The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC 09-07-2005 e I I ~ ~HILLS Approved: September 26, 2005 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 7,2005,9:00 A.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 1245 WEST HIGHWAY 96 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS AND GSA MEETING CALLED TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Present from City of Arden Hills: Mayor Aplikowski, Councilmember Holden, Councilmember Lois Rem, City Administrator Michelle Wolfe Also present: Jerry Filla, City Attorney In attendance: John Shardlow, DSU Paul Bakken, The Valuation Group David Kiernan, GSA Collin Barr, Ryan Companies /CRR Bart Rehbein, Glenn Rehbein Companies/CRR Dan Mueller, Intergra Realty Resources Phil Youngberg, GSA Richard Nugent, BAT Associates, Inc. Kevin Legare, GSA Jeffrey Knutson, Glenn Rehbein Companies/CRR Mike Fix, TCAAP/Army Mayor Aplikowski opened the meeting, asking everyone to introduce themselves and thanked them for coming. David Kiernan of GSA asked the appraisers to present their concl usions thus far regarding "highest and best use" for the TCAAP excess property. Dan Miller, appraiser for the GSA, began with his conclusions: Mr. Miller stated that he has done quite a bit of research. He feels the most dominant use on the site would be housing of some sort. He foresees a mix of all three types of housing. He has concluded that of 588 acres, approximately 400 acres would be housing. Even though the framework vision shows parkland, etc., for appraisal purposes he has to look at highest and best use. He feels single family housing will dominate the site, about 200 acres in total. He thinks about 150 acres will be town homes and about 50 acres high density. He stated that he was largely following Arden Hills' guidelines for bousing, as follows: \'Metro-inet.us\Arden Hi 11s\Admin\Council\Minules\Special\2005\09-07 -05 Approved.doc ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL-GSA MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 2 e 1. High density - 12 units per acres 2. Medium density - 6 units per acres 3. Single family - 2.5 lots per acre This leaves, in his estimation, 180 acres for something else. He thinks retail has been cut short on the city's framework vision. He thinks there will be added demand for retail. In the 180 acres he sees a mix of retail, light industrial, office and hospitality. He has assumed 60 acres ofretail, hospitality/restaurants, and convenience business. Of the last remaining 120 acres he sees 60 acres of industrial/light industrial/office showroom, and 60 acres of office. Paul Bakken, appraiser for the City, stated that his expectation for today's meeting was a discussion regarding highest and best use. His first concern is that he thought the athletic fields were specifically set aside, along with the wild life corridor, and those areas seem to be included in Mr. Miller's numbers. He further stated that he thought he was only to appraise 488 acres for the City. It was noted by GSA that they need to value those two designated areas for their purposes, which is why Mr. Miller was directed to include them. Mr. Bakken stated that he thinks the industrial along 135W and Highway 10 might be a bit too much. Regarding retail, he thinks there is an appropriate amount on the framework vision, and he doesn't see much more on the site. He doesn't think retail or I office will be real big components. Mr. Bakken stated that he hasn't seen the traffic studies, and transportation is an issue. It is critical to how dense the site will be. He noted two questions: (1) the amount of flex space along highway 10 and 135W; and (2) density of housing. He is assuming for appraisal pLlrposes a development-ready, clean site. He questioned whether the GSA has any plans for the site, to which responded that they do not have any plans. Mr. Bakken noted that value is tied to uses and densities. It was stated that neither appraiser will be exceeding the densities on the plan. It was also noted that the City has not eommitted to the densities under the plan. John Shardlow sated that the density shown on the framework plan is "net" of the plan, including park land and open space. GSA indicated that we ean work out the athletie faeility/wildlife eorridor issue outside of the appraisal proeess. Mr. Bakken suggested that the appraisal be done two ways: one with the ball field/wildlife eorridor included and one without. Mr. Bakken again noted that he really does not see a lot of retail for this site. No more than shown on the City's framework vision. He proposed using the City's vision in terms of the mix of uses, but then the appraisers will have to look to the market for speculating densities. I e I I ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNClL-GSA MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 3 GSA noted they need a fixed number when they go to Congress, not a range, although Mr. Kiernan indicated he would check on this. It was noted that, technically, the property is not currently zoned. On the discussion ofland use by acres, Mr. Mueller's numbers were recapped: . 200 acres single family with 2.5 lots per acre . 150 acres town homes, 6 units/acre . 50/30 acres high density housing, 12 units/acre GSA indicated they may amend their appraisal instructions to ask for two outcomes: one with and one without the atll1etic fields and wildlife corridor. Mr. Bakken stated that he could provide a summary of his conclusions regarding highest and best use in one week (a deadline of 9/15 was set). Mr. Miller will also submit his findings in writing by that time. The parties will meet again my conference call on Tuesday, September 20 at 2:00 ET (I :00 CST). After a break, some members reconvened for further discussion about other TCAAP- related topics. (The appraisers were no longer present). Phil Youngberg, GSA, said that he had reviewed the MEPA process and that it is very similar in many ways to NEPA. The NEPA process is fairly compact, since the federal government intcnds to transfer the property. They will draw a lot from MEP A, which will be more lengthy and detailed. The GSA's position is to partner with the City, and extract what they need from our MEP A process. They will participate as necessary in public meetings. They will endorse our mitigation plan, working out differences ahead of time. The GSA indicated that they can work within our l20-day timeline. They are ready to get "plugged-in" to the process at any time. All they need to look at in their NEP A process is the question of dispose or not dispose (of the property). In terms of timeline, it is hoped that these processes can start in early 2006. The GSA would like to kick offwitb a scoping letter, but suggested that perhaps there can he a joint letter kicking off both MEPA and NEPA. DSU indicated that they can share their mailing list with GSA. The next topic discussed was the status of the GSA's survey of the site. Kevin Legare stated that a draft is completed and available, they are in the process of putting in legal description. The GSA has researched the issue of easements, and concluded that there is no real issue with any easements, including Xcel Energy. CRR was asked if they had completed their comments regarding the ternlS of the Offer to Purchase document. They indicated that they would complete and forward soon to GSA. e e I The next topic was insurance. GSA asked about CRR's progress on insurance. Mr. Rehbein responded that at this point, to get bindable quotes, they need the additional environmental information, so they cannot really do much more until that information is collected. The GSA is to provide CRR with examples of insurance binders so that CRR knows what GSA is looking for in terms of coverages. Kevin Legare noted that neither the FOSET nor the Armey's environmental clean up costs are available yet. The FOSET is moving forward but not ready yet. It was noted that we need to determine the status of the Response Acton Agreement. Kevin Legare will arrange the conference call. The meeting was adjourned at 11: 15 AM. ~~t~"~' Beverly lik ski Mayor f1I~Jdt /)YWfI/ft Michelle A. Wolfe ' City Administrator \ \Metro- inet. us lardenhills \Admin \ Council \Minutes ISpecia/\2 005 ISeptember 7- Draft2. doc