12-06-1994 SPECIAL MEETINGOITY OF RIOFIFIELD
PLnn m OOf elf Y ssion
nawfl
December 6, 1994
7:00 p.m. -- Speical Meeting
l( V 1 l
j p r• >< 1 < t' NI i n u i I
I "ub lic• I- Ic'.tr•ir;
ITEM #1 94- APUD -3 CSM - Amend Phase I
ITEM #2 PC Letter #16 Comprehensive Plan Finding for East
66th Street Redevelopment Project Area
Icl l:u ine
Lids®n Reporta
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96
hours in advance to the Administrative Service's Director at 861- 9702."
Up 0 CITY OF R10HRELD
PLRnninG OOMMISSIOn
Action R®queit
Item: #1 Agenda Section: Public Hearing
Case: #94- APUD -3 Date: December 6, 1994
GENERAL INFORMATION
Petitioner: CSM Corporation
Subject Area: That area bounded by 77th Street on the north, Colfax Avenue on the east,
I494 on the south, and Emerson Avenue on the west.
Type of Request: Amend final development plan and conditional use permit for Phase I
Redevelopment Project.
Zoning: PC -2 (planned general commercial)
Land Use: Retail
Comp. Plan: Freeway strip
References: (see attached Citations section for excerpts)
Zoning Code: Section 530.41 outlines the process for amending the final development plan
and conditional use permit of a planned unit development.
ACTION
Proposed Change: The amendment would allow an increased building size for Anchor B from
the plans which were approved on August 1, 1994.
Staff
Recommendation: Approve the amended final development plan and conditional use permit for
Phase I.
HISTORY
Public Notice: Notice of the Planning Commission's consideration and public hearing was
mailed to all property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. The
mailed notice was also sent to all business operators in the Phase II area.
Public Hearing: The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on December 6,
1994.
City Council: Planning Commission action would set a City Council public hearing date of
December 12, 1994.
ANALYSIS
Background: The current final development plan for Phase I, as approved on August 1,
1994 is 116,605 square feet of retail space, as follows:
Anchor A tenant (SportMart); 43,968 square feet -- west building
Anchor B tenant; 15,561 square feet -- middle building
Anchor C tenant (Best Buy); 57,076 square feet -- east building.
Proposal: CSM is proposing to increase the Phase I building area to 127,366 square
feet. The increase would be realized by adding approximately 10,500
square feet to the Anchor B (middle) tenant space, to be occupied by
PetSmart.
The parking ratio for the proposed plan amendment would be 4.55 spaces
per 1,000 square feet of gross building area, for a total of 579 spaces. The
City requires a minimum of 4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross
building area for retail uses.
The proposed amendment is similar to the original Phase I PUD plan, which
was scaled later back to provide a more favorable parking ratio for Phase I,
due to uncertainly over who would develop Phase II. On November 1,
1994, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) selected CSM to
develop Phase II.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommended
Action:
Preferred: Recommend that the City Council approve the amended final development
plan and conditional use permit for Phase I of the CSM Redevelopment
Project subject to the following stipulation:
1. That a veterinary clinic not be located in the Phase I area.
Basis: 1. The proposal is consistent with the Interstate - Lyndale - Nicollet (ILN)
Redevelopment Plan and Comprehensive Plan.
2. The Phase I site is capable of supporting the additional square footage of
building space as proposed.
3. The number of parking spaces to be provided would exceed the City's
parking standard.
4. The loading area would be adequate.
5. The City Council recently determined that a veterinary clinic is not
appropriate for this type of setting.
Alternative: Recommend that the City Council deny the amended final development plan
and conditional use permit for Phase I of the CSM Redevelopment Project
with a finding that the amendment would have adverse effects on the
adjacent properties or the City as a whole.
CITATIONS
ZONING CODE:
530.41. Amendment of conditional use permit. Amendment to a conditional use permit issued for
land within a PUD district shall be by two - thirds vote of the council. The council may hold such
hearings on a proposal to amend a conditional use permit as it may consider necessary; but at least one
public hearing shall be held. The council may consider all factors considered in connection with
rezoning the PUD district and issuing conditional use permits therefor as well as any other factors
relevant to the public health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or welfare and to the protection of
property or improvements in the neighborhood.
1
iG
I
4JJVS'3AV 3WOND
t —_ U)
ti
w
I I I I I I n 11 111
Al 11111 Will III
11111111 WHIM
14 I I I I I
11411111 1 U I I I I I In-I
ILLI—LU RI III IH-
TFFTI I I U I I I I 111
1 1 1 1 111 u I I I
I I I I I I I I u I I I I In
ir I J-
ICI ICI Ij11111 u I I I I I rl
I II
r ri-mi 11 t - r r I-
P4w
ti
x
as
I'i
Vs
a z
Q
LLI 0Z
0
w
f) wLU
IL a-
ON
imem:
H
I.
IIIIIl1111 111111111111111111111111111E
P4w
ti
x
as
I'i
Vs
a z
Q
LLI 0Z
0
w
f) wLU
IL a-
ALTERNATIVE A
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority
in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota
Redevelopment Plan
for the
East 66th Street Redevelopment Project Area
Dated: November 21, 1994
Prepared By:
The City of Richfield
Department of Community Development
Housing and Redevelopment Division
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield MN 55423
612) 861 -9760
MAYOR
Martin J. Kirsch
CITY COUNCIL
Michael Sandahl, Council Member At Large
Susan Rosenberg, Ward I
Russ Susag, Ward 2
Donald Priebe, Ward 3
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Thomas Harms, Chairperson
Joan Helmberger, Vice - Chairperson
Vern Luettinger, Secretary
Russ Susag, Member
Michael Sandahl, Member
CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
James D. Prosser
PLANNING COMMISSION
Daniel Linnihan, Chairperson
Kristal Stokes, Vice Chairperson
Timothy Erlander, Secretary
Pamela Dmytrenko, Member
David Gepner, Member
Morris Nilsen, II, Member
Thomas Scaglia, Member
William Snyder, Member
Paul Wasko, Member
CITY STAFF
Byron Wallace
Director, Community Development
Bruce Palmborg
Housing & Redevelopment Coordinator
Katia Medvetski
Redevelopment Specialist
CONSULTANTS
John B. Dean
Ronald L. Batty
HRA Legal Counsel
Holmes & Graven, Chartered
Minneapolis, MN
Mark Ruff
Publicorp, Inc.
Minneapolis, MN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
East 66th Street Redevelopment Project Area
Redevelopment Plan - Alternative A Page
Number
A. Statement of -Public Purpose 1
B. Statutory Authority. 1
C. Statement of Goals and Objectives 1
D. Description of Redevelopment Project Area 2
E. Development Activities and Agreements 3
F. Public Redevelopment Costs; Proceeds; Financing 4
G. Proposed Land Use 4
H. Acquisition, Relocation, and Rehabilitation Activities 4
L Environmental Considerations 5
J. Redevelopment Plan Modification 5
K. Administration of Redevelopment Project 5
Appendix A: Map of Redevelopment Project Area 6
ALTERNATIVE A
EAST 66TH STREET REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA PLAN
A. STATEMENT OF PUBLIC PURPOSE
It is found that the public interest requires the replanning, reconstruction, and
rehabilitation of neighborhoods; that in order to protect the overall economic stability of the
community, particularly its commercial areas, it is necessary to redevelop and remedy conditions
of underutilized land, economic obsolescence, and physical blight; that in order to create an
economic environment which fosters the growth of a healthy commercial base and facilitates the
redevelopment of land, it is necessary to encourage private enterprise to engage in redevelopment
to be constructed -in accordance with a comprehensive community plan.
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota
the "HRA") and the City Council of the City of Richfield (the "City") have determined that
public intervention is necessary in the East 66th Street Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project
Area ") in order to achieve set goals and objectives for proper redevelopment of the area.
B. STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The statutory authority for the undertaking of a redevelopment project in the Project Area
and the redevelopment activities proposed in the redevelopment plan relating thereto is conferred
upon the HRA pursuant to and in accordance with the Housing and Redevelopment Authorities
Act (the "Act "), Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.001 to 469.047. Specifically, Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.027 establishes the requirements for redevelopment plan preparation by an
HRA prior to undertaking property acquisition, relocation, and redevelopment.
C. STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The HRA determines that it is necessary, desirable, and in the public interest to undertake
a redevelopment project in the City pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
469.
The following goals and objectives are intended to serve as a basis for guiding the
development and redevelopment of the proposed project area:
1.) To facilitate the acquisition of land or space which is vacant, unused or
underused;
2.) To facilitate the redevelopment of land for the construction of a
contemporary professional office building;
3.) To achieve a high level of design and landscaping quality in order to
enhance the surrounding physical environment;
4.) To facilitate the removal of nuisance uses adjacent to residential uses;
ALTERNATIVE A
5.) To create effective buffers, screens and transitions between residential and
non - residential uses;
6.) To improve the commercial property tax base of the City and other taxing
jurisdictions; .
7.) To provide increased employment opportunities and improve the income
base of the state; and
8.). To provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the city and
other local jurisdictions, for development by private enterprise.
D. DESCRIPTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
In order to guide the development and redevelopment in the Project Area, the HRA has
created this redevelopment plan. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sec. 469.002, subd. 12, the
proposed project meets the definition of a redevelopment project. More specifically, Minnesota
Statutes, Sec. 469.002, subd. 14, states that a "`Redevelopment project' means any work or
undertaking:
1) to acquire blighted areas and other real property for the purpose of
removing, preventing, or reducing blight, blighting factors, or the causes of blight;
2) to clear any areas acquired and install, construct or reconstruct streets,
utilities, and site improvements essential to the preparation of site for uses in
accordance with the redevelopment plan;
3) to sell or lease land so acquired for uses in accordance with the
redevelopment plan;
4) to prepare a redevelopment plan, and to incur initiation, planning,
survey and other administrative costs of a redevelopment project, and to prepare
technical and financial plans and arrangements for buildings, structures, and
improvements and all other work in connection therewith."'
The redevelopment project area boundary is site specific to the project and encompasses
all that real property within an area described as follows:
The North 250 feet of the West 1/4 of the. Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of
the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26, Township 28, Range 24, except streets, Hennepin
County, Minnesota.
2
ALTERNATIVE A
E. DEVELOPMENTACTIVTIES AND AGREEMENTS
General
The objectives of this Redevelopment Plan will be accomplished pursuant to the authority
granted to the HRA by the Act.
Redevelopment within the Project Area must be financially feasible, marketable, and
compatible with long range redevelopment plans of the City and HRA. The following
development activities are appropriate for the area in light of current redevelopment
opportunities:
1.) Land acquisition;
2.) Site clearance; and
3.) Site improvements.
Any and all proposals by the developer will be reviewed by the HRA to determine
conformance with the redevelopment plan and applicable municipat ordinances and codes. To
facilitate this effort, the following documents may be requested for review and approval:
1.) Site plan;
2.) Construction, mechanical, and electrical system drawings;
3.) Landscaping plan;
4.) Grading and storm drainage plan;
5.) Signage system plan; and
6.) Any other drawings or narrative deemed by the HRA to demonstrate the
conformance of the development with the redevelopment plan.
It is the intention of the HRA that the majority of the redevelopment activities, including
but not limited to acquisition, relocation, site clearance, and improvements be directly undertaken
by the developer with assistance when and where appropriate from the HRA.
Description of Anticipated Private Development Activities
The proposal for redevelopment of the project area calls for the acquisition, site clearance,
and construction of a new commercial, dental office building and related parking. The subject
land is owned by a private, third party. Currently and since approximately 1965, the site has been
occupied by a self - service car wash business with four stalls.
The new commercial dental office building is expected to accommodate a dental clinic for
three dentists. The dentists have outgrown their current space in an adjacent community and have
sought Richfield as an appropriate community to locate to. The commercial office building will
approximate 6,000 square feet in size, including finished space on the lower level. The site will
also accommodate parking and landscaping.
ALTERNATIVE A
Description of Anticipated Public Development Activities
The proposed public development activities in the redevelopment project area would be
undertaken by the BRA and City in order to support the private development activities and
facilitate redevelopment of the area in a manner suitable to overall development plans. These
activities include direct financial assistance to the developers for project costs and indirect
assistance to the project for acquiring and extinguishing a leasehold interest in the subject
property. Redevelopment activities would be contingent upon the mutual agreements set forth in
a Contract for Private Redevelopment.
F. PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT COST; PROCEEDS; FINANCING
The HRA determines that the funding of the necessary activities and improvements in the
redevelopment project area shall be accomplished through the use of the revenue in the HRH's
Development Fund. Specifically, the developers will obtain a $50,000 loan from the HRA for the
dental office project in order to relocate the tenant from the property through a leasehold interest
buyout.
As the HRA will not acquire any land directly, no capital proceeds from land sale are
expected.
G. PROPOSED LAND USE
The current land use in the redevelopment project area is zoned C -2, General Commercial.
The proposed redevelopment project would be consistent with permitted uses in the C -2, General
Commercial District.
H. ACQUISITION, RELOCATION, AND REHABILITATION ACTIVITIES
Acquisition
As stated previously, the HRA does not intend to acquire any real property for the
project. However, it is intended that the developers will acquire the following
property in order to assemble land for redevelopment, according to the objectives
set forth in this plan:
PID # 26- 028 -24-41 -0004
Legal Description: The north 250 feet of the West 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of the
Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26, Township 28, Range 24, except
streets, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
2. Relocation
The existing car wash business must be removed from the site for the proposed
development.
4
ALTERNATIVE A
3. Rehabilitation Program
No rehabilitation is currently intended in the Redevelopment Project Area.
L ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The proposed redevelopment project does not present any permanent environmental
problems. All municipal actions, public improvement, and private development shall be carried
out in a manner that will enhance, rather than detract, from the natural environment. All
necessary environmental permits and clearances will be obtained by the developer.
J. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN MODIFICATION
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.029, subdivision 6, a redevelopment plan
may be modified at any time provided that the HRA and City Council adopt such modifications
upon the notice and after the public hearing required for the original adoption of the
redevelopment plan. If the BRA determines the necessity of changes in an approved
redevelopment plan or approved modification thereof, which changes do not alter or affect the
exterior boundaries, or do not substantially alter or affect the general land uses established in such
plan, then such changes shall not constitute a modification of the Redevelopment Plan nor require
approval by the governing body of the political subdivision in which the project is located.
K. . ADMINISTRATION OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
The administration of the redevelopment project area will be undertaken by HRA officials.
ALTERNATIVE A
APPENDIX A
MAP OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
I
CITY OF R10HRELD
PLnnnm oommission
Lotter
Item: #2 Agenda Section: New Business
PC Letter: #16 Date: December 6, 1994
GENERAL INFORMATION
Subject: The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) requests that the
Planning Commission consider a resolution fording that a proposed
redevelopment plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Type of Request: Consideration that the "Redevelopment Plan for the East 66th Street
Redevelopment Project Area" complies with the Comprehensive plan, and
approval of a resolution fording the same.
References: • Chapter 462 of the Minnesota State Statute requires the Planning Agency to
review redevelopment plans for consistency with the comprehensive plan.
ALTERNATIVE A -- Redevelopment Plan for the East 66th Street
Redevelopment Project Area, dated November 21, 1994 (attached).
HRA Letter No. 79 dated November 21, 1994 (attached).
BACKGROUND
Purpose: Approval of the attached resolution would allow, subject to Council approval,
establishment of a redevelopment plan and project area. The redevelopment
plan would facilitate redevelopment of the car wash site at 6601 Bloomington to
a dental office.
Public Notice: Not required for a finding of this type. Notice of the consideration was,
however, posted on the official bulletin board at Richfield City Hall.
City Council: Planning Commission action would set a City Council public hearing date of
December 12, 1994.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommended
Action:
Preferred: Adopt the attached resolution which finds that the Redevelopment Plan for the
East 66th Street Redevelopment Project Area is consistent with the Richfield
Comprehensive Plan.
Basis: . 1. The Comprehensive Plan Map designates the subject redevelopment plan area
as "medium density buffer", where residentially scaled convenience
commercial uses are permissible.
2. The subject redevelopment plan area is zoned C -2, where dental offices are a
permitted land use.
Alternative: Find that the Redevelopment Plan is not consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. However, this would appear to require amending the Comprehensive
Plan.
RESOLUTION NO. 96
RESOLUTION OF THE RICHFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION
FINDING MODIFICATION TO RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT PLAN, CONSISTING OF ADOPTION OF REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE EAST 66TH STREET REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA,
TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE RICHFIELD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Richfield, Minnesota (the "HRA ") has determined that there is an area of the community
in need of development and redevelopment but which is unlikely to occur in the reasonable
foreseeable future solely through the efforts of private enterprise; and
WHEREAS, in order to encourage private development and redevelopment in the
area, the HRA has determined to amend the Richfield Redevelopment Project Plan by
establishing the East 66th street Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project "); and
WHEREAS, the HRA has caused to be prepared for the Project a document
entitled "Redevelopment Plan for the East 66th Street Redevelopment Project Area" (the
Plan ") which is dated November 21, 1994 and is on file in the office of the executive
director of the HRA; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Plan and compared it
with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Richfield Planning
Commission that the Plan is consistent with the general plans for development of the City
as a whole as expressed in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Adopted this 6th day of December. 1994 . by the Planning Commission of the City
of Richfield, Minnesota.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Daniel Linnihan, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Timothy Erlander, Secretary
77.7
m
q.,
m
W415-F
E. I mmw Jul'uUL.
ji[OMIlf M M.7MTgTr 09250 MTMT-- .. ..
m m "la BI
96OPT
f
m Mm
A;
41!
1,
7rol, A, I
ME...
SUM
SilltitiU :vua: r::::>: t1 1!lfR118 ' I`' i
In
TIM
M
diumil L110iU uuo
lit
7— IMM71= _e
A
r
dt
Iff
se7U 'D
cf?O.- Wtr4 i
00
W
Z
a
z
W
a
0
W
O
W
7
h
W
Z
W
C
a
0
v
14 LL
All
a UUW
N
Z
Z
N
N
W s
ox
z
o
W
L 1
Q v 0
Eyhy
o
oU+
H 6! d 2
w Cw
ro
2
tv
z a '5 a •°
N N
U U
U NN !,
t
o
d
C v
a E
U ^d
y
0
m a i co
CLO
N
U
U d
ni d
U
C M
E .0
E,
v
co
o
3
d
Rr
s
Q.-
1—J
J
1
0
F—
F
1
a
t/i
Od
xi
r.
0
0m
a
c0
0a4
c
E
a
o
d
Rr
s
Q.-
1—J
J
1
0
F—
F
1
a
t/i
Od
xi
r.
0
0m
a
c0
0a4
c
E