedestrian friendly versus automobile friendly and he felt the kind of building being proposed is automobile friendly which is not a good fit. He agreed that the zero lot line has to be held on Broadway. Cindy Anderson agreed with Dennis Sullivan. She felt the traffic pattern generated by Walgreens is inconsistent with what should be in the downtown area and the question of access is a major concern. Cindy Anderson noted that there is no assurance that there will be an access given on TH 25. The HRA was polled. Bill Fair felt that the three blocks that made up the downtown area and has the zero lot line setback should be able to be accommodated as a traditional downtown. He would not like to see the downtown area trampled by traffic. Redevelopment will happen. As growth continues, 4 Joint Meeting Minutes - 12/22/03 demand increases and development is inevitable. What happens there sets a pattern for future development and the City needs to look at the entire downtown area not just Block 52. He also added that things have been happening such as the Towne Centre and other development. Dan Frie would support the project but is skeptical about the TIF needed to address the gap. Darrin Lahr felt the plan is for the long term. He was supportive of zero lot line on Broadway and a setback from TH 25, similar to the Monticello Theater. Even if this project did not go through he felt development would take place anyway. Steve Andrews noted the HRA and other boards have spent considerable time on this issue and he has heard comments both for and against the project. Brad Barger stated that with the Hoisington study it brought the community together with a blue print. He felt the City needs to be flexible with the comprehensive plan if development is not occurring. He also noted parking concerns but felt people who came downtown to the drugstore might stay for other things. He also added that the TIF assistance at this point is unknown because all figures they have are very preliminary in nature. Richard Carlson agreed with Brad Barger that the comp plan is a guide and needs to be adjusted periodically. He felt the intersection was an unique corner for development and agreed that some kind of stimulus is need for the downtown area. Brian Stumpf brought up the issues of accessibility and negotiations with adjacent property owners which he felt were major concerns. He indicated that he felt zero lot line should be retained along Broadway with a setback along TH 25. Bruce Thielen would support the zero setback along Broadway and concurred that issues such as accessibility and acquisition of properties need to be resolved. Glen Posusta said he would like to have Bruce Thielen and Brian Stumpf go on record to say that the no property would be taken by condemnation. If they would make that statement he would support the proposal. He said sometimes you have to break the rules to make things happen. Glen Posusta suggested that because of traffic and accessibility issues, Block 52 may be the wrong block for Walgreens to locate on. Robbie Smith stated he did not want to see the City utilize condemnation in this case. There are a number of issues besides the setback that need to be addressed and he felt that what must be looked at is what is good for the community and not just what is good for the individual. He stated would support the proposal either way but would prefer zero setback along Broadway. Bruce Thielen stated that the Council would make at decision at the first council meeting in January. The decision would be whether to amend the comprehensive plan and whether the amendment would allow a setback on one street or both streets. Mayor Thielen thanked everyone for attending and providing input. The workshop was closed at 7 p.m. Recording Secretary 5