Loading...
HRA 11/08/1984 - 29359CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING NOVEMBER 8, 1984 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Commers declared the November 8, 1984, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Larry Commers, Elmars Prieditis, Carolyn Svendsen, Duane Prairie Members Absent: Walter Rasmussen Others Present: Nasim Qureshi, HRA Director Sid Inman, City Finance Director Dave Newman, City Attorney Chris Wegemer, General Manager, Storer Cable Keith Hennek, System Plant Manager, Storer Cable APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 11, 1984, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE THE OCT. 11, 1984, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mr. Commers stated that since representatives from Storer Cable were at the meeting, he would request that they be first on the agenda. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. RELOCATION OF OVERHEAD CABLE TO UNDERGROUND CABLE BY STORER CABLE: Mr. Wegemer, General Manager, Storer Cable, stated that approximately ten daps ago, they received a call from the City that Storer was required to move on the Mississippi Project. He stated.this was the first notification Storer has received since their request for reimbursement. He stated the HRA had received a letter from Storer in May with a draft reimbursement of their expenses. He stated he had reviewed the HRH's June meeting minutes HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, NOVEMBER 8, 1984 PAGE 2 in which the HRA decided to deny Storer's request for reimbursement. He stated that apparently, the basis for that decision might have been based on an erroneous recommendation from City Staff; namely, that the franchise agreement with the City states that "removal or replacement of service lines shall be at the expense of Storer ". Mr. Wegemer read the following from the franchise agreement, Section 6.05, Undergrounding of Cable: "The placement of cable underground is encouraged. Cables shall be installed underground at Storer's expense where all existing utilities are alread underground. Previously installed aerial cable shall be pplaced underground in concert with other utilities when such other uti ities may convert from aerial to underground construction." Mr. Wegemer stated there was no explanation that this had to be done at Storer's expense, and he would assert that as being an intentional distinction. He stated this might have been an oversight on the City's part and he wanted to bring this to the HRA's attention as it was a concern of Storer's as they start the Mississippi project. Mr. Commers stated the cost for the project provided to the HRA previously was $17,282. Mr. Keith Hennek, System Plant Manager for Storer, stated that figure was correct. That figure included labor and materials. Mr. Wegemer stated that was a summer price. Had they received a response from the City early enough before Oct. 1 when the winter prices went into effect, they could have done the project at that price. Now the price will increase with the winter rates. He stated he understood NSP was relocating some of its lines underground right now. How quickly did the City plan on having this done? If there was no urgency, the City could save money by waiting until the first thaw to ahve the cable relocated. Mr. Qureshi stated the timing was not a big problem. He stated the question here was one of policy as to whether Storer should be paying for the relocation of the overhead cable or the HRA. Mr. Qureshi stated Storer is using public right -of -way. It is provided that whenever the City makes improvements, the utility has to do the relocation at its cost. The City is putting everything underground, and that is why Storer should put their cable underground also. It was not specifically mentioned in the franchise agreement that Storer pay for it. Mr. Commers stated that apparently the HRA's legal counsel had not had a chance to review this matter. Since it was Storer's claim that the HRA made its decision based on the wrong interpretation of some languange in the franchise agreement, and since there was not a.timing problem, he would suggest that their legal counsel review this before the next meeting. is The HRA members agreed this suggestion was appropriate. 6 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, NOVEMBER 8, 1984 PAGE 3 MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN, TO REFER THE MATTER OF HERELOCATION OF OVERHEAD CABLE TO UNDERGROUND CABLE BY STORER CABLE COMMUNICATIONS TO LEGAL COUNSEL FOR REVIEW AND INTERPRETATION OF THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND STORER CABLE. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Comers asked that their legal counsel have a written report available for the next meeting. Mr. Wegemer thanked the HRA for their consideration in this matter. 2. CONSIDERATION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HRA AND HEARTLAND REALTY INVESTORS ., DITNE OF H LLY'SHOPPING CENTER: Mr. Qureshi stated the HRA members had received in their agenda packets an outline of the agreement he.has worked out with the new owners of the Holly Shopping Center, Heartland Realty. Since then, they have formalized it into a formal agreement that has been prepared by O'Connor & Hannon. Essentially, it incorporated the conditions of the outline received in the agenda packet and was basically what they had discussed at the last HRA meeting. • Mr. Comers stated he thought the procedure the HRA had been following would negate the necessity of a public hearing. Mr. Qureshi stated it has been suggested that a public hearing might not be required; however, Jim O'Meara did say a public hearing should be held and a suggested date was the Dbc. 13 HRA meeting. Mr. Comers asked Mr. Qureshi to briefly summarize the proposal. Mr. Qureshi stated that basically the proposal said that the Holly Center owners will commit about $350,000 to make improvements to their property, $100,000 out of that they are willing to accept as assessments. The rest of it they will finance privately. The work that is going to be done on the building, essentially the signage and the facade improvements and pylon, will be done by the Holly Center owners. Some of the curbing, landscaping, and other improvements along Mississippi and the greenway will be done by the HRA and assessed to the owners, that cost to not exceed $100,000. Mr. Qureshi stated there is a plan the City is requiring from the Holly Center owners along Mississippi St. for improving the traffic situation. The Holly Center owners are buying the gas station property which the HRA will buy and sell back, retaining a portion for the Mississippi St. improvement. Mr. Comers asked what the HRA's net contributions to this project were overall. . Mr. Qureshi stated they are looking at a total cost of approx. $225,000. He stated the other element is that the Holly Center owners are spending $350,000. The Holly Center owners have also agreed to accept a minimum HOUSING &'REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, NOVEMBER 8, 1984 PAGE 4 evaluation for the shopping center starting Jan. 2, 1985, of $22 million. That brings to the HRA roughly $40,000 a year extra, and that is how the HRA will actually be able to pay this back in 5 -6 years. Mr. Qureshi stated that if the HRA feels this agreement is satisfactory, they should make a motion authorizing their approval of the resolution. The next step would be to authorize Staff to publish the notice of public hearing for Dec. 13. The HRA members questioned the need for approval of the agreement at this meeting if a public hearing was to be held at the next meeting. Mr. Qureshi stated that if there was any hesitation, maybe the HRA should approve the agreement in concept subject to the public hearing with final approval at the public hearing. Mr. Commers stated he thought the HRA members were agreeable in concept. They have done that before. If they are going to have the public hearing. it might be more prudent to wait until then to give final approval. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PUBLISH THE NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR DEC. 13, 1984, RELATING • TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HRA AND HEARTLAND REALTY INVESTORS, INC. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Commers stated that Staff could relay to Heartland Realy Investors, Inc., that it was the concensus of the HRA that it was all right if Heartland Realty Investors wanted to go ahead and sign the agreement. 3. "DISCOVER DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY - CITY OF FRIDLEY": Mr. Qureshi stated Staff had given the HRA a mock -up of this brochure at a previous meeting, and this was now the formal printing. He stated this was what the City will be distributing and putting into the community brochure with a cover letter. Hopefully, this will generate some interest in develop- ment in the southwest quadrant. Mr. Qureshi stated that if any of the tenants in the area want to know what is happening, the HRA members can say that the City is making it known that this land is available, but that there are no proposals at this time. He stated this time, the City's approach will be a little more prudent. They will screen the potential developers and a proposal will not be brought before the HRA until the City feels a developer is really financially sound and can really produce a good package. He stated that at this time, none of the tenants have been advised of this brochure and he did not feel it was a good idea to advise them that the City was doing this, because even with all this promotion, • there is the possibility that nothing will happen anyway. 6 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, NOVEMBER 8, 1984 PAGE 5 Mr. Prieditis stated the tenants or owners will probably find out about this anyway. Somehow someone is going to see this brochure and rumours will start going around. Why not just write a statement of what Mr. Qureshi had just said- -that at this point, there are no proposals and when there is a solid proposal, the tenants will be informed. Mr. Prairie agreed and stated he thought the tenants want to be made aware of what is going on. Mr. Qureshi stated he still disagreed with that approach. Mr. Inman stated he agreed with Mr. Qureshi. It was not as if this was some- thing brand new or something they are just starting. The other thing that has changed is the difference in this center. Before,the center was in a loss position and now tenants are fighting to get in there across the street from Target and the new Holly Center. Mr. Qureshi stated that when they do get a formal proposal that they think Ka; good possibilities, they can make sure that they protect the interests of the existing tenants as much as they reasonably can. Ms. Svendsen stated she agreed with what Mr. Qureshi was saying, but on the • other hand, the HRA members are asked questions every day, and she did not want them to be perceived as hiding anything when they are not. Mr. Qureshi stated this was a redevelopment district. The City has been pro - moting it, but so far nothing has happened. The tenants will the first to know if something really happens on that property, and the City and the HRA will do everything within reason to protect their interests. Mr. Prieditis stated his concerns had been in terms of a courtesy message to the tenants, but he could see where this could be rather difficult. He was willing to accept Mr. Qureshi's explanation and agreed the HRA should proceed the way he had described. Mr. Qureshi stated he firmly believed in not disturbing the tenants until Staff was satisfied that a developer has the strength and ability to put a good proposal together. Then, before anything is approved, they can make sure they get public input. Ms. Svendsen stated she also agreed with Mr. Qureshi. It would be fine if people were able to perceive a letter the way it was intended, but there was a great opportunity for the tenants to misinterpret that letter. That would make things worse instead of better. Mr. Prairie stated he could see advantages and disadvantages to notifying the tenants. n U • 0 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, NOVEMBER 8, 1984 PAGE 6 Mr. Commers stated this was certainly a legitimate issue, but at this point, he felt it was the concensus of the HRA that they go forward with the mailing of the brochure and hope there was no adverse developments as a result of not communicating specifically or especially with anyone. The HRA members thought the brochure was a nice looking brochure and very well done. They received it and approved it. 4. FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR PERIOD OF JAN. 1, 1984,-TO-NOV. 8, 1984: Mr. Inman reviewed the financial statement which included a recap of the billing presented at the last meeting which was not approved at that meeting. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MS. SVENDSEN, TO AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF THE BILL FOR SERVICES IN THE TARGET PROJECT AREA THROUGH SEPT. 30, 1984, TOTALLING $163,530.15, AS STATED IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION BY MS. SVENDSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF THE.BILL FOR PERSONAL SERVICES AND OPERATING EXPENSES IN THE AMOUNT OF .$46,198.43. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. OTHER BUSINESS: a. Municipal Warehouse Liquor Store Mr. Inman stated they are rapidly finishing the hardware store. The building was in pretty bad shape because it had sat empty for such a long time. They are looking at Dec. 13 and 14 as the grnad opening dates for the municipal warehouse liquor store. They would be looking at approving the lease before the grand opening. b. Contest Mr. qureshi stated that at the last meeting, they had discussed the idea of a contest to get some ideas for a design for the Mississippi /Highway 47 intersection. He stated he had given the HRA members some drafted materials regarding the contest for their review. He stated he would welcome their input. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, NOVEMBER 8, 1984 PAGE 7 ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MS. SVENDSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COINNERS DECLARED THE NOV. 8, 1984, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8 :45 P.M. Respectfully submi ted, Lynn Saba Recording Secretary 0