10/14/14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

he did not think that was the case because the conditions of the Purchase Agreement did not require any changes to the density or financial assistance. So he had defended that deal. Commissioner Tossey noted that as the density request changed, he knew that if at .75 it would be cost prohibitive because the parking structure had to be built. He stated he received a call from another developer who was told the City would not change that so that developer moved to a project in St. Francis. He noted the issue came up that it is the zoning that's a problem and the zoning should be changed. Commissioner Tossey questioned staff's confusion about the HRA's previous direction because it was acknowledged in the staff report so he would ask why a zoning request is not on the agenda tonight. He stated Mr. Kuker is interested in a project but he (Commissioner Tossey) does not think taxpayers should pay for it or other developers in the region excluded. Commissioner Tossey stated support for considering a rezoning of this area and maybe other areas to attract more developers. He stated Mr. Kuker sent him information showing other communities were changing zoning. Deputy Executive Director Gladhill stated the zoning is not on tonight's agenda because that public hearing was set for the Planning Commission meeting and Code requires ten days in between Planning Commission and the Council. The Planning Commission met and conducted that public hearing last Thursday but there was no ability to have minutes available for the Council's consideration tonight. He noted the Planning Commission meets once per month and staff needs to work within the timing of the State Statute. Commissioner Tossey asked whether it was anticipated to have the zoning issue before the Planning Commission at the beginning of November. Deputy Executive Director Gladhill explained the Planning Commission met last Thursday, held the public hearing, and advanced its recommendation to the City Council. It will be introduced on October 28, 2014, for a first reading. In addition, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare FAR exhibits for the benefit of the Council so the policy implications are clear. It is anticipated that adoption will occur in mid - November before the Council. Commissioner Tossey stated it is an election year but no mater what PSD does, it will be controversial in Ramsey and he believed the real issue was the parking ramp. He described a scenario of a property being sold that had a radon issue and whether it would be worth more prior to radon mitigation or post radon mitigation. Commissioner Tossey felt that by lowering density, the value of the property in question will increase since there would be no requirement to construct a parking ramp. Brian Pankratz, CBRE stated supply and demand is a big driver and yes, there will be interest from a wide group of people but it is a `different ballgame' to get a transaction to a Purchase Agreement and then to close. He noted that for Parcel 49, there is a cost to build a parking structure but rental rates are not there to meet the market. However, in downtown and uptown, the rental market is there. Mr. Pankratz believed that if you have to build a parking ramp, it would be a loss leader. Commissioner Tossey asked CBRE to make recommendations to staff if they determine there are things the City can do to better promote development, such as rezoning. Housing and Redevelopment Authority / October 14, 2014 Page 5 of 8