02-25-2002 HR MIN MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
• HELD AT THE ELK RIVER CITY HALL
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2002
Members Present: Chair Toth,Commissioners Thompson,Lieser,Motin and Wilson
Staff Present:, Economic Development Assistant Heidi Hall, City Administrator Pat
Klaers,Planner/Park Planner Chris Leeseberg,and City Clerk Sandra Peine
Council Present: Mayor Klinzing, Councilmembers Kuester,Dietz,Motin, and Tveite
1. Call Meeting To Order
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Elk River Housing and
Redevelopment Authority was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by Chair Toth.
2. Consider 2/25/02 HRA Agenda
COMMISSIONER THOMPSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 25,
2002, HRA AGENDA AS PRESENTED. COMMISSIONER WILSON
SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
3. Consider Consent Agenda
COMMISSIONER WILSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA
AS FOLLOWS:
3.1. JANUARY 28,2002, HRA MINUTES
3.2. FEBRUARY 4,2002 HRA MINUTES
3.3. CHECK REGISTER
3.4. REVENUE/EXPENDITURE REPORT
3.5. BALANCE SHEET
COMMISSIONER LIESER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION
CARRIED 5-0.
4. Open Mike
There was no one present for Open Mike.
5. Downtown Riverfron Revitalization Project
5.1. Review Project Goals, Objectives and Development Strategies
Heidi Hall introduced Jim Prosser of Ehlers and Associates.
Jim Prosser of Ehlers and Associates reviewed the redevelopment strategies for the core
central business district.The redevelopment strategies included the following.
• 1. Solicit Proposals—Staff is in the process of requesting proposals for multiple
areas.The HRA is not committed to accepting any proposals.
HRA Minutes Page 2
February 25, 2002
41)
2. Goals -Long-term viability of CBD and making a connection to the community.
3. Project Objectives- Include mixed use, consideration of historic context study,
strengthen connection to the community,retain traditional downtown design
elements and use visual breaks in the building design,increased residential density,
pedestrian orientation,increased exposure to the riverfront,recognize the buildings
that have potential for rehabilitation,replace market/economic obsolete buildings,
and consider multiple types of housing.
4. Preservation of Sites for Later Development—Existing parking areas may be an
example.
5. Land Acquisition—One of the most controversial issues,possibility of mediation
and/or eminent domain.
6. Highway 10—The long range Interregional Plan that calls for elevation of Highway
10 could pose problems with development. Recommend alternative designs and
seek developer planning feedback.
7. Historical Context Study—Solicit RFP prior to completion of study.Work with
developer to explore results of study in design alternatives and use results of
developer analysis to assess costs and impacts of various alternatives.
• 8. Redevelopment Time Frame. Expect the need to update the concept in 5 years.
9. Initial Time Frame For Redevelopment—Do not expect construction before
2003.
10. Financial Assistance—Will look at each individual application. Assistance likely
due to land cost, consider qualifying area for tax increment.Abatement and grants
are other options for assistance.
11. Communication—Public involvement is very important because redevelopment is
controversial. Encourage questions and respond to concerns.
5.2. Review Public Feedback& Communication Strategy
Heidi Hall reviewed the public feedback received from the February 12 and 13 Open
Houses. She noted that the feedback included comments relating to preservation of historic
Elk River,rehabilitation of older buildings,utilization of the riverfront, adequate parking,
general housing concerns,retaining green space, and low interest rehabilitation loans.
Planner Chris Leeseberg reviewed the public response to the alternative design concepts. He
indicated that Concept A was the most favored concept. He reviewed the reasons Concept
A was accepted which included the following:
• Provides a good amount of parking
,• Includes an art building
• • Utilizes the riverfront
• Provides a mix of housing and retail
• Retains buildings located on Main St. and Jackson
HRA Minutes Page 3
February 25,2002
S
Chris reviewed the common concerns which included preservation of historic Elk River,
utilization of the riverfront,parking, existing business owners, and housing.
Heidi Hall reviewed the progress report on the Historic Context Study. She noted that a
presentation of the Phase I and Phase II study findings should be prepared for the HRA in
April.
The HRA discussed the results of the Comment Forms. The HRA indicated its concern that
the results of the comment forms only represent 39 opinions,which is a small percentage of
the Elk River population. Commissioner Motin indicated his concern regarding results of
study being given to the developers as they may give too much weight to the small number
of people who responded. Commissioner Thompson stated that it is important to let people
know that the results represent a small percentage of residents. Chair Toth stated that the
information received is good,but the public must know that these are only some of the
issues facing the downtown. Councilmember Tveite noted that the people who responded
will be the most directly effected by the redevelopment. Mayor Klinzing stated that the
responses are important but maybe more so for the HRA than the developers.
Councilmember Kuester noted her concern of an arts building being close to the highway or
railroad tracks. Councilmember Kuester questioned whether there could be underground
parking in any project.
Councilmember Tveite indicated he is not comfortable with level of change proposed
• because many of the downtown residents and business owners do not see a big problem
downtown.Jim Prosser indicated that the fundamental question of, "is there a problem?" is
something that must be determined by the HRA. He noted that HRA should also consider
whether a problem could evolve in the future in 5-10 years.
Jim Prosser indicated that the next steps in the process include submitting RFP's to over 100
developers.He noted that there would be a preproposal meeting in mid April at which time
community concerns and concepts will be discussed. Mr. Prosser indicated that proposals
will be received at the end of April at which time they will be evaluated and following the
evaluation a summary will be provided to the HRA. Following HRA review,project
components will be identified. The HRA will determine which developers it wishes to
interview and following the interviews the HRA will choose a developer and a
predevelopment agreement will be put together.
6. Adjournment
There being no other business, COMMISSIONER WILSON MOVED TO ADJOURN
THE MEETING. COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDED THE
MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
The meeting of the Elk River Housing and Redevelopment Authority adjourned at 6:15 p.m.
Q.-,
• Sandra Peine
City Clerk