February 22, 2006
MLK Park
7:00 PM
Attendance
Redevelopment Committee Members Present: Rosemary Dolata, Darrell Gerber, Peter Hallstrom, Mark Hinds, Arthur Knowles, David Motzenbecker, Tom Parent, Marnie Peichel, Ryan Raleigh, Dave Saddoris,
KFNA Staff Present: Joanna Sahlberg Hallstrom, Sarah Linnes-Robinson
Business/ Community Member Present: Janet Keith and Virginia Richmond, property owners of 37XX Nicollet Ave. S. and Jeff Matson, of CURA / Minneapolis Neighborhood Information Systems.
Introductions: Saddoris introduce Janet Keith and Virginia Richmond to the Redevelopment Committee.
Approval of Minutes: January 2006 minutes approved.
37XX Nicollet Ave. Zoning Request: Saddoris introduced zoning request of Janet Keith and Virginia Richmond. Richmond is the property owner of 37XX Nicollet Ave. S, a residential home with retail spaced attached to the front of its structure. The property is located just north of Marisa’s Bakery. Richmond seeks to down zone her property from commercial (C1) to residential (R5) because she needs to refinance her property and her property refinancing request is not being approved by her lender under its current zoning status. Richmond requested KFNA support to change her property from C1 to R5.
Richmond moved to Minnesota from Illinois in 1989 and purchased the property with the intention of operating a business in the retail space attached to the house. Richmond subsequently had a stroke and was unable to proceed with her business plan. The home was originally financed through a regular mortgage and contract for deed. Richmond stated that she is refinancing now because repairs on the home are too costly and her SS and rental income are limited. Richmond, a senior citizen is seeking to refinance in order to receive a reversed loan, to allow her to stay in her home of 17-years.
The committee discussed with Richmond and Keith the implications of rezoning and the City requirements for the rezoning process. Saddoris reviewed with the committee and property owner the types of commercial uses allowed under R5 vs. C2. An R5 would greatly reduce the properties potential for commercial use in the future, which is contrary to Kingfield and City development goals for the 38th and Nicollet business node – of which this property is apart. Motzenbecker, a member of the City Planning Commission, informed the two parties about that there is specific criteria that has to be met in order to qualify a property to be considered for a zoning change. He stated that this case will not be approved by the City because it doesn’t meet this criteria. Motzenbecker noted that a property owner must prove undue hardship under its current zoning, however is cannot financially related. Motzenbecker was able to provide a copy of the zoning change criteria to Richmond.
Saddoris noted that a C1 zoning adds value to property and asked if Richmond had pursued refinancing her property as a commercial. Richmond stated that she did not qualify for this route based on her income.
The redevelopment committee was very sympathetic to Richmonds situation but was unable to support a zoning change. Hinds referred Richmond to Ruth Kildow, Senior Ombudsman at the City to help Richmond investigate other resources/solutions to her situation.
After Richmond left the committee discussed other possible solutions to this situation. It was suggested that a committee member meet with the property owner again, tour the retail space and offer to assist in finding a small business owner to rent out the retail space. P.Hallstrom asked what KFNA programs are still available that could help repair / upgrade the site to make it ready for rent. Linnes-Robinson stated that this case may qualify for the Emergency Home Repair Program that can be matched with up to $8000. Other committee members, thinking about the future development potential of the sight asked how much KFNA should put into the existing property. P. Hallstrom stated that Richmond’s connection to her home and the committee’s value of keeping a diversity of housing and long-term residents in the neighborhood needs to be supported. P. Hallstrom suggested approaching Lander Group Inc. about renting the retail space short term for their 38 sales office. Hinds or Linnes-Robinson will call Keith and Richardson to see if renting the store front is a viable option for Richmond.
Geographic Information Services Presentation:
Jeff Matson of Minneapolis Neighborhood Information Systems gave a PowerPoint presentation on Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and how MNIS has made GIS an accessible resource for Minneapolis neighborhoods.
GIS is a tool that allows analysis through mapping. City data, census data etc. can be downloaded in to GIS and information can then be visually formatted into a map. For example, neighborhoods can download specific data to create a land use map, a crime grid, or map environmental, economic, or NRP program activity trends.
In order to access discounted GIS software, software training, mapping services (including large scale printing), and other GIS support specific to neighborhood goals neighborhoods need to sign a membership agreement and possibly pay an annual membership fee to MNIS. Previously the membership fee was $250, but MNIS is restructuring their membership program and this fee may be reduced or eliminated. Access to GIS software is $100 for one computer at a non profit office (GIS software retails close to $1500 per license). Neighborhood representative can also use the GIS lab at U of M.
Dolata motioned for KFNA to participate in program. Motzenbecker made a second. The motion passed unanimously.
Hinds recommended that committee members regularly participate with the software. MNIS will train people in their lab (24-person capacity). Kingfield can schedule a special training just for neighborhood representatives.
There is an informational meeting next Thursday for neighborhoods. Linnes-Robinson will attend. KFNA Staff will be main contact for this program.
19 W. 38th Street:
Rydrick’s final plans and variance requests for 19 W. 38th Street were presented emailed out to committee members prior to the meeting for review. The plans detail Rydrick’s revisions to the development after meeting with the City. Rydryck went down from 10 to 8 and units, which reduced the length of the building by 20 ft, thus the reducing the impact to the site. Rydryck is still working with Linnes-Robinson and Dolata on a green roof grant and will match it up to$40,000.
Saddoris noted that the reduction of units will most likely increase the sale price per unit.
There were not major concerns with the plan and variance requests.
Hind motioned to approve Rydrick’s plan. Motzenbecker made a second.
Discussion: Lindseth asked if there were any concerns about the alley set back. It was stated that the alley Ts out to Blaisdell and an alley vacation would be favored by Lander and Rydryck however, the City does not want to vacate it. The committee was satisfied that both developers had adequately addressed the alley concerns.
Motion passed unanimously
Hinds will bring this recommendation the KFAN board and ask Rydryck to attend.
Master Planning:
The committee was asked to read through the Guide to Creating a Neighborhood Master Plan (MP)and the Local Commons Project (LCP)prior the meeting.
It was noted that LCP and MP should be combined together. LCP would compliment the City Plan to connect green spaces etc.
Motzenbecker noted that Beth Elliot being moved to DT Planning and she will introduce her replacement at the next meeting.
In discussions with Motzenbecker Elliot asked why KFNA wanted to spend the time and money on a MP when KFNA already agrees wit the Minneapolis Comprehensive Plan. It was suggested that KFNA money could be better used to deal with small planning.
Knowels stated that he didn’t see a need for a Master Plan and recommended to move on and focus on specific projects. Lindseth asked how detailed the Minneapolis Comprehensive Plan is. Motzenbecker explained that it is broken down into commercial, community corridors etc and what the City wants to see happen. P. Hallstrom asked if Elliot could bring City Plan for the committee to view and see if we agree with it.
Hinds stated that regardless of whether or not we do a neighborhood MP we need to develop a guide to make decisions instead of looking at each case site by site. Motzenbecker stated that we can institute and expand development guidelines or create a set a principals and guidelines that we can hold things up against . Knowels noted that we have a lot of the components for this already and just need to pull them together.
Linnes-Robinson noted that whatever we do it is important that it is recognized by the City and carry’s some weight. She also asked what we want as an end goal – do we want it built into the Mpls Plan? Motzenbecker stated that is could become recognized as a small area plan for the City and that they become enforceable as elements in the comprehensive plan.
Next Steps. Motzenecker noted that the Minneapolis Comprehensive Plan will be updated in next two years. KFNA needs to have something to influence this process. KFNA wants to guide development. The committee was asked to read through the doc on small area planning. Parent offered to look through Comprehensive Plan to and pull out sections the committee should read before next month.
Minutes prepared by Joanna S. Hallstrom