Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout[04a] Minutes CITY OF ST. JOSEPH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Meeting Minutes—Wednesday February 27,2013 Present: Board Members Chair Wick, Doug Danielson, Steve Frank, and Gary Osberg. Absent: EDA Member Larry Hosch. Also present City Administrator Judy Weyrens, resident Michael McDonald, and EDA Director Cynthia Smith-Strack. Call to Order. Chairperson Wick called the February 27, 2013 meeting of the St. Joseph EDA to order at 5:00 p.m. Agenda. Chairperson Wick introduced the agenda. Motion by Osberg seconded by Danie/son to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried 4-0. Public Comment. None. Approval of Minutes. Chair Wick introduced the minutes from the January 23, 2013 regular EDA meeting. Mofion by Danielson, Second Osberg to approve the January 23, 2013 minutes as presented. Motion carried 4-0. Accounts Payable and Monthly Report. Chairperson Wick introduced the agenda items and reviewed accounts payable for January 2013 in the amount of$2,728.28(MDG contract and mileage) and the check register. Frank inquired as to whether or not there were any anomalies in the financial reports. Strack noted Finance Director Bartlett noted numbers from close of last year are not audited at this time so they may be adjusted in Spring after the audit is complete. Motion by Frank, Seconded by Danielson to approve the accounts payable as presented. Motion carried 4-0. Downtown Master Plan. Wick introduced the agenda item and referenced Strack's memo noting survey with 50 downtown property owners was complete. Strack distributed updated tabulations as three additional responses were received since the EDA packet was generated. Strack noted that of the 51 property owners within the downtown (central business district) 29 persons (57%)had been surveyed all but three by phone, the remaining three returned a written survey. Of those responding to the survey 76% or 22 property owners indicted no major changes to their property is anticipated over the next ten years. Four respondents (14%) said changes were anticipated, three respondents (10%) say changes were 'maybe' possible. Strack noted that if you factor in those not responding to the survey the feedback was as follows: 22 (43%) of property owners didn't respond to the survey; 22(43%)of those responding indicated 'no' change to property anticipated in next ten years; four (8%) indicated changes were anticipated; and, three(6%) indicated they may change their property in the next decade. When asked whether or not road blocks curtailed the use of their property over the next ten years eight persons (34%) said 'yes'. Those answering affirmatively stated the following were road blocks: the state of the economy, lack of parking, taxes/fees/red tape, personal issues, physical changes at CSB, and building code issues. Frank opined any issues relating to rental housing and CSB had or would soon blow over. February 27,2013 EDA Meeting Page 1 a Strack continued noting only three people indicated parking in the downtown was an issue, but those three indicated it was a very significant issue for them. Wick stated parking was more of an issue for those patrons visiting the downtown than business owners. Frank stated there was not one handicap parking stall in the downtown adjacent to Minnesota Street. Osberg inquired as to who has jurisdiction to remedy the lack of handicap parking issue. Weyrens noted Minnesota StreeUCSAH 2 was currently under the jurisdiction of Stearns County but that the roadway was likely going to be returned to the City in the next year and the issue addressed at that time. Strack noted that of those responding to the question five persons (38.5%) suggested the parking lot by City Hall be used more frequently; an additional fve persons (38.5%} indicated student rental houses could be razed and public parking created on the vacant lot; two persons suggested their property be used for public parking; and one person suggested the St. Joseph's Church parking lot. ' Strack said that of those responding 13 people (45% of those answering the question) indicated an interest in meeting with the EDA to discuss their vision for the downtown; an additional five people indicated they may be interested in assisting if certain conditions were met; and 11 people (38%) indicated they had no interest in downtown visioning. When factoring in those who did not respond to the survey the following totals were established: 43% didn't respond to the survey; 25% said they would be interested in visioning; 22% said they would not be interested in visioning; and 10% said they may be interested in visioning provided certain conditions were met. Wick asked EDA Members how they wanted to proceed with this project. He inquired as to whether or not the EDA thought there was enough interest to continue with visioning. ' Frank suggested giving those interested in visioning a topic to investigate, such as whether or not the government center and police department should be kept in the downtown. Frank noted consensus of the EDA was city hall and police should stay downtown, but others may disagree, particularly those owning property. Wick stated the community center was just one topic surrounding a potential master plan for the downtown, additional issues were present. Osberg opined the Council's decision of where a community center could be placed and whether or not administrative and police offices stay downtown would drive any downtown planning. He suggested the EDA wait for the Council to make decisions regarding public facilities and then re-examine the 'faotprinY of downtown. Osberg opined the EDA is nat the decision maker but rather an assisting body in this matter. He suggested the EDA communicate to the Council a willingness to support the Council's decision regarding public facilities. He stated the survey and charts may be helpful, but they may not be helpful as well. Wi k in 'r c qui ed as to what other members of the EDA Board thought of putting downtown visioning on hold until the issue of public facilities was addressed. Osberg opined the EDA didn't have a lot of business owners shouting for more parking in the downtown. Frank suggested angle parking. Osberg cautioned any consideration of angle parking. Danielson noted new ideas may need to be considered. Motion Osber , Second Frank for discussion to ut downtown /annin on ho/d until Council takes 5 ( ) p p 9 action on public facilities. Wick asked for comments. Strack stated she was not a voting member of the EDA but in an advisory capacity with several years of experience she very strongly recommended city-administration and police services remaining in the downtown as an anchor bringing people to the core of the City. She also stated the survey had shed light on several property owners who may be interested in changing their property. She suggested the EDA may want to give thought to reaching out to those surveyed and inviting them to submit proposals for the purchase of their property. An informal process would put pricing in the hands of the property owners, the competition would drive prices down, and the City wouldn't be in the position of publicly stating an interest in purchasing property which could artificial inflate perceived value. Knowledge February 27, 2013 EDA Meeting Page 2 3 of potential pricing could also spur conversion of the property and/or acquisition and redevelopment by private entities. Motion approved:4-0. Potential Ordinance Changes to Commercial and Industrial Zones Wick introduced the agenda topic noting the issue was postponed for discussion at the previous meeting due to time constraints. He referenced three separate zoning classifications on which direction was sought. Strack referenced standards contained in the B-2 Highway 75 Business District relating to exterior building materials. She noted potential ordinance changes were discussed at a staff meeting in January. The Building Official suggested clarification of standards relating to perimeter foundations, exterior building materials, and percentage of building required to have alternate materials. The Building Official reported the ordinance language as existing prompted numerous questions and comp{aints regarding expenses for developers. � , The Board discussed the percentage of the exterior that needed to be brick or better and the applicability to all sides of the structure. The Board recommended decreasing the required percentage to 30% from 50% and just making the standard applicable to sides of buildings facing public streets. Osberg recommended the City model their ordinance standards after the standards used by Sartell, creating consistency with area standards but remaining competitive at the same time. Strack noted that the B-3 General Business District applies to areas adjacent to I-94 and new CSAH 2. The district clearly allows for convenience stores and not truck stops. Some discussion with the developers of property adjacent to the highway in the past has suggested allowing truck stops. Strack asked what the EDA's thoughts were. EDA Members discussed the potential for unique development styles in the area along with aesthetic qualities of development and serving the motoring public. Consensus of the EDA to not comment on the issue. Strack mentioned the L-1 Light Industrial District allowable uses and noted bioscience and biotechnology businesses were not identified as either permitted or special uses. The EDA reached consensus in recommending biotechnology and bioscience uses be classified as special uses in the L-1 District. Business Development Report. Strack referenced a business development report which was included in the packet. She noted the St. Cloud Acoustics building was purchased by Seal Enterprise and will be used as a business office and rental agency relating to towing equipment for automobiles. She noted discussion with biomedical business continues. She stated the City Engineer was conducting capacity testing in a sewer main adjacent to CSAH 2/Minnesota Street. The purpose of the testing was to determine whether or not enough capacity existed for connection to some property adjacent to Lake Sarah and I-94/new CSAH 2. Finally she noted promising discussion with a potential business moving into the Buettner Business Park. Osberg requested a 'bluebird' report monthly describing one large project that was underway. Board Member Announcements. None. Adjournment. Motion by Frank, Seconded by Danielson to adjourn the EDA meeting at 6:10 pm. Motion carried 4-0. February 27, 2013 EDA Meeting Page 3 �