Loading...
HRAM 02/06/2014 CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY COMMISSION February 6, 2014 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel called the HRA Meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: William Holm Pat Gabel Stephen Eggert Gordon Backlund MEMBERS ABSENT: Larry Commers OTHERS PRESENT: Paul Bolin, HRA Assistant Executive Director Scott Hickok, Community Development Director ACTION ITEMS: 1.Approval of Expenditures MOTION by Commissioner Holm to approve the expenditures. Seconded by Commissioner Eggert. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel asked what the EDAM charges were for. Paul Bolin replied Economic Development Association of MN membership fees for Wally, Scott and Paul. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel asked what a SAC fee was. Mr. Bolin replied it is for the sewer access charge paid to Met Council. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM GABEL DECLARE THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 2.Approval of January 2, 2014, Meeting Minutes MOTION by Commissioner Holm to approve the minutes as amended. Seconded by Commissioner Backlund. Commissioner Backlund asked on page 3, second paragraph to bottom, change “affordable Region housing in the County …” Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel noted on page 2, item 4, second sentence should read StarTribuneStarTribune Minneapolis . And in the Motion should read Minneapolis . Also is Page 3, item 6, third paragraph, third sentence should read “Once this lot is sold…” Commissioner Eggert Backlund said page 2, item 4, should read Commissioner Backund . UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM GABEL DECLARE THE MINUTES APPROVED AS AMENDED 3.Approval of Master Site Plan – GWNE Property Scott Hickok , Community Development Director, stated that the petitioner is requesting 3 land use items to allow for the redevelopment of 5830-6071 University Ave, known as, “Gateway Northeast”. The S-2 Master Plan properties are zoned S-2 Redevelopment District, the master plan needs to be approved before development can start. The TOD Master Plan properties are within the TOD Overlay, the plan needs to be approved before development can start and the Street and Alley Vacation will accommodate the thth redevelopment, a portion of 60 Avenue and an alley south of vacated 59 Avenue needs to be vacated. At a later date, a vacation request will be submitted for the University Avenue Service Drive. Mr. Hickok said that the properties were originally developed in the 1950’s-60’s for commercial uses, restaurant and gas stations. When access was limited as a result of upgrading University Avenue, several of the businesses began to suffer and as a result significant vacancies occurred and the buildings became blighted. In 2007, the HRA partnered with the Corridor Housing Initiative to brainstorm, collaborate and develop some plans for the future of the subject properties. The buildings proposed by the petitioner are of the similar height and scale as those buildings the neighbors and other residents designed for the site in 2007. Mr. Hickok stated that over the few months, City staff and the HRA have spent a great deal of time working with the petitioner, their surveyor, the HRA’s title company, Mn/DOT and Anoka County to identify and clean up the issues that are always associated with plats that were recorded 130 years ago. There have also been meetings with utility companies to identify locations of utilities to ensure that existing utilities will be protected and to review new locations for any and all utilities. Mr. Hickok said that the proposed development will have a total of 265 apartment units, contained in (3) separate buildings. Each building is proposed to be 4-stories, with 3 stories of living above indoor, ground level parking. Two of the buildings proposed have 104 units rd and the 3 building has 57 units. Buildings 1 and 2 are proposed to be connected to each other through a skyway. Mr. Hickok stated that the petitioner has designed the project with removal of the University st Avenue Service Drive. A new private drive coming off of 61 Avenue will be installed on the east side of the subject properties, which will allow access to the project. The project will th also receive access from 60 Avenue and on the south end of the site from the Service Road connected to 57 ½ Avenue. Mr. Hickok said that the City is currently working with Anoka County and Mn/DOT on the University Avenue Service Road turn-back documents. Once staff has the clarification needed on those documents, a street vacation request of the service road will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council. Due to the long, narrow shape of the site, the buildings are positioned in a lineal fashion fronting the length of University Avenue. They are situated approximately 90 ft. from the eastern property line, where the rear yards of the single family homes are located. The surface parking is located on the east side of the building so as to not be visible from University Avenue. Mr. Hickok stated that a portion of the development will be green space which will offer outdoor amenities such as walking trails, a picnic and grilling area and a gazebo. This open space will also allow for certain amount of storm water infiltration. Sidewalks are also included in the design providing convenient pedestrian access to public sidewalks and to other areas of the neighborhood. Mr. Hickok stated that when a property is zoned S-2, it requires that the accompanying site plan become the Master Plan for the site. Once the Master Plan is approved by the City Council, any modification to that approved plan would require a Master Plan Amendment. Review and Recommendation is required by the HRA. In 2011, the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay District was approved. The subject properties are within the TOD Overlay District. The project needs to comply with the TOD standards. The TOD Overlay allows for flexibility when designing a redevelopment project that encourages dense, mixed use, pedestrian-friendly developments. It was also created to minimize the use of the automobile by allowing reduction in parking requirements, if certain conditions can be met and sidewalks are constructed. Mr. Hickok said that within your packet is a list of all of the performance standards the petitioner is required to meet as part of a TOD project. Some of those standards are related to lot coverage, setbacks, height, façade articulation, building face, parking, landscaping, sidewalks, and lighting. The petitioner has designed a project that meets the TOD standards that will enhance the development and achieve what the City and HRA were hoping to see with redevelopment of this land. th Mr. Hickok stated that the petitioner held a neighborhood meeting on Thursday, January 9. They state that is was a good meeting with well-pointed questions. There were 16 members of the neighborhood present. Staff has heard from 4 neighbors regarding the proposed project. 1 neighbor was inquiring if the petitioners neighborhood meeting would be on cable TV, 1 neighbor had some general questions, not stating if they were for or against the project. 2 neighbors had questions about the development and weren’t happy to hear that it was multi-family project. Mr. Hickok stated that City Staff recommends approval of the S-2 and TOD Master Plans, with stipulations, found in packet. This meets the purpose of the TOD Overlay District and the proposed use meet the goals highlighted in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The development will also provide additional housing opportunities. Commissioner Holm asked how many units will be in the first building in phase one. st Mr. Hickok answered 104 units. The first phase will be the building closest to 61 and the building will have an elevator core attached with a pedestrian over cross to get over University Avenue. Phase one is the northern lot, phase two in the middle, and phase three is the last building. Commissioner Holm asked if there were any attendees at the Planning Commission Meeting. Mr. Hickok replied that the audience was small and a few people were interested in the project but did not speak. Commissioner Eggert asked how the project would look during the phasing and how it would appear to the public when the second and third building won’t come until later. Mr. Hickok recalled there were some comments at the Planning Commission Meeting. One comment was if a park area would be developed. The idea was that each phase would bring its own piece and as they work south they will develop that area. The park is not in the first phase but landscaping and surrounding areas to phase one will be completed. Commissioner Backlund asked if there would be samples or preselling of the units during the first phase or if the developer would wait until the building is completed before they start selling. Roger Fink, Trident Development, said they would presell in terms of lease and rent. This is standard practice. They are on track where they had hoped to be since November in creating the preliminary design work. Commissioner Holm said that the building is very attractive. He asked if the main access st would be off of 61 and if the driveway would be completed throughout the site in the first phase. Mr. Fink replied that the first phase at the north end will have two access points plus they th will create a roundabout at the south end of phase one that connects to 60. th Commissioner Holm asked if 60 would be closed initially th Mr. Hickok replied that it is not an intention to have 60 closed. It will remain open and the road will terminate at the roundabout. Commissioner Holm asked what happens at the south end of the site where the third building is constructed; will there be an access road that connects to the existing service road. Mr. Fink replied that’s correct. They intend to add signage that says people are entering a private property area. With the assistance of the Engineering Department they will add a half cul-de-sac where there is some unused existing public right of way for people to turn around and go back. They are also working with the Engineering Department to place additional thth signs on 57 stating that 57 is not a through street so they know they can’t get all the way through. Commissioner Holm said that in the initial phase there will not be any roads beyond th building 1 and there will be an access point for 60 Avenue and that will be the end of development until they proceed with building number 2. Mr. Fink replied that is how it is currently being envisioned. In terms of improvements for the first phase it is the intention to construct a privacy fence in the back and an ornamental fence along University Avenue across the entire development. Commissioner Holm asked if there were plans for access for fire vehicles to be able to connect with fire hydrants and if that would be built in the first phase. Mr. Fink replied yes. He responded to the question about preleasing and stated that it is customary to start advertising some time prior to opening to generate interest and they will also send out marketing information. They hope to get a number of commitments prior to opening. They plan to coordinate the building so a model unit may be available to market the properties. There will also be a marketing office in a trailer placed on site to show samples etc. Commissioner Eggert asked what the developer envisioned with the existing service road. Mr. Fink replied that once the crew comes in to do the demolition they want to get it all done rather than do only a portion until the next phase. It might be wise to have all service improvements removed and disposed of as part of the first phase of construction. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel asked about the fence in the back that belongs to different property owners and how that will be constructed. Mr. Fink replied that there are two things going on; there are continuous “hodge podge” backyard fences and the developer has committed to put up a new decorative privacy fence in addition to what is already there. Conversations have been held with property owners, legal counsel and city staff as to how to address the space between the new fence and the old fence. There are details that need to be worked out. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel asked if people could just live with the new fence vs having fences back to back; it is an issue of placement. Mr. Fink agreed; property owners like the design but it’s complicated. In some areas 2’ of land will be given to the property owner and there is a question as to who maintains the property. All lots won’t line up perfectly and the best answer is to address each property separately. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel asked about the fence in the front if it would be the same as the other side of University Avenue. Mr. Hickok replied yes. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel asked if the property owner would be responsible for maintaining that fence. Mr. Hickok replied that is in the details to work out with MnDOT. The fence can be positioned so it is in the clear, away from MnDOT property. The fence will be put in by the developer and the developer will take care of the maintenance on the fence. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel asked if the HRA would have any responsibility of the fence. Mr. Hickok replied no, the positioning will be on private property. Commissioner Eggert asked if it’s been determined that all fences in the back are on neighbor’s properties. Mr. Fink said they are aware there may be some potential encroachments. Once the ally vacation is complete they will be able to better determine if there are encroachments. The ally vacation will give the developer and property owners each 6’ and they will see where that comes out for each property. Commissioner Backlund was surprised that no one commented at the public hearing about th traffic coming down 60. Mr. Hickok recalled that there was a speaker from the neighborhood who made a statement th about leaving 60 open so traffic wouldn’t mix with neighborhood traffic. th Mr. Fink added that at the neighborhood meeting someone recommended 60 to be closed off. The developer wasn’t opposed to that but it could cause problems for emergency and fire access with only one access point. The question was directed back to the city as to what they thought about closing that road off. It was gathered that if the road were closed off a cul-de-sac would be required for fire trucks and snow plows to turn around. This is where the roundabout feature came in. Another revision that was made was to add a right turn lane stst for an exit point off of 61. If there was only room for one car to turn left on to 61 in peak periods that would cause a backup. Mr. Hickok added that the city’s position was that the roads were designed to handle the traffic. This development will be making bikeways and walkways available for others to get to the corner to get where they want to go. This is an important connection. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel didn’t recall traffic being an overwhelming concern at the st neighborhood meeting. There was a concern with stacking at 61 because the light is long and pedestrians need to get across. The light will have to be longer going the other way. Mr. Hickok said that there was an important meeting with MnDOT regarding safe routes to school and it is also listed in the comprehensive plan. There was good reception by MnDOT and Met Council and everyone shares a desire to make this as safe as possible for people to cross. Another meeting is coming up regarding this and talks will continue. At certain times of the day signals are timed to help with back up traffic. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel said that there is something with the timing of the lights that doesn’t work real well now. Commissioner Backlund agreed that it is a good idea to keep the road open for plowing, fire st trucks and it relieves the pressure for people to go out 61 or going through the development th at 57. He asked if the fence in the back would be animal approved. Mr. Fink replied that several fencing designs were offered showing a variety of products. Neighbors were overwhelming in favor of a certain style. It is decorative but doesn’t have any openings in it. Neighbors didn’t want any spaces in the fence so you can’t walk through it. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel asked if the 55+ senior building was still an option. Mr. Fink replied that idea is still on the table. Because that building would occur in a few years it is difficult to commit to it knowing that the market may change. A market study illustrates a strong demand for apartments with a smaller demand for 55+. There isn’t a lot in the market right now addressing 55+ but the next few years there may be a lot of inventory. The developer will measure the demand again as they get closer to that phase. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel asked if property management would reside on site. Mr. Fink answered yes; at least one property manager will be living onsite as well as an office located on site. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel asked if anyone has made a decision about plowing more sidewalks in Fridley. Mr. Hickok replied that the Authority will be pleased to know there is a great deal more plowing that is happening by public works. To this site specifically, the city now plows th down to 57 Avenue. This may change because of the private developer and the developer is interested in plowing the walkway for public use. MOTION by Commissioner Holm to approve the Master Site Plan. Seconded by Commissioner Eggert. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM GABEL DECLARE THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Informational Items 1.Center for Energy & Environment – Program Overview Paul Bolin , HRA Assistant Executive Director, said that representatives from CEE were present to provide an update on loan programs currently operated for Fridley and to introduce programs they have in other communities that may be of use in Fridley. This is an opportunity to learn more about CEE and learn about the recent changes they have made. Judy Mortenson , Lending Manager, stated that there residential and business efficiency programs available at CEE along with research and information and financing. CEE loan programs are designed to promote energy efficiency and to help reduce the burden of government. CEE has been providing services since 1993 and Fridley was CEE’s first city partner in 1996. Ms. Mortenson stated that CEE administers loan programs in partnership with MN Department of Commerce, MN Housing, City of Minneapolis Neighborhood Revitalization Program, Anoka, Blaine, Brooklyn Park, Coon Rapids, Fridley, New Hope, St. Louis Park and Excel Energy and great River Energy. They have over 105 different loan programs administered by the Lending Center at CEE and CEE internally funds seven different programs including financing for Residential and commercial loans. Ms. Mortenson stated that over $190M in energy and home improvement loans have been funded at CEE and loans closed in the City of Fridley are in excess of $2.4M. Fridley loans were for projects for remodel, exterior projects, landscaping, garage/driveway, windows, energy efficiency and additions. Ms. Mortenson said that marketing efforts for CEE are done through web support, collateral materials and social media like Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Google and Pinterest. Community engagement includes city home shows, local events and TOLBY. TOLBY is a character who visits schools, participates in parades and shows up at other local events. Stacy Boots-Camp reviewed the Home Energy squat Enhanced (HESE) Program. Currently the cities that partner in this program are Bloomington, Edina, Hopkins, Minneapolis, New Hope, Richfield and St. Louis Park. This program involves community engagement, home energy visits, follow up and financing, and contractors and quality assurance. Community engagement and education includes educational workshops, business and faith school presentations, home shows and farmers markets. The home visit includes a two hour visit, two energy experts, installing of materials, identifying opportunities and helping residents save money and energy. Instant savings with the HESE products installed include door weather stripping, water heater blanket, programmable thermostat, high efficiency light bulbs and showerhead and faucet aerators. Ms. Boots-Camp stated that an energy fit home certificate was developed to help drive demand for energy efficiency in the MN housing market and existing hoe certifications are for new homes and the certificate shows that an existing home meets basic EE requirements. HESE will prioritize home energy improvements, give a list of qualified contractors and supply utility rebates and specialized financing. Qualified contractors are sponsored by partner cities and CEE. They require air sealing and insulation training and certification as well as quality control checks on 10% of installs. Ms. Mortenson stated that low cost financing can benefit your community as home and business owners have more efficient, less costly buildings. Property values increase with home improvements and the housing stock is improved driving interest and demand in residency and business development. Mr. Mortenson said that opportunities for Fridley include Home Energy Squad (HES), rental rehab, commercial building enhancement and home improvement for efficiency loans for seniors. Financing from Fridley funds can be revolving, deferred, grant funds or interest subsidy. Another opportunity is PACE; Property Assessed Clean Energy. Commissioner Backlund asked if PACE was property by property or if people draw from one bond. Mr. Mortenson replied that it can be done in one bond but now one bond is one project. If the project is substantial a million dollar PACE bond can be requested and drawn down as needed. Commissioner Backlund asked what was used for collateral, the city’s ability to tax. Mr. Mortenson replied yes. Commissioner Holm asked about the Home Energy Squad; Fridley currently doesn’t participate in this program but if a citizen wanted to do that they could pay the fee. Ms. Boot-Camp replied that this is an installation of energy saving materials. Since CEE is involved with other communities they allowed us to take our community energy service program from Minneapolis to offer to partner cities. An agreement is needed and then the program can be marketed to partner cities. Without an agreement with your city, people can sign up for the enhanced program but will have to pay $100 for it. This is an incentive for cities to partner and be involved in community events and get people in through the process of improving efficiency in their home. Chairperson Pro Tem Gabel thought that should be put on the agenda for discussion at a future meeting. Mr. Bolin said that staff will review the information and bring recommendations to the Authority in the next few months. 2.Housing and Loan Program Update Paul Bolin , HRA Assistant Executive Director, said that two loans were approved for January making a year to date total of two. There were no remodel advisor visits for January. Mr. Bolin reported that the Home and Garden Show was a month early and 68 vendors participated. Quite a few people attended from Fridley. The feedback from vendors and people were that people are interested in doing projects. Adjournment MOTION by Commissioner Eggert to adjourn. Seconded by Commissioner Holm. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM GABEL DECLARE THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND DECLARED THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:40 P.M. Respectfully Submitted, Krista Peterson Recording Secretary