By: Mollee Francisco

A recently proposed three- or four-story building at the northwest corner of highways 41 and 212 has fallen out of favor.

Instead, the Chaska City Council is hoping to create a grander entrance to Firemen's Park. 

Of the 12 redevelopment concepts for the busy corner, the one that caught the council' s eye was a plan to enhance Fireman’s Park  and add a restaurant/office complex along Highway 212.

The council has struggled with what to do with the corner since acquiring control of the land where Ohnsorg Truck Body Manufacturing, Chaska Farm and Garden and Randy’s Auto Repair now sit. The city spent more than $2 million to buy the two parcels of land and is looking at nearly $1 million in environmental cleanup costs.

The dollars involved have made redevelopment a challenge, as councilors would like to see the high-profile corner become a showpiece of downtown while minimizing the use of more city money.

At a work session Monday night, councilors directed city staff to look into a plan that would place a 7,500 square foot restaurant behind the existing Ernst & Associates Landscaping Architects building and a block of up to three office buildings to the west, over the existing parking lot.

“These would be Rick Ford-type buildings,” said Chaska City Administrator David Pokorney, referring to the two-and-a-half story brick office building across from City Square Park. Ideally, the new office buildings would complement the adjacent Chaska brick buildings. The buildings could provide up to 20,000 square feet of office space.

That would free up the 212/41 corner to expand Firemen’s Park into a larger green space. City staff discussed working with landscape architect Gene Ernst, who owns the Ernst building, to come up with some proposals for the park space once the existing buildings are demolished.

Moving beach

Because the office buildings and adjacent parking would intrude on the existing beach at Fireman’s Lake, the council was in favor of relocating the beach across the way to Schimelpfening Park. The current park has volleyball and basketball courts as well as horseshoe pits and archery targets but is not heavily used. As part of the plan, the city could create a trail that would connect both parks and encircle the lake.

“I like that plan because it enhances Firemen’s Park, it enhances Schimelpfenig Park and it makes the corner a showpiece,” said Rohe. “The restaurant gives it more of a destination place.”

The question on the park plan is whether or not a restaurant would be attracted to the area.

“I could be persuaded with an Axel’s or a Redstone,” said Councilor Bob Lindall. “But I’m afraid we wouldn’t even get an Applebee’s.”

Other plans the council looked at suggested using Schimelpfening Park as a source of revenue by building apartments, townhouses or single family homes on the site but councilors could not justify getting rid of the park.

“Touching the park across the lake is a no,” said Councilor Jay Rohe.

The other viable option that would minimize city dollars was the multi-story corner development. The development could either be three stories with street-level retail and two stories of apartment units above or two stories with street-level retail and upper level office space.

“I prefer two stories over three stories in general,” said Councilor Christopher Schulz. “It’s less overwhelming but it sure wouldn’t be my first choice. I’d really like to see that other set-up work.”

The council directed city staff to focus on the parks/restaurant/office plan. Staff will shop the plan around to developers to gauge interest and report back to the council. If the initial plan has no bites on the restaurant portion, the council agreed they would consider swapping the restaurant space for another office building. The third option they could pursue would be the multi-story corner development.

For now, the council and staff are hopeful that their preferred plan will attract interested participants.

“It’s a pretty good plan,” said Pokorney. “But we need to make it great.”

Corner redevelopment proposals

A) 7,500 sq. ft. restaurant and a 5,000 sq. ft. commercial/retail building. City subsidy: $840,000

B) All open park space. No new buildings. City subsidy: $2.23 million

C) 7,500 sq. ft. restaurant with remaining space dedicated to park expansion. City subsidy: $1.15 million

D) Three-story complex on corner with 20,000 sq. ft. of street-level retail and 54 apartment units above. City subsidy: $0

E) Two-story building with 20,000 sq. ft. street-level retail and 20,000 sq. ft. office space above. City subsidy: $0

F) CVS drug store and restaurant on corner. City subsidy: $0.

G) 7,500 sq. ft. restaurant, expansion of Firemen's Park and 84-unit apartment complex at Schimelpfenig Park. City subsidy: $125,000

H) 7,500 sq. ft. restaurant, expansion of Firemen's Park and 18 town houses at Schimelpfenig Park. City subsidy: $0

I) 7,500 sq. ft. restaurant, expansion of Firemen's Park and four single-family homes at Schimelpfenig Park. City subsidy: $271,000

J) 7,500 sq. ft. restaurant, expansion of Firemen's Park, 20,000 sq. ft. office space in three buildings along Highway 212 and beach moved across lake to Schimelpfenig Park. City subsidy: $79,300

K) Expansion of Firemen's Park, 20,000 sq. ft. office space in three buildings along Highway 212 and four single-family homes on Schimelpfenig Park. City subsidy: $22,000

L) Four single-family homes on Schimelpfenig Park, expansion of Firemen's Park to encompass entire corner. City subsidy: $1.2 million.

SOUND OFF: The city essentially chose to pursue Option J. Did they make the right choice? Which option would you have picked if you were on the council?