Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/28/2006 AGENDA MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TUESDAY, March 28,2006 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL MAPLEWOOD ROOM 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes a. March 14,2006 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Communications 6. Unfinished Business None 7. New Business a. Alternative Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan Review (with CORB) 8. Date of Next Meeting(s) a. Apri111? 9. Adjournment DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, MARCH 14,2006 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL MAPLEWOOD ROOM I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:13 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioner Tom Connelly Commissioner Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Joe O'Brien Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner Beth Ulrich Present Present Present Absent Present until 8:20 p.m. Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the HRA minutes for January 10, 2006. Commissioner Ulrich moved to approve the minutes. Commissioner O'Brien seconded. Ayes - Fischer, O'Brien, Ulrich Abstention - Connelly The motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Connelly moved to approve the agenda. Commissioner Ulrich seconded. Ayes - Connelly, Fischer, O'Brien, Pearson, Ulrich The motion carried. V. COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Roberts mentioned a special city council meeting was called which began at 5:30 p.m. in the city council chambers. The meeting is to discuss the City Manager and his position with the city. Chairperson Fischer said there were some inserts included in the HRA packet. If you have any questions regarding the inserts please contact Ken Roberts. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -2- Minutes of 03-14-06 VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VII. NEW BUSINESS a. Introduction - Central Community Housing Trust (Saint Paul Tourist Cabins - 940 Frost Avenue) Mr. Roberts said the Central Community Housing Trust (CCHT), a nonprofit housing developer, want to introduce themselves and their program to the HRA and other interested individuals. For more information you can go to the Central Community Housing Trust (CCHT) website www.(CCHT).org. They are preparing a redevelopment plan for the Saint Paul Tourist Cabins at 940 Frost Avenue. As part of the new housing plan for the site, they may be requesting funding support from Ramsey County to help provide housing for low and moderate-income families. This is just a preliminary plan at this point, it is not an application for a proposal. If and when that would happen the proposal would have to go through the planning commission, the community design review and through the city council and there would be public meetings that the public could offer input at that time. The Saint Paul Tourist Cabins is clearly a site that needs redevelopment. It is the expectation of city staff that (CCHT) will be able to prepare a plan for housing on the site that has units for low and moderate-income families while being sensitive to the existing site conditions (including the slopes, trees and nearby wetlands). Mr. Roberts introduced three members from the Central Community Housing Trust that are here to make a presentation. Gina Ciganik, Vice President of Housing Development, Central Community Housing Trust, 1625 Park Avenue, Minneapolis, addressed the HRA. Jeanne Kelsey, Senior Developer, Central Community Housing Trust, 1625 Park Avenue, Minneapolis, addressed the HRA. Philip Schaffner, Development Assistant in the Public Relations and Communications Division, Central Community Housing Trust, 1625 Park Avenue, Minneapolis, addressed the HRA. Mr. Schaffner thanked everyone for coming. He said (CCHT) was formed in 1986 by a group of citizens responding to the demolition of 350 housing units in downtown Minneapolis. Since then (CCHT) has grown to be one of the largest and most respected nonprofit providers of affordable housing in the State of Minnesota. Central Community Housing Trust (CCHT) is a private nonprofit organization. He said the housing (CCHT) services is for many different facets of people. They have 1,252 housing units for homeless individuals, homeless youth, homeless adults that need to live in sober environments, housing in downtown Minneapolis for workforce individuals that earn about $8 to $12 an hour and work in the service sector, and 200 units of family housing and other units that are closer to the market rate in the twin cities. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -3- Minutes of 03-14-06 (CCHT)'s mission is to create and sustain quality affordable housing that strengthens lives and communities. Its values are Community, Trust, Diversity, Excellence, Sustainability, and Leadership. Their goal is to increase visibility and broaden community support for long-term stability and success. They also have five strategies. One of the projects that (CCHT) has built around the twin cities area include: East Villaae in Elliot Park, east of downtown Minneapolis. The site is 2.9 acres, 6,000 square feet storefront commercial space, 250 underground parking spaces. The site has 180 units with studios and one to four bedroom apartments of high-quality attractive housing that complements the historic neighborhood architecture and replaces underutilized and deteriorating structures and parking lots. This structure provides 250 underground spaces for residents and 100 spaces for Augustana Care Center. Other amenities include an exercise room, party room, and car wash in the parking garage, play area, gas grills and a picnic area. Construction of this project ran from December 1999 to September 2001. The total cost of this project was $29.5 million dollars. Operating costs funded primarily by resident rents (some residents received assistance through Section 8 program). Another project to be built will be Rip/ev Gardens which is to be a quality housing project on a historic site. This former historic maternity hospital in the Harrison Neighborhood of Minneapolis will create 52 units of high quality mixed-income rental housing and 8 for-sale town homes. It is a 1.9-acre site on the corner of Glenwood and Penn Avenues in North Minneapolis. This will be life- cycle housing with a variety of sizes, types and price ranges to serve diverse households, lifestyles and incomes. The site will have significant green space, walking paths, and a structured play area to provide places to walk and gather and places for children to play. There will be underground parking to maximize the visual appeal, density, landscaping possibilities and resident security. Half of the rental units will be affordable to households earning 30% to 50% of the Area Median Income and half will be market-rate. All of the for-sale town homes are affordable to households earning 60% to 115% of the Area Median Income. The total development cost will be approximately $15 million. Construction will begin in the spring of 2006 and occupancy will begin in summer of 2007. Another project is the Franklin-Portland Gatewav. This is a three-phase development adding 269 units of quality, mixed-income housing and up to 30,000 square feet of neighborhood-scale commercial space in Central Minneapolis. It includes both rental and homeownership housing for a variety of income levels and household sizes. It is located at the intersection of Franklin and Portland Avenues in Minneapolis. Total development cost is approximately $50 million. These units are rental. Approximately 111 units are market rate, 118 units are affordable to people earning 50% of the area median income, and 18 units are affordable to people earning 30% of the area median income. Home ownership is possible with 17 units with four affordable to people earning 50% of the area median income. The first Phase is 30 units called Pine Cliff Apartments. The Children's Village Center is 30 units plus a community gathering space and offices. The Hope Community Court is 10 units, six rental units and four home ownership units. Phase 2 called the Jourdain is 41 units plus 4,000 square feet of commercial space. Construction started December 2005 and should last 1 year. Phase 3 called The Wellstone is 67 units, 54 rental and 13 home ownership units. Site C is approximately 91 units plus 4,000 square feet of commercial space. Construction began March 2005 and expected to last 14 months. The last project is called The Sinclair. The Sinclair is a housing option for a suburban community. It will be 115 rental housing units and 12,000 square feet of commercial space in a traditionally designed neighborhood. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -4- Minutes of 03-14-06 The Sinclair will be located in the center of the Clover Field Neighborhood in Western Chaska. Rent will be approximately $650 to $790 for a one-bedroom unit, $780 to $975 for a two-bedroom unit, and $890 to $1,225 for a three-bedroom unit. The total cost of the development is approximately $21 million. Construction is to begin in 2006 and be completed in 2007. Mr. Schaffner said their board asked them to expand to other suburban communities and that is one of the reasons they are interested in this site in Maplewood. Then Mr. Schaffner introduced Gina Ciganik, Vice President of Housing Development for Central Community Housing Trust. Ms. Ciganik discussed some of the frequently asked questions that the (CCHT) gets. 1. Where do you get your operating funds? Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) is a private nonprofit company with 25 full-time employees and their budget is $2.3 million dollars annually. 47% of the revenues collected are from developer fees. These fees are associated with the service they provide for doing real estate development. 34% come from private grants and contributions from corporations and private individuals and foundations. 15% come from property fees which means a small percentage of rent people pay supports the organization to support the stewardship to make sure capital improvements are planned and that it is a well run asset to the community and to the future. 1 % come from miscellaneous sources. 2. Why Central Community Housing Trust (CCHT)? There are a lot of developers out there. Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) is a mission driven organization which means that first and foremost the mission is what drives their work. Their mission is to strengthen lives and communities. (CCHT) also takes on complex and challenging sites. Typically these sites would go undeveloped. Sometimes these sites are boarded up vacant buildings which haven't been renovated for many years. This might not generate a profit for a developer so they don't want to take on the challenge but (CCHT) sees a challenge as a good thing to do for the community for future development of the area. Historic preservation is also a challenge and with those challenges there are many historic requirements. About 1/3 of (CCHT's) properties have saved historic sites that are on the national register. With long-term affordability, they talk about developments lasting 50, 100 and 150 years. When building, (CCHT) won't build with in cheap windows or building products that will need to be replaced in 10 years. They think through the design process and think of the future so the building can be an asset for 100 years or more. 3. Community based relationship is something they are really known for. Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) holds meetings with the community to understand what the communities needs are. They don't come with a preconceived notion that they have to build a certain number of units in order to make a development work financially. (CCHT) thinks of the communities needs, they do some checking to see for example if there is a way to vacate a street to make a development work. Most developers ask what the maximum number of units would be that they can build on a site. (CCHT) asks the community what they would like to see and tries to meet with the community to find out what the needs are. (CCHT) has incorporated homeownership into the units which helps people take pride in ownership. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -5- Minutes of 03-14-06 Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) has incorporated mixed-income housing into their developments. They have also incorporated some commercial building into the space. (CCHT) built a Dunn Bros. coffee shop and a restaurant into a development because it was important to the community and it would be supported by the neighborhood. 4. How does (CCHT) support a critical niche in the community? Ms. Ciganik said they fill a critical niche in the community by serving folks that otherwise don't have access to housing. They also take on projects that other developers would not in order to better the community. 5. What is affordable housing? Ms. Ciganik said there are many misconceptions of affordable housing. Is it Section 8? Is it a broken down building, do drunks and drug abusers live there? There are properties like that but typically that type of housing only happens because of poorly managed property. Most of (CCHT's) properties are well run. Many times you drive right by affordable housing and you could never tell because the building looks nice from the exterior. If you take the rent payment or house payment along with the utilities it should not equal more than 30% of your annual income. If you are paying more than 30% of your annual income towards housing costs then you start making other critical decisions regarding which bill not to pay this month. For instance, say your car breaks down; can I afford to fix the car so I can get to work and then be late with my house payment this month? This puts people in a difficult financial situation. About 60% of the households pay more than 30% of their annual income for their house payment and utilities and 1 in 5 Minnesotans pay more than 50% of their annual income towards housing costs. The average rent for a two bedroom apartment in the twin cities is about $925 a month. If you are making minimum wage which is $6.15 an hour, in order to meet the definition of affordable housing you would have to work three full-time jobs or work 120 hours to pay for affordable housing. This is just another reason why this type of housing is so critical to so many people. 6. Who are the people that live in the type of affordable housing that (CCHT) provides? Ms. Ciganik said the people are cashiers, cooks, waitresses and servers. These are people that we see every day in the community. They are your family members, your friends and people in your neighborhood. The representatives from (CCHT) showed a video that would represent somebody making $24,000 to make it in the twin cities on that type of a budget. This video lasted about 5 minutes in length. 7. Why does (CCHT) want to build in this area of Maplewood? Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) has expanded to the suburbs. They are working in the City of Chaska who asked (CCHT) to create a rental development. They are also working with the City of Roseville to develop a rental community in an area of Roseville. In October of 2005 (CCHT) finalized a conversation with one ofthe owners of the Saint Paul Tourist Cabins who said he was planning on selling because he could no longer afford to keep the property and there have been struggles with the roads, the utilities, the infrastructure, and many of the units are still on a well system for water. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -6- Minutes of 03-14-06 Ms. Ciganik said the owner doesn't have the financial resources to fix the property up the way it needs to and for the neighborhood to take over the costs of the project would cost about $2.5 million dollars. The owner of the property told (CCHT) if they are interested in the property they should put in a purchase agreement to purchase the land and get things moving forward. (CCHT) had to think about idea for awhile because this was a mobile home neighborhood that was struggling and in very poor shape. (CCHT) decided to put together a purchase agreement and see what happens. The problem is there are very specific rules regarding how you work with mobile home park closures. What you need to do is provide a notice; the residents then have 45 days to work together and see if they themselves can come up with a plan or the money to purchase the park. Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) thought they could do this in a way that is respectful to the residents and in a way to work with the community to replace the affordable housing units that are lost for the long term. A condo developer could come in and not need any assistance from the city or local government which would kick in the uniform relocation act that supports the way to positively help the residents or they could decide what is best for the site. (CCHT) has a purchase agreement signed, they don't own the property yet, but they have site control. (CCHT) went through the 45 day process, met with the residents and gave them a packet of information. They gave them information about All Park Alliance for Change (APAC), a mobile home park representative, and they would organize the residents and work with them to find a different alternative. The 45-day period passed in early January and (CCHT) has had several meetings with APAC and Minnesota Preservation Project (MPP) another group who supports mobile home parks. (CCHT) isn't sure what will happen on this site yet but they are here to discuss this idea. (CCHT) hired a relocation specialist to talk with the residents to let them know what the different housing alternatives are and what it would cost to move. Many of those units are very old and were not built in compliance with HUD codes and have outlived their life cycle. The mobile home units are in such bad condition that they could not be moved without falling apart. This is a very difficult situation and people's lives at stake here. (CCHT) has read a lot about the Gladstone Redevelopment Plan and we understand nothing has been approved yet. (CCHT) reviewed a lot of information regarding what the city and the community is thinking about. (CCHT) knows the site has been flagged for redevelopment for mid to high-density housing and (CCHT) felt they could redevelop the site in a way that would support the city's goals and the community as a whole. Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT)'s plan is to build something "similar" to their East Village site which is a mixed income and mixed-use development. This would have efficiency size units to four-bedroom rental units and look like town homes. (CCHT) has a strong sense for community space with front porches which creates communication with your neighbors. (CCHT) has a strong sense for "defensible space" or crime prevention through environmental design principles regarding how you can develop and design space that encourages community interaction. In most rental developments you walk through a main or front door and you see different people all the time. (CCHT) likes to split the buildings up into mini buildings with a security door entrance where people can get to know each other and know who belongs and who does not belong. They take careful consideration regarding the surrounding buildings and the neighborhood and try to make the buildings fit into the neighborhood. They make their buildings look as if they fit in and appear to have been there all the time. Sometimes their buildings have exterior green space and a play area. Sometimes there isn't enough green space to have a play area and they make interior spaces in their developments. Occasionally (CCHT) has even built a small mini mart or coffee shop as an amenity to the neighborhood and to the residents. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -7- Minutes of 03-14-06 Ms. Ciganik opened the discussion up to the HRA members and others in the audience. The followina people were present and spoke at the HRA meetina: 1. Linda Olson, Community Design Review Board member. 2. Susan Broin, 1221 Ripley Avenue E., Maplewood. 3. Gretchen Francis, 1740 East Shore Drive, Maplewood. 4. Jody Cushman, 1376 Belmont Lane East, Maplewood. 5. Glenn E. Johnson, 1835 Phalen Place N., Maplewood. 6. Sandy Anderson, 1796 East Shore Drive, Maplewood. 7. Marilyn Galbraith, 1770 Edward Street N., Maplewood. 8. AI Galbraith, 1770 Edward Street N., Maplewood. 9. Kevin Berglund, 1771 Burr Street N., Maplewood. 10.Kevin Schmidt, 1800 Phalen Place N., Maplewood. Commissioner O'Brien asked with a 501 (C)(3) nonprofit organization you can bring additional dollars to the table through HUD dollars that another organization couldn't? Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) leverages a lot of sources of financing to be able to bring into the community. In Chaska they were able to leverage almost $1 million from the Metropolitan Council to bring to the Chaska development. They received $600,000 from Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED). (CCHT) receives money from the State of Minnesota and the City provides some (TIF) financing and money from a lot of private resources through the tax credit program of private equity. People invest in these types of developments with their own money so they can receive a tax credit. Commissioner Connelly asked if (CCHT) sees developing this site or would they assist another developer? Ms. Ciganik said they haven't decided that yet. They are evaluating everything from taking soil borings, wetland mitigation information, finding out the community needs, and understanding relocation needs of residents. They would have to make sure these residents would be taken care of. The cost to relocate these residents could cost as much as $700,000. Ms. Jeanne Kelsey said because (CCHT) uses federal funding, they have to follow the standard relocation act which requires relocating the individuals by buying their units out but also ascertaining their income levels and assisting them with finding alternative housing. If a developer came in that did not need any government funding or assistance they would not have to do that. Another developer would have to pay the residents to compensate each resident "on average" $2,000 a piece which would be very unfortunate for those individuals. Commissioner O'Brien asked how many units are on the site now? Ms. Kelsey said there are about 30 units that are occupied by elderly single people and a few families. (CCHT) met with the residents in November when the notice came out from the current Saint Paul Tourist Cabin owner. (CCHT) sent six representatives to each home and met with the residents. Ms. Kelsey said she gets phone calls weekly from the residents stating they want a change and they want out. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -8- Minutes of 03-14-06 Ms. Kelsey said the residents know this is a start to finding an alternative life style that the residents probably did not have in the past. Their intent is to try to put together a plan that would help the people change their housing goals. Part of that would go through a funding process this summer through the State of Minnesota to ascertain some of those dollars to help in relocation that is at a severe level. Commissioner O'Brien said (CCHT) is the best bet for the residents as far as relocation protection that will give the residents what is due to them under any laws or ordinances. Ms. Kelsey said they think so because (CCHT) is willing to take the time and make the applications to ask the state to participate. There are other mobile home parks that have asked for assistance so this would not be the first time a mobile home park asked for help. You have to allow enough time for the application process for help. A mobile home park in the City of Bloomington asked for help but did not allow enough time for the process to take place, it takes more than 90 days to process applications, sometimes it could take up to a year for the process. Mr. Roberts asked if it's conceivable that some of the residents could move into the units (CCHT) would build if they are built? Ms. Kelsey said (CCHT) has looked into that but because of the condition of the site and the fact that it only has two wells on the site (and one of the wells is not working well) makes that impossible to build this in phases therefore, people would be displaced and would be in transition. When one well shuts down they take a hose from one well to the other well in order to pump water to keep water moving from one spot to another. This was surprising that a neighborhood is still working on a well system. These residents drink well water for their daily intake so there is a maintenance and monitoring issue that has to go on with the current management company to keep the water safe and sanitary for them. Ms. Ciganik said if there were people that wanted to live at the new building (CCHT) would be open to supporting that idea if people wanted to apply to live here. Chairperson Fischer asked if Commissioner Ulrich had any questions. Commissioner Ulrich said her questions were already answered and she is familiar with (CCHT) because of her position with the City of St. Paul. Chairperson Fischer said there are many challenging sites in the twin cities and she asked if (CCHT) has had experience with challenging sites that have environmental impacts such as what this site has? Ms. Ciganik said unfortunately they have had a lot of experience with challenging sites such as lead, petroleum, ground water problems, asbestos, and mold. They are working on a site that has had $500,000 worth environmental issues on site. They are familiar with the process and steps that need to be taken. Chairperson Fischer asked what about experience with wetlands? Ms. Ciganik said there are some areas in Chaska that have nearby wetlands and one of the things under the sustainability value areas are green development. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -9- Minutes of 03-14-06 Ms. Ciganik said there is a demonstration program that happened at the end of last year called Minnesota Green Communities that looked for applications and award for developments through out the state funding to support green types of building, energy efficiency units etc. Two of the four awards were for (CCHT) and they were very proud of that. (CCHT) has incorporated a lot of energy efficiency units, green roofs, and underground parking ramps to eliminate the massive surface parking lot you typically see. Underground parking is more expensive but over the long term it is better for the site and is more attractive. Board member Olson asked about accessible housing and how (CCHT) manages that. She asked if they have multiple elevators? Ms. Ciganik said they have multiple elevators and they also have other ways to access the building rather than through the front porch. They also have a percentage of units that must be accessible and there are certain guidelines they must follow for those units as well. The units have to be "visitable" so if someone comes over to visit, the units have to be accessible for not only for the physically challenged but also hearing impaired and other impairments. Board member Olson asked about exterior building materials and other amenities. Those are things the Community Design Review Board (CDRB) would be very critical of during the review process. Ms. Kelsey said (CCHT) is not a plan "99" off the shelf type developer. One thing (CCHT) does is custom design the building to meet the neighborhood and the communities needs through meetings and evaluating the site. They would get a professional architect on board in order to start the evaluation and the public process. This is something that is very important to (CCHT). People take ownership in living in their building and having the right design makes the proper space usable space. (CCHT) would love to have everyone tour their buildings. Board member Olson asked if they have community spaces or rooms inside their buildings? Ms. Kelsey said in Chaska they are incorporating a community room in their plan. The City of Chaska has a community room across the street that is available for rent by the community. In the buildings (CCHT) builds they provide a community room that anyone in the community can use with a damage deposit. People may want a computer lab in the design so that could be added to the design plan. Maybe people want a game room that the renters and the community could enjoy. Once (CCHT) gets the funding in place and looks at what is needed to meet the community's needs they can make think about design ideas. (CCHT) has management offices in all of their buildings and a manager lives on site. That way the residents have someone they can talk to that manages the property on a regular basis. Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) opens the community rooms up to the public. The doors are located so they are accessible from the outside of the building so you don't have to walk through the complex to get to the room. Ms. Ciganik said when they worked with Dunn Bros. they jointly helped raise funding for a community space. During the day people use that space and enjoy coffee and hang out. If you need a meeting room they close off the room and people can enjoy coffee and scones or whatever they like. This type of a setup helps people feel connected and helps them know their neighbors. When people have access to resources like this they stay better connected. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -10- Minutes of 03-14-06 Board member Olson asked what type of storage they would have for the units for things like bikes, Christmas trees, etc. Ms. Ciganik said they do their best to accommodate the storage needs. (CCHT) has learned a lot with the development of these buildings and have learned from mistakes in the building of some of their units. If you provide too large of a storage space it becomes too much of an ownership situation so they prefer to do many smaller storage units. They try to do their best to accommodate and assess the storage situation and make things functional. They don't want Christmas trees stored on the balconies or bikes locked up on the front railings so they do what they can to make storage manageable. Mr. AI Galbraith, Gladstone resident asked how many units they anticipated building here? Ms. Ciganik said she understands the Gladstone plan has not been approved. This is only an idea at this stage and it is not a proposal, but they anticipate they could build about 120 units. Mr. Galbraith asked if they estimate about 4 people living in each unit? Ms. Ciganik said that would depend because they would probably efficiency units and one and two bedroom units. Mr. Galbraith asked if there have been any studies on the infrastructure and sewer, water, and lights as to who is going to pay for those things? If people live in these units with children, and there will be children, where will they go to school? Have there even been studies done to see if the schools can handle these children? Ms. Ciganik said we are in the idea stage and are not at that stage yet to even research that level of detail. Mr. Galbraith asked when that would be done and what the time line was? Ms. Ciganik said we have just started this idea. We have been writing down the questions that have come up tonight and we will know to research the answers to those questions. A Gladstone resident asked if these would be all rental units? Ms. Ciganik said we don't know that for sure yet. We do have some units that are for sale units in other developments where people can own their own units and the remaining are rental units. A Gladstone resident said there are no MTC buses that stop in this location that you are talking about developing these units. Ms. Ciganik said they thought about that and there have been times in the past that (CCHT) has been able to work with MTC to get the busing back. A Gladstone resident said MTC quit stopping here about a year ago. Mr. Galbraith asked if this project was driven by the Metropolitan Council? Housing and Redevelopment Authority -11- Minutes of 03-14-06 Ms. Ciganik said there is no one involved in this development. (CCHT) has a purchase agreement on this site and don't officially own the property yet. (CCHT) would take the opportunity to work with as many partners as possible to bring in the funding to leverage a quality development in this community. Mr. Galbraith said since you are planning on building in a area that is single family homes, and parkland, and wetlands, he said he envisions another apartment complex like the one the city got hooked with at the end of Lake Phalen years ago. Mrs. Marilyn Galbraith said many of those apartment units have been empty for over a year so it's a concern being residents in the Gladstone neighborhood. Chairperson Fischer asked staff if they knew how many units there were in the Lake Phalen apartment units mentioned? Mr. Roberts said he wasn't sure. Ms. Ciganik said they have had great success with both the rental and ownership of their units in all of their buildings. Mr. Kevin Schmidt, Gladstone resident said Melinda Coleman the Assistant City Manager, once said there were about 180 units in that apartment complex and she said it was one of the highest density areas in Maplewood. Mr. Glenn E. Johnson asked how much land there is at the Saint Paul Tourist Cabin site? Ms. Ciganik said it's about 6.4 acres in size but not all of that is buildable. some land is wetlands and there are many beautiful mature trees that they would try to preserve. Mr. Johnson asked how much of that land is actually buildable? Ms. Ciganik said that is something they would have to find out. They are getting geo-tech reports, looking at the soils, topography and potentially what they could work with on the site. A Gladstone resident asked what their turnover statistics were? She asked how the renters qualify to live in their buildings? Ms. Ciganik said their occupancy rate is very high in all of their buildings. They have management companies on site and they have strict rules that everyone has to follow. There is a screening process for the tenants. The three rules are you must pay your rent on time, respect the property and don't do any damage, and respect the people in and around the property. Things like loud music are a problem and noise is a respect issue. Some people rent for a year or two or may rent longer depending on their housing situation. Ms. Kelsey said there are two background checks done on the individual. There is a criminal background check and a credit background check, and if either of those do not meet the criteria, then (CCHT) cannot rent to the individual. In the future ifthat background check changed and they get a police report that is sighted over something, then (CCHT) could no longer rent to the individual any longer and that is in everyone's lease when they sign it. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -12- Minutes of 03-14-06 Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) is not saying their situations have all been perfect but they have had a good track record. (CCHT) cannot guarantee perfect tenants and they are very responsive with their tenants and their actions. Mr. Galbraith said when you bring in that many people to live you are already on a busy road, on a hill, and access is going to be a big problem for the residents and for the emergency vehicles. With the Gladstone plan the plan is to put in a roundabout at the corner and that seems like a strange thing to put in at that corner. He said this is kind of a blind meeting. He said the pictures they showed were of four and five story buildings. He asked what kind of a commitment does this neighborhood have that there won't be visual pollution here? Ms. Ciganik said you have seen some of their developments in the slide show and (CCHT) hopes you think they are attractive. (CCHT) has won a lot awards for the care they have taken in developing quality, nice looking and functional spaces. (CCHT) would love people to see the buildings they have built. It is (CCHT's) hope that their track record will give you some comfort. Mr. Galbraith said this is going to have an affect on the single family homeowners having to look out onto a multi-story high density development built in their backyard. Commissioner Connelly said as a HRA Commissioner he would like to thank the people from Central Community Housing Trust for coming and giving this nice presentation. This is not the time to critique this, it is only in the idea stage. He said he has always been a positive thinker. He said the owner of the Saint Paul Tourist Cabin property said he wants out from owning this property. The city is looking for a way to improve this property. He believes it is best to think positive and explore every avenue the city can and this is a good beginning as a possible avenue for the city to take. His view of this is to think positive and to not start off on a negative. He said negativity does not serve anyone's real purpose. The people that live here would have a transitional period and maybe they will want to come back to this area to live. He said (CCHT) has presented a well thought out presentation. Board member Olson said visual pollution is the responsibility of the Community Design Review Board (CDRB) that she serves on and the board would make sure this would be a nice looking, quality design. The CDRB would make sure it's accessible and emergency vehicles will have no trouble getting into and out of this site. Board member Olson said she was relieved to hear they evict troubled renters. This is critical to her in keeping a safe environment. She said if people get into this type of housing and people feel they can do what they please, things deteriorate and people won't feel safe living there. She said Central Community Housing Trust has come up with more answers then the number of questions she had to ask and she was impressed with this plan. (CCHT) has gone beyond her expectations. (CCHT) is anticipating soil borings and environmental issues, they have looked at the wetlands and they will be looking at the wells. The thing that impressed her the most is the relocation specialist. She said ifthere are elderly single people living here and you are going to help them find a place to live. The average developer would only pay $2,000 per unit and the tenants would be evicted. She said she compliments Central Community Housing Trust. Mr. Roberts said (CCHT) has been working with Melinda Coleman, Assistant City Manager, and this plan sounds much better for these residents of the Saint Paul Tourist Cabins compared to what could happen to those residents. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -13- Minutes of 03-14-06 Chairperson Fischer said in case people in the audience are not familiar with the process, the proposal goes to the Planning Commission (PC), the Community Design Review Board (CDRB) and then to the City Council for the final step. Most of these are public meetings and the neighbors are always welcome to attend. Ms. Galbraith said they were told they could come tonight. Chairperson Fischer said yes certainly, she said she was only explaining the steps the review process goes through before a final decision is made by the city council. Ms. Galbraith said with the Gladstone coalition we have been the forerunners of all of this and we like the presentation this evening. The questions that were brought forward are things that the people in the Gladstone neighborhood have been asking for and wanting. She said we are here with a positive attitude. Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) looks forward to future meetings. A Gladstone resident asked if one of the buildings is located across from Augustana? Ms. Kelsey said yes. A Gladstone resident said she saw the building and said it's a lovely place. She asked if this building would have underground parking as well? Ms. Kelsey said yes, most likely, because that is part of the green development and would also incorporate the right vegetation on the site. Another reason (CCHT) is here tonight is as part of the requirements to acquire the funding for this site, Ramsey County requires some type of a letter to state there is support for them to acquire this site to utilize the funds to acquire this land for this proposal. The owner of the property has stated he no longer wants to own this property and the site is costing the owner a lot of money to keep it going and has stated he wants to be released from owning this property as soon as possible. Mr. Kevin Berglund asked what the cost of the entire project would be since (CCHT) is making an application for money? If the project is for 120 units, what would that overall cost be for the land acquisition? How does (CCHT) raise money for that or how much have you raised to acquire the land? Ms. Ciganik said the project would cost about $2.15 million dollars. The residents in the Saint Paul Tourist Cabins were given that amount in case the residents in the park could put together money or a plan to acquire the park. The financing comes from different financial institutes to finance a loan for (CCHT) to acquire the site. There would be some secondary loan financing until they could come up with a permanent source of financing to take out a loan. So in the interim, (CCHT) would be raising funds from financial institutes to hold the site until (CCHT) could acquire the final amount. The Minnesota Housing Financial Agencies (MHFA) has done a lot of studies to ask for resources and these developments are within these ranges. With the cost of the site acquisition, attorney fees, architects, and the development total it would cost about $160,000 to $190,000 per unit. Housing and Redevelopment Authority -14- Minutes of 03-14-06 Ms. Ciganik said if you multiply that by 120 units it would cost about $24 million to complete the entire site with underground parking. Depending on the amenities, which could raise the cost to the $200,000 range per unit. A Gladstone resident asked if the units would be "for sale" units? Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) doesn't have any history on that and looking at the condo market she didn't know if this area would support a condo development. A Gladstone resident said as a Maplewood resident in Ramsey County we just received our property tax statement which showed a $300 tax increase. She asked what the tax impacts would be if this development were to be built? She knows something needs to be done on this Saint Paul Tourist Cabin site property but she was concerned how this development would affect her taxes. As a stay at home mom and a husband who works they struggle to get by and any additional tax increase will be more of a burden on them living in this neighborhood. Ms. Kelsey said one misconception is that a nonprofit company does not have to pay taxes in the city in which they occupy. This is not true, they are not tax exempt from paying taxes. On average, affordable rental housing pays more taxes than more of the housing options out there. Board member Olson said (CCHT) would be contributing to the cost of the Gladstone streetscape and road improvements in this area. Ms. Ciganik said yes. Board member Olson asked if (CCHT) would talk to MTC to see if they could start the busing up again in that area? Ms. Ciganik said yes they would. If there is a need for busing in that area (CCHT) would do their best to get it started up again. If there wasn't a need for MTC to stop there before that was probably the reason the bus stop was eliminated before. Commissioner Connelly said he is a taxpayer too. You can see what exists there now and after the presentation you can see what could be built here which is definitely nicer. He said taxes are based on value and the value of what could go in here is considerably greater than the value of what is there now with the Saint Paul Tourist Cabins. More than likely that development would pay a lot more taxes in the "future" and he looks at that fact as a plus. Anytime you improve a property it is definitely a plus from the standpoint of a tax payer. A Gladstone resident said she wondered how much tax payer money was going into this. Commissioner Connelly said we are talking about the "end" result. Ms. Ciganik said the city doesn't typically do any type of tax levy for this. Mr. Schmidt asked if we would see this property paying regular property taxes and not receive any type of incentive from the City of Maplewood? Housing and Redevelopment Authority -15- Minutes of 03-14-06 Ms. Ciganik said (CCHT) would propose tax increment financing (TIF). Mr. Roberts said (TIF) is still paying taxes. Ms. Ciganik said yes. Commissioner O'Brien said anyone else that would propose to build on this property would propose tax increment financing as well. He said there are two options of building on this site, non- profit and "for" profit development. Commissioner O'Brien said the nonprofit development would get funding through the 501 (3)(C) that a "for" profit company would not be able to get. (CCHT) has the typical stereo type bias idea against them so they will "over achieve" to make a quality product and in their exterior aesthetics. This is a good proposal and he would make a motion that the city recommend it to Ramsey County. Commissioner O'Brien moved to make a recommendation to Ramsey County regarding the plans by Central Community Housing Trust (CCHT) for the redevelopment of the Saint Paul Tourist Cabins at 940 Frost Avenue. Commissioner Connelly seconded. Ayes - Connelly, Fischer, O'Brien The motion passed. Ms. Ciganik handed booklets out at the end of the presentation along with her business cards. VIII. DATE OF NEXT MEETING a. The next HRA meeting is Tuesday, March 28, 2006, along with the Community Design Review Board (CDRB) to discuss the Alternative Gladstone Redevelopment Plan. b. There may be another HRA meeting on Tuesday, April 11 , 2006. IX. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Fischer adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Manager Ken Roberts, Planner Gladstone Area Redevelopment Master Plans March 22, 2006 INTRODUCTION For the last two years, the city has been conducting an extensive planning process for the possible redevelopment of the Gladstone Neighborhood Area (the area near Frost Avenue and English Street). The process has included the hiring of consultants to prepare and evaluate development and redevelopment plans and altematives for the area. It also included the formation of a task force of citizens and city commission members to provide input to the city and the planning consultants about the proposed plans. Through this extensive process, the city and the consultants completed a draft neighborhood redevelopment plan in November 2005. This plan had about 800 housing units in the Gladstone Redevelopment Area. The HRA and the CDRB reviewed this plan during a joint meeting on January 10, 2006. The city council, in January 2006, directed staff and the planning consultants to study whether a redevelopment plan with about 500 housing units in Gladstone would be financially feasible. Staff has completed the concept design for such a plan and the financial analysis. That plan, also known as Plan B or the Bartol Plan, is now ready for review and comment by the city advisory boards and commissions. The city is now asking all the city boards and commissions to each make a recommendation to the city council about the latest plan and to make comparisons and recommendations about various elements of the two different plans. The CDRB will be reviewing the latest plan during their meeting on March 28, 2006. The HRA is invited to this meeting to listen to the presentation and then to provide comments on the different possible plans for Gladstone. BACKGROUND On December 19, 2005, the city held a meeting at the Maplewood Community Center for all city boards and commissions. The planning consultants provided the board and commission members an overview of the planning process and a summary of the draft Gladstone Redevelopment Plan. The consultants and city staff also answered questions about the planning process and the draft plan from those in attendance. DISCUSSION Attached to this memo I have included a memo from city staff about the latest plan and other information about Gladstone and the possible redevelopment plans. These documents provide excellent background information about the Gladstone planning process and the status of the planning process. Please bring your copy of the draft neighborhood redevelopment plan to the meeting and be prepared to review the proposed plan. RECOMMENDATION Make a recommendation to the city council about: 1. The draft Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan (dated November 14, 2005). 2. Plan B (the Bartol Plan) for the redevelopment of the Gladstone Neighborhood. 3. The pros and cons of each plan. P: Gladstone:Gladstone Plan to HRA and CDRB (2) - 2006 Attachments: 1. Gladstone memo dated March 14, 2006, from city staff 2. Informal Poll Results and Comments 3. Gladstone Advisory Board Questions Memorandum TO: City of Maplewood Advisory Boards and Commissions FROM: Bruce Anderson, Chuck Ahl and Melinda Coleman DATE: 14 March 2006 SUBJECT: Review <jGladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan and recent alternative concept INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Over the last several years, the City of Maplewood has been exploring redevelopment concepts for the Gladstone Neighborhood. In December of 2004, the City retained the services of a consultant team to conductlfacilitate a planning process and develop a master plan for the neighborhood. A Task Force representing City Cormcil, boards and commissions, community residents and neighborhood businesses was assembled to provide guidance to the process and to serve as a conduit to the neighborhood and greater community. The process has included five public meetings and ten meetings of the task force over the last 14 months. In November of 2005, a draft master plan was presented to the public and to advisory boards and commissions. In December of 2005, newly elected Council member David Bartol requested that an alternative concept be developed and explored. At a City Council meeting in January, the Council authorized staff to develop the alternative presented by Mr. Bartol and to put this alternative through the same analysis and public review as the November 2005 draft plan. Consultants and staff completed this review over the months of January and February, presented the concept to the Task Force and presented the concept to the public the first week in March. WHERE WE ARE AT IN THE PLANNING PROCESS Weare nearing the point in the planning process where the City Council will need to converge on a preferred master plan for the Gladstone Neighborhood. The redevelopment planning process includes a review by City advisory boards and commissions. The objective of this review is for each board/ commission to offer a recommendation on the plan or its key aspects relative to the board/ commission's individual mission or purpose. The Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Master Plan is an important part of the community and virtually every advisory board or commission will be involved in the ongoing implementation of the master plan. SUPPORTING INFORMATION To assist you in preparations for your upcoming meeting we suggest reviewing the following items (note: some of these items were distributed in November while others are attached for your use): 1. The Draft Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan dated 14 November 2005 (distributed in November of 2005) 2. The Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) (distributed in November of 2005) 3. February 21 Memorandum to the Gladstone Task Force describing the alternative concept and evaluation 4. Powerpoint presentation slides from public workshopltask force meeting presentation presenting alternative concepts and comparison to the November 14 draft plan 5. Summary of public meeting #5 survey questions evaluating the alternative concept compared to the November 142005 draft. This summary is of the evaluation form filled out by participants at the March 2 2005 public meeting. 6. Evaluation questions. These questions were developed by staff and consultants to help facilitate a review and discussion of key items of the plan. The core difference between the two concepts has to do with the level of public investments that form the basis of the plan (those public investments include improvements to parks, open space, trails, road reconstruction, burial of power lines, streetscape, stormwater systems). In the November 14 draft, a public improvement budget was established at rougWy $18 million. In order to fund this investment without using general tax dollars, redevelopment to the magnitude ofrougWy 800 new units would need to occur. That level of development also would support 50,000 to 75,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial development. The alternative concept reduced the public improvement budget to the tune of $11 million in order to reduce the development levels to 490 units. This concept would support approximately 10,800 square feet of commercial development. Reductions in public improvements were achieved by reducing the scope and magnitude of the $18 million dollar improvements. A more detailed summary of the changes is included in the attached information. The consultant team's analysis concluded that the either concept works from a Financial perspective. The alternative concept with the lower public improvement budget and lesser development magnitude runs a greater risk of not achieving the broader vision and guiding principles established through the planning process. Through the task force meeting deliberations and the public process we know that the November 14'h concept exceeded the level of acceptance for some members of the community. We also know that the alternative concept with the lesser public improvement budget and resultant development magnitude, underachieves what the Gladstone Neighborhood could or should be. RECOMMENDA nON Staff recommends that the board/ commission discuss the master plan from November and the more recent concept alternative with supporting documentation and offer recommendations or opinions on the concept and relevant aspects of the plan. Your recommendation(s) will be assembled with all other advisory board/ commission's recommendations and the recommendation from the Task Force and submitted to the City Council for their use in considering the plan at their meeting tentatively set for April 18'h If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact staff. MEMORANDUM Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. 11I11 ~n To: Gladstone Area Task Force From: Subject: Brad Scheib Date: Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan project update - Task Force Meeting #10 Scbeduled for Thursday February 23'" at City Hall 6:30 to 8:30 17 February 2006 Background As noted in our last memorandum dated January 18, we have been revisiting an alternative scenario for the project at the request of Council member David Bartol and as approved/directed by the Maplewood City Conncil. This memorandum is intended to provide you with the basic description of the concept alternative including the development patterns, density and public improvements associated with the project. We intend to entertain a discussion with the task force in evaluating the merits of this concept, its strengths and potential risks, in comparison to the concept that is reflected in the current Master Plan Draft report dated 14 Nov. 2005. City Council member David Bartol proposed a plan for the Gladstone Area that attempts to establish the lowest limit of possible development within the project area. It was requested of the City Council that direction be given to staff to consider this evaluation and conduct analysis to illustrate a pattern of development that results in 4-90 new units as opposed to the current concept which is for roughly 800 units. The alternative concept being proposed included a reduction in the public improvement investments from roughly $18 million dollars to approximately $11 million dollars. General thoughts on where the reductions in public improvement costs could be provided and where reduction in density could be accommodated were described in the agenda report to the City Council dated January 3, 2006. The City Council approved this analysis at its January 9"' City Council Meeting. Alternative Concept Description Attached to this memorandum is an alternative concept plan reflecting the directions as approved in by the January 9"' City Council action. It was requested of us to prepare a concept that directly illustrated the number of units as could be built on each site. The attached concept plan illustrates a total of 332 new units. Not illustrated in this concept is the Tourist Cabin site which we have assumed could yield an additional 150 units. The total of both unit counts combined is 4-82 units. This falls 8 units short of our directed target of 4-90 units for the project. We are confident that the additional 8 units could probably be absorbed somewhere else within the project area to achieve the 490 unit target. Development pattern and density. We were also directed to consider development patterns of 6 to 14- units per acre with a variety of attached single family units (townhomes) and potentially some detached single family units. We attempted to prepare a concept site plan that did not include any stacked units (more than two story multi-family structures). The 123 North Third Stree~ Suite 100. Minneapoli~ MN 55401-1659 Ph (612) 338-0800 Fx (612) 338-6838 www.hkgi.com Direct (612) 252-7122 Email bscheib@hkgi.com Task Force Memo 17February 2006 Pane 2 feasibility of achieving the desired unit count proved to be physically constraining without some stacked units that would exceed the desired 14 unit per acre maximum density. The final concept plan illustrates two structures on the northwest corner of the Maplewood Bowl site. These would be 3 story structures with underground parking and could be designed with the principles articulated in the master plan. We attempted to minimize the amount of stacked units in the concept. The footprints represent 57 total units of stacked housing. The remainder of the area consists of different attached townhome products. The footprints of these structures are reflective of product examples that we were able to pull from local and regional developments that might be well suited to the project. We will provide some examples of these at the task force meeting. (If you are interested in exploring some of these prior to the meeting, follow this link on line to a good resource that we used and look at the New Brighton and Woodbury fact sheets. ht:q;>.//www designcenter mnn.edll/reference ctr/fact$heet,fFS housing density html). Actual density levels within the various areas range from a low of 7 to 8 units per acre on the edges to a high of 20 units per acre on the Maplewood Bowl site. On average across all areas shown as redeveloped, densities are approximately 13 units per acre a. The current draft master plan illustrated 800 units, including some additional areas of redevelopment along the east side of the Vento Trail south of Frost and across form the Gladstone Fire Station. Stacked units were illustrated in the current master plan fronting on Frost and English Street. Densities ranged from a low of 10 units per acre on the edges to 35 units per acre at the core area for the current draft master plan. Also as part of the project, we have included a small retail structure that contains approximately 10,800 square feet on the site of the funeral home. This structure would accommodate a small convenience grocer and potential coffee shop/bakery or other service retail. The intent would be to accommodate neighborhood retail services. The current draft master plan included 50,000 to 75,000 square feet of retail and commercial service space spread throughout the core area at Frost and English. Setbacks on this concept also vary from the current master plan. The setbacks shown on the attached concept are generally a 20 foot minimum setback from the property line, whereas the current master plan illustrated smaller setbacks particularly along Frost Avenue ranging from 10 feet for residential units to 5 or 0 feet where commercial fronted on the street. The maximum building height of any structure in the attached concept is 3 stories. The current master plan contemplated up to 4 stories. Public Improvements Part of the directions from the January 9th Connci.l directive were to consider a reduction in the scope of the public improvements. In general terms, this reduction was from roughly $18 million to $11 million. It has been achieved in the attached concept in two ways. First, we reduced the scope of the improvements by limiting roadway improvements from extending all the way to Hazelwood along Frost Avenue. Reconstruction of Frost Avenue was reduced to include a 2" bituminous mill and overlay for most of the streets with some limited concrete curb and gutter replacement. A landscaped center median and concrete parallel parking bays are still planned along Frost A venue between Frank Street and English Street but are not extended beyond those points. Bituminous parallel parking bays are also maintained in the attached concept along English Street north of Frost Avenue. Costs also assume that the existing Frost Avenue and English Street roundabout will remain as existing. The proposed roundabout at East Shore Drive remains as assumed in the current draft master plan. Task Force Memo 17Februarj 2006 Page 3 Powerline bwial has also been reduced in its scope. The attached concept assumes bwial of power lines along Frost Avenue from Binningham Street to Phalen Place. The draft master plan extended this to Hazelwood Street. English street remains the same as the CWTent draft master plan. We also have limited the volume of the improvements. The most significant volume reductions occur in streetscape improvements and park and open space enhancements. The streetscape enhancements continue to include a sidewalk but lessen the amount of landscaping and amenity treatments. At the meeting on Thursday we will present some imagery to demonstrate the possible difference in public improvements from the attached concept and the current master plan. The assumptions for storm water improvements remain the same as in the current draft master plan. The Beho structure (pedestrian hridge) proposed to connect Flicek and the Savanna has heen reduced to a culvert that will provide storm water overflow. A more detailed tabulation of the public improvement costs compared between the attached concept and the current master plan draft will be provided at the meeting. Evaluation We have been working through an analysis of this alternative concept. It is imperative that prior to moving forward with this concept, we fully understand feasibility from a financial and market perspective. We also need to discuss the pros and cons of the site as perceived by the community stakeholders. This evaluation begins with the Task Force discussion on Thursday and will be followed with discussions at the advisory boards and commissions and a public meeting. In preparation for Thursday's meeting, I would suggest as a starting point, that you review the attached concept, read through the brief description above and revisit the Vision and Guiding Principles as articulated in Chapter 3 of the draft master plan dated November 14, 2005. Purpose of Task Force Meeting At the meeting staff will provide a presentation of the concept and walk through the rationale behind it. We will also provide a greater degree of detill on the public improvements proposed and engage the task force in a discussion about how this concept achieves the goals and principles of the Master Plan. As usual, please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Attachment: concept2-16-06 Layoutl (I)