Discussion of 167th Avenue and Highway 47 Node

Background:
The retail node located at 167th Avenue and St. Francis Boulevard (Trunk Highway 47) has been a topic of discussion with City Councils and EDA boards for the past ten (10) years. This node has struggled to become economically viable for some time, is experiencing very high vacancy rates and a decaying building stock. Historically, the City has conducted a number of studies and conceptual master plans for this area; and at one point considered funding a second master planning effort.

Beginning in the summer of 2012, the 167/47 retail node resurfaced as a priority discussion topic.  Over the past year, Staff has received a number of inquiries; including proposed new uses, inquiries for City assistance, expression of frustration from property/business owners, inquiries to approve a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendment for the parcels, inquires for the City to purchase parcels, etc.

As a result, the EDA has reviewed a number of cases regarding this manner.  The policy direction developed by the EDA is as follows:

• The EDA is not interested in purchasing property to revive the 167/47 retail node in the near future.
• The EDA is interested in developing an ownership meeting group to brainstorm options, share information and to investigate opportunities.
• The EDA is interested in the idea of developing a professional marketing package for the 167/47 retail node to entice redevelopment/investment.
• The EDA is interested in investigating what financial assistance options exist for a potential redevelopment project.
• The EDA is not interested in approving a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendment for the subject property to allow for warehouse and/or light manufacturing uses.

Purpose of Case: Review updates/information collected and provide Staff with general direction

Listed below are five major topics for discussion.

(1) Ownership Meeting, June 5
Staff met with 167/47 retail node property owners on June 5 with the purpose of:
    (1) gathering owner information (goals, barriers, etc).
    (2) provide City background/historical information and identify potential available tools
    (3) provide feedback for EDA

Attached to this case are meeting notes and information collected.  In summary,  (A) a majority of property owners are interested in selling today, (B) all property owners are interested in a EDA sponsored developer marketing package, (C) all property owners believe additional roof tops will benefit the retail node, (D) all property owners are not opposed to a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendment to allow for light industrial/warehouse type users and (E) one property owner would like the City to consider support of a residential development proposal.

(2) Rum River Hills Proposal
Staff met with representatives of of Rum River Hills Golf Course in June regarding a proposed 248 unit residential development.  NOTE: the entire project and development of all units would take several years to unfold and require coordination with numerous property owners. The initial phase would focus on approximately seventy (70) units. Please reference the attached maps for details.

In summary, Rum River Hills is proposing a 248 unit residential development that would include a variety of housing types and would call for the relocation of two existing golf holes to the west side of Hwy 47.  Said proposal would require a Saint Francis Boulevard (TH 47) underpass for safety purposes.  Rum River Hills representatives have indicated sewer costs (1.5M), the cost to acquire City land (117K) and the cost for and underpass (500K) are barriers to moving this project forward. 

(3) DEED Redevelopment Programs
Staff attended an informational meeting on June 20 regarding two Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) redevelopment programs.  

One program allows the City to apply for a GRANT to pay for 50% of eligible redevelopment project costs (this could be on behalf of a private developer).  Another program allows for the City to purchase properties using a LOAN from the State.  Then, if eligible redevelopment occurs, 50% of the loan is forgiven.  Additionally, loan repayment doesn't begin for two years.

These programs are ideal for the demolition and redevelopment of the north side of 167th.

(4) Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendment
Staff continues to receive requests to to approve a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendment to expand allowed uses of the 167/47 retail node.  In summary, it has been requested again the City allow for light industrial or warehousing type user(s). The City has attempted to identify other acceptable uses beyond warehousing and light industrial. However, the property owners have not identified any additional suggested uses.

(5) Marketing Package
It has been previously proposed, the EDA consider leading an effort to create a professional grade marketing package for outside developers. Said package would outline buy-in from all land owners, display asking prices, show what financial assistance the City is able to provide, display attractive graphics/site layouts, etc.  Upon approval from the EDA and Council, the marketing package would be disbursed to various developers (or marketed by a third party).

Preparation of this discussion topic is being handled as part of regular Staff duties.

Provide general feedback/direction regarding all five discussion topics.

(1) Ownership Meeting, June 5
Does the EDA have any comments or direction regarding the ownership group?

(2) Rum River Hills Proposal
In concept, does the EDA have interest in pursuing this preliminary proposal? --which includes a willingness to consider assistance for a sewer connection, a Saint Francis Boulevard (TH 47) underpass and a land write down.  NOTE: this is not a final decision or a commitment; however, it will allow a developer to make a formal proposal/project budget.

(3) DEED Redevelopment Programs
Is the EDA comfortable with Staff advertising the grant program to developers?  Is the EDA interested in further investigating the redevelopment loan program (i.e. draft a proposal for EDA review)?

(4) Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendment
Would the EDA support approving a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendment on the subject 167/47 retail node to allow for light industrial or warehouse type users?  Should this item be reconsidered by the Planning Commission, followed by final approval of the City Council? NOTE: The Planning Commission has previously reviewed this concept (light industrial or warehousing) and did not direct Staff to pursue said amendment.

(5) Marketing Package
Would the EDA like Staff to develop a proposal for consideration at the August EDA meeting (which will include cost estimates)?

Provide general feedback/direction regarding all five discussion topics.

(1) Ownership Meeting, June 5
Does the EDA have any comments/direction regarding the ownership group?

(2) Rum River Hills Proposal
In concept, does the EDA have interest in pursuing this preliminary proposal? --which includes a willingness to consider assistance for a sewer connection, a Saint Francis Boulevard (TH 47) underpass and a land write down. NOTE: this is not a final decision or a commitment; however, it will allow a developer to make a formal proposal/project budget.

(3) DEED Redevelopment Programs
Is the EDA comfortable with Staff advertising the grant program to developers? Is the EDA interested in further investigating the redevelopment loan program (i.e. draft a proposal for EDA review)?

(4) Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendment
Would the EDA support to approval of a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendment on the subject 167/47 node to allow for light industrial or warehouse type users? Should this item be reconsidered by the Planning Commission, followed by final approval by the City Council?

(5) Marketing Package
Would the EDA like Staff to develop a proposal for consideration at the August EDA meeting (which will include cost estimates)?