02-25-2002 HR MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

HRA Minutes Page 2 February 25, 2002 41) 2. Goals -Long-term viability of CBD and making a connection to the community. 3. Project Objectives- Include mixed use, consideration of historic context study, strengthen connection to the community,retain traditional downtown design elements and use visual breaks in the building design,increased residential density, pedestrian orientation,increased exposure to the riverfront,recognize the buildings that have potential for rehabilitation,replace market/economic obsolete buildings, and consider multiple types of housing. 4. Preservation of Sites for Later Development—Existing parking areas may be an example. 5. Land Acquisition—One of the most controversial issues,possibility of mediation and/or eminent domain. 6. Highway 10—The long range Interregional Plan that calls for elevation of Highway 10 could pose problems with development. Recommend alternative designs and seek developer planning feedback. 7. Historical Context Study—Solicit RFP prior to completion of study.Work with developer to explore results of study in design alternatives and use results of developer analysis to assess costs and impacts of various alternatives. • 8. Redevelopment Time Frame. Expect the need to update the concept in 5 years. 9. Initial Time Frame For Redevelopment—Do not expect construction before 2003. 10. Financial Assistance—Will look at each individual application. Assistance likely due to land cost, consider qualifying area for tax increment.Abatement and grants are other options for assistance. 11. Communication—Public involvement is very important because redevelopment is controversial. Encourage questions and respond to concerns. 5.2. Review Public Feedback& Communication Strategy Heidi Hall reviewed the public feedback received from the February 12 and 13 Open Houses. She noted that the feedback included comments relating to preservation of historic Elk River,rehabilitation of older buildings,utilization of the riverfront, adequate parking, general housing concerns,retaining green space, and low interest rehabilitation loans. Planner Chris Leeseberg reviewed the public response to the alternative design concepts. He indicated that Concept A was the most favored concept. He reviewed the reasons Concept A was accepted which included the following: • Provides a good amount of parking ,• Includes an art building • • Utilizes the riverfront • Provides a mix of housing and retail • Retains buildings located on Main St. and Jackson