Commuinity Development Authority- MINUTES - 2/11/2004
CITY OF MUSKEGO APPROVED 3/25/04
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (CDA) Audio recording of meeting
MINUTES is also available.
Wednesday, February 11, 2004
CDA Chairman Frank Waltz called the meeting of the Community Development Authority to order
at 7:00 PM p.m.
Those in attendance recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
The meeting was posted in accordance with the Open Meeting Law.
PRESENT: Commissioners Rob Glazier, David Lidbury, Suzi Link, Gail Miles, Frank Waltz, Ald.
Petfalski and Ald. Nancy Salentine
Also in attendance were Mayor Slocomb, Interim Plan Director Jeff Muenkel, Finance Director
Dawn Gunderson, Mr. Dave Anderson of Ehlers & Associates, Mr. Steven Stewart of Investors
Equity, LLC, Mr. David Jorgensen of Voss Jorgensen Schueler Co., Inc. and Mr. Mark Pfaller #AIA,
Architect and Mr. Clint Selle.
GUESTS: 21
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Ald. Salentine moved to accept the minutes for the January 15, 2004 meeting. Commissioner
Link seconded. Upon a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously.
OLD BUSINESS
None
NEW BUSINESS
Consideration of a Recommendation to the Common Council concerning approval of a
Revolving Loan Fund loan to Leaps & Bounds Learning Center Inc. to assist with the
purchase of equipment and to provide working capital at W189 S7783-85 Racine
Avenue.
Commissioner Link moved to consider the Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) loan application to
Leaps & Bounds Learning Center, Inc. Commissioner Glazier seconded. Ald. Petfalski
shared his concerns on this loan application. The loan request had changed drastically than the
one the CDA approved months ago; mainly, the city’s equity position. The petitioner would be
using the money to purchase equipment and not property. He indicated the city would be put at
too much risk. Commissioner Link also was concerned about the limited amount of equity. There
is no security. It’s a lease space and all the city would have would be equipment. Interim Director
Muenkel said that purchasing equipment is allowed under the RLF as well as working capital. He
mentioned that if approved, before it would go to Common Council, it would have to go before Plan
CDA Minutes, February 11, 2004 page 2
Commission for approvals for the fencing needed to comply with the State regulations. Mr. Gorski
had no comments. Commissioners discussed what other equity they could attach to secure the
loan. Upon a show of hands, the motion was defeated unanimously. The petitioner was
advised they could restructure the loan application and petition the CDA again. There was no
prejudice.
Review of new concepts for the Former Parkland Mall Site.
Chairman Waltz shared that since the last CDA meeting, there have been three meetings outside
the CDA meetings. On Tuesday, February 3, Finance Director Gunderson and Mr. Dave Anderson
of Ehlers & Associates met with Mr. Stewart and Mr. Jorgenson to discuss financial planning for the
redevelopment of the former Parkland Mall property. On Thursday, February 5, Mayor Slocomb,
Alderman Petfalski, Finance Director Gunderson, Engineering Director McMullen, Interim Plan
Director Muenkel and Chairman Waltz met with Mr. Stewart, Mr. Jorgensen, Mr. Pfaller and Mr.
Selle to discuss concepts for the redevelopment of the former Parkland Mall property in preparation
for this CDA meeting. On Tuesday, February 10, Finance Director Gunderson, Interim Plan
Director Muenkel and Mr. Anderson of Ehlers & Associates met with Mr. Stewart and Mr.
Jorgenson to discuss funding of the proposal for the redevelopment of the former Parkland Mall
property.
The developers were given an opportunity to present their concept and receive feedback from the
CDA. Mr. Jorgensen brought the CDA members up to speed on the design and where they are as
far as density for the condos, retail and office space. They would ask the CDA to think about the
flexibility in what they are doing. They were not ready to give actual numbers of units, but when
they get to that point, they would like everybody to agree upon it—the number of parking spots, the
percentage of green space, and different amenities. When they are then ready to go out to the
private sector to start finding tenants for the retail space and do the market studies on what people
want their condos to look like, etc., they want to have the flexibility within the CDA guidelines to
make changes. As they move along, they will eventually come to the CDA and present the designs
and the actual locations that they need for the CDA, the Plan Commission and the Common
Council.
Mr. Pfaller present two schemes pointing out their number of retail units, square footage, condo
units, etc. At this point, these were only at schematic stages. They have not design pathways,
lighting, etc. They were asking for flexibility to allow them to go in various directions.
Commissioners were provided with data on both schemes. What had changed substantially in
both the schemes was the parking. This was changed because it would be very expensive to put
multi-level parking spaces in the development. Another thing is they lowered the condo units to
three floors, which allows them flexibility in construction. Not necessarily a lower grade of
construction but when you go higher, you have to go to fireproof and to concrete construction.
With the three floors, they can go to wood structure with brick and siding. The condo units were
moved more to the north and east side of the lot, leaving the boulevard where it was. They put
more parking in the southwestern part of the lot. The design schemes separate the residential
from the commercial using a wall, a five or six foot fence or stoned, to allow the first-floor tenants to
see a courtyard or a yard. They put the condos on the Lannon Drive side to help buffer the
residential area. They have kept some of the amenities but reduced the green space to make
room for parking areas.
CDA Minutes, February 11, 2004 page 3
Mr. Lidbury asked where the parking was for the condo units? Mr. Pfaller stated it was
underground. Mr. Lidbury asked if they gave consideration to deliveries to the retail/commercial
units? Mr. Pfaller said that was difficult to handle technically. This is a management thing and they
need to be worked out through the developers and the builders. Chairman Waltz commented that
it’s a more integrated site. He did not see quite as much green. One of the criteria was green
space. Mr. Pfaller said that somewhere in the scheme the green space would fit in with the
configuration and the city’s requirements. Mr. Glazier felt that the numbers were based on reality;
some may change, but it’s basically in the ballpark. Mr. Pfaller said several months ago, they
designed the lot in the development and it ran the cost of the Proforma. They have now taken the
Proforma, reworked the items, then redesigned. The numbers are close but again it is consumer
driven. Commissioner Glazier said he liked Scheme I better. He liked the better mixed-use
development. Commissioner Link stated that she liked Scheme I, but Scheme H addressed the
wrap-around condos better. It wasn’t as claustrophobic. She would like to see this of Scheme H
integrated into Scheme I. Mr. Pfaller said there are a couple ways of doing that. Commissioner
Miles asked if there was a local building that they could compare with the 50’ height so the people
can get an idea of what it would look like? Interim Plan Director Muenkel stated that the new
auditorium at the high school is 50’ in height. Mr. Pfaller said the site has a swale so any
comparison would be misleading. The buildings are going to be built based on the ability of the soil
to hold the buildings up. Commissioner Glazier asked what was the next step? Mr. Jorgensen
said they need to start talking with the bank, they need to get to the point where they can start
focusing on the condos and how they are going to lay out, talking to brokers and start talking to
tenants to see what they will want. Basically, they are going to come back to the city with what the
Proforma looks like as that is the driving force behind the development right now. They want to
present a plan that will work for the city and for them, financially for everybody. The next time, they
will probably be able to show the CDA the building types, the building styles, elevations. Ald.
Salentine said the most important things were addressed regarding the height and the density
issues. Commissioner Link inquired if the pond would be able to handle the storm water. Mr.
Pfaller said they have not dealt with that issue yet. They need to discuss it with the Plan
Department.
PUBLIC INPUT
Members of the general public commented on the condos, the green space, and the residential
homes on Lannon Drive. Mr. Pfaller shared that Mr. Dyer had bought one of the three homes
along Lannon Drive and it would become a part of the development.
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW
Ald. Petfalski commented that he would like a procedure in place whereby the city staff could
review the RLF requests to determine their merits before being brought to a public forum.
NEXT MEETING: The next meeting is scheduled Thursday, March 25, 7:00 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT:
CDA Minutes, February 11, 2004 page 4
There being no further business, Commissioner Link moved for adjournment, seconded by Ald.
Petfalski. Upon a voice vote, the motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:03 p.m.
Stella Dunahee, CPS
Recording Secretary