07-18-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Approved would be interested in purchasing the property; the Council reviewed the property and decided that it would be a good site for redevelopment. The Council solicited for redevelopment proposals and one proposal was received, which was from TimberCraft. The Council has only been able to review this proposal in a conceptual form and is still trying to negotiate out the terms for the site. This is an effort to revitalize the down town area, if the B2 zoning were to stay, then the most likely scenario would be that the Marv’s Transmission building would stay and the property would not be redeveloped at all. He added that this redevelopment proposal is similar in nature to the Pratt- Ordway development south of this site; it would bring the parking within the site instead off of the street, and would bring the building out to the street for a more main street feel. The City paid $350,000 for the site and the developer has offered to pay $175,000. Zisla inquired if the City would be loosing money on this site. Fernelius replied that the City will be making this site a Tax Increment District, which will help to recover a portion of the difference. Zisla stated that he supports the redevelopment of this site, but at the initial presentation to the Planning Commission the zoning was inappropriate for the site. He also supports the proposed rezoning of the properties since it does not put a hardship on to the owners, however, if something needs to change then he would recommend not rezoning the two properties on Fourth Avenue. Lynn Ecklemyer, 634 Fourth Avenue NW, stated that she is not comfortable with the proposed rezoning of the properties on Fourth Avenue and does not feel that the General Development Plan is enough protection if future developers decide to purchase the properties and change them to commercial. She added that at one time down town New Brighton was thriving and it was decimated by rezoning and does not feel that to revitalize down town it should come at the expense of the residential areas. Mark Kempler, owner of Kempler and Associates, is not opposed to his property being rezoned as B4. He inquired why he is limited to the B2 standards if the property will be zoned for B4. He added that he understands that the time has come for Marv’s site to be redeveloped and would hate to see it not go forward because people don’t like change. Gundlach replied that if Mr. Kempler decides to remodel his property in a way that does not conform to the B2 standards, he would be able to apply for a special use permit under the B4 ordinance to establish a more specific General Development Plan. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Baker, Second by Mann to. 5 Ayes, 0 Nays. Schiferl asked if by placing parking in the rear of the property as proposed by TimberCraft and if Kempler and Associates decided to redevelop and place their parking in the back wouldn’t it have a negative impact on the 736 Fourth Avenue. Gundlach replied that if at the time that 721 Old Hwy 8 decides to redevelop, the City would try to I:\COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\Minutes\2006\07-18-2006.docPage 11 of 13