Loading...
HRA 11/14/1985 - 29347CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING NOVEMBER 14, 1985 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Commers called the November 14, 1985, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Larry Commers, Elmars Prieditis, Duane. Pratrte, Virginia Schnabel Members Absent: Walter Rasmussen Others Present: Hasim Oureshi`, -RRA Di,ector Samantha Orduno, Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator Rick Pribyl, Acting City Finance Director Dave Newman, City Attorney Jim O`Meara, Miller & Schroeder Jim Casserly, Miller & Schroeder Bob Barnette, City Councilman -at -Large • Ed Fitzpatrick, City Councilman Louis Lundgren, 1140 Mtnn. Bldg,, St. Paul 5510I Roland Jacobs, BWBR Architects Sid Inman, Holmes & Graven Dave Weir, 10201 Wayzata Blvd., Minnetonka Barbara Hughes, CATV Advisory Commission Keith Hennek, Storer Cable (See attached list) APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 10, 1985; `HOU�IN`ftD0RM1<N��kUl1lfI1RtS: MOTION by Mr. Prairie, seconded by Mr. Prieditis, to approve the Oct. 10, 1985, oFr using & Redevelopment Authority minutes as written. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Commers declared the motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL HOUS�INf�UO011t�l�THORT FIRIOT,��95 IIOT1014 by Mr. Prairie, seconded b -,,( Mr. Pr editi;s, to approve - the Oct, 29_, 1985, oA us ng & Redevelopment Authority minutes as written. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Commers declared the motion carried unanimously. 0 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY-MEETrNG;'NOVEMBER 14, 1985 PAGE 2 1. PUBLIC HEAR I NG 'ON 'OF LOT BL CENTER: MOTION by Mr. Prieditts�, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to open the publtc heartng. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Commers declared the public hearing open at 7:07 p.m. Mr. Qureshi showed where the pronerty was located. fie stated that in 1982 when the HRA entered into an agreement with the Columbia Park Properties, they gave an option to the Columbia Park-Properties to buy this property for their expansion. That option runs until Jan. 2, 1986, but Columbia Park Properties has already submitted their option money and is desirous to build an expansion to their existing clinic. He stated the proposed addition was about 17,000 sq. ft. Columbia Park Properties would also be adding a parking facility, surface level with one level below the surface level, providing a total of 380 parking spaces. He stated the property in question that the HRA would be selling was basically where the parking facility would be built. He stated a representative from BWBR Architects who was representing Columbta Park-Properties was at the meeting to explain any details. Mr. Commers stated the HRA has been concerned about the distance between University Ave. and the narking spaces and how the project will look from University Ave. Mr. Roland Jacobs, BWBR Architects, stated the narking ramp would have only one level on grade and the second level would be 100% below grade. Facing University Ave. would be a 4 ft. high brick wall to keep people from walking from the sidewalk into the parking lot. The wall would match the exterior brick on the clinic building. He stated it would have a very low profile, and they will continue the same planting scheme surrounding the property lines on the spiral streets and Univ. Ave. He stated there will be about 6 -8 ft. of green space between the brick wall and the sidewalk on Univ. Ave. Ms.Schnabel asked what would be housed in the proposed 17,000 sq. ft. addition. Mr. Jacobs-stated the addition would house physical therapy, expanded labora- tory facilities, and occupational health, not additional examining rooms, but additional support services for the existing clinic. Ms. Schnabel asked what additional traffic this new addition would create. Mr. Jacobs stated it would increase the traffic flow somewhat. The outpatient services, physical therapy and occupational health, would be at odd hours- - Saturdays, evenings, as they are expanding their time frame. They are not increasing the need for parking proportionate to the square footage of the existing building as they were not adding any more doctors or more examining rooms. He stated he still felt there was a need for additional parking, perhaps • on the east side of the clinic. HOUSING & -RED EVELOMNT"AU`THORITY'MEETING; - NOVEMBER 14, '1985 PAGE 3 • There was no one in the audience who wished to address the HRA or the staff regarding this proposal. Mr. Qureshi stated the proposed addition was supposed to be $4.36 million in value so it would be a sizeable addition to the Fridley Plaza Clinic. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Prairie, to close the public hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Commers declared the public hearing closed at 7:19 p.m. 2. RESOLUTION NO. HRA 15 -1985 APPROVING AND.AUTHORIZING.THE EXECUTION Of A CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE EVE'OPM T H'C Ilk'M MOTION by Mr. Prieditis, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to approve a resolutioh approving and authorizing the execution of a contract for private development with Columbia Park Properties. Mr. Jim O'Meara reviewed the development agreement with the HRA members. Mr. Commers asked what the agreed -upon assessed value for tax purposes was upon completion of the expansion and parking facility. Mr. O "Me.ara stated at th=e present time, he believed the value for the present clinic building was $2,300,000.There was no figure in this agreement for the minimum market value for the entire project, upon completion of the building and the construction of the parking facilities. Mr. Commers stated it was the usual procedure of the HRA to have an agreed -upon assessed value in the development agreement before approving the agreement. Mr. Qureshi stated they would have a value agreed upon before the execution of the agreement. It was a matter of having the City Assessor valuate a proper market value once thev have the plans and then insert that figure into the agreement. He stated that if it was the desire of the HRA to have an agreed - upon assessed value figure before approving the agreement, they could table approval until the next meeting at which time the Staff would have that figure. Mr. O'Meara stated this development agreement would supercede the option agreement, but the option agreement was still in effect through Jan. 2, 1986. This agreement would suspend the option agreement and in the event they con- veyed the property under the development agreement, of course the option agree- ment would no longer be in effect. He would think Columbia Park Properties could close on the bond issue prior to the HRA approving the development agree- ment because one way or the other, they would have control over the land. Ms. Schnabel stated that if legal counsel could assure the HRA that not approving the development agreement at this time would not affect the bonding • process; and if it would not have an effect, in essence, on the City Council's action, then she thought they could either approve the resolution with the con- HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT 'AUTHORITY MEETING, NOVEMBER 14, 1985 PAGE 4 0 tingency that the figure be set before the City Council meeting so the City Council is aware of it, or thev could table the approval of the resolution until their Dec. 12th meeting. MOTION TO AMEND by Mr. Prieditis, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to approve Reso utlon Jo. HRA 15 - 1985, A Resolution Approving and Authorizing the Execution of a Contract for Private Development with Columbia Park Properties with the stipulation that an agreed -upon assessment value be placed in the development agreement to be presented to the City Council prior to their Dec. 2, 1935, meeting. Mr. Commers stated this would expedite the development agreement and the HRA could adopt and ratify the assessed value at their Dec. 12th meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PURCHASE AND RESALE OR OTHER DISPOSITION BY THE HOUSING EVELOP 1E T' AUTH0 I Y' BLOCK 1, SYLVAN BLOCK ;.SYLVAN-HILLS PLAT7, 1 Y 'iI S MOTION by Mr. Prieditis, seconded by Ms. Schnabel,to open the public hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Comers declared the public hearinn open at 7:35 p.m. Mr. Qureshi stated, the public hearing was basically on Phase 1, which was the 234 unit rental project. He stated this public hearinq was published in the paper and the City Staff provided notices to people within 500 feet-, of the property. Mr. Lundgren showed a model of the rental building. He stated they have two more phases of commercial and an elderly housing project for the future. He stated they are still trying to achieve a total project that will be cohesive and upscale in terms of quality which hopefull will be one that will create a sense of space and a sense of unity that will synergize the various com- ponents of it. He stated the City parking requirements are being met in the various phases. He showed pictures of the apartment building looking from the south and from the north. Mr. Prairie asked Mr. Lundgren if there was some kind of timetable for the phases. Mr. Lundgren stated he did not have control over a lot of things which would influence the timetable. Tfhis rental building would be started in 1986 and finished in 1987. It was hoped that by summer or fall of 1986, they would be able to start the first commercial building. Of course, this depended on the workcing relationships with a number of parties involved. HOUSING & REDEVEL'OPMERT AUTHORITY' - MEETING, NOVEMBER 14, 1985 PAGE 5 Mr. Lundgren stated his partnership intended to talk to every tenant and land owner on a one -to -one basis in the next 90 days to find out whether any of them are interested in becoming part of this project, either as a tenant or in ownership, what their needs and wants are, and what their objections are. Mr. Lundgren stated that possibly in early 1987, the second commercial project or the elderly housing would be the next phase. As they develop the plans, the timetables might change, but t4ev are looking at the total project being started in 1988 and finished in 1989. Mr. Qureshi stated the proposal, if approved, was to acquire- the property and build two level underground parking and then lease both-back-to the partnership over a 15 -year period where at the 15th year, there would be a balloon payment so the HRA would receive all the money with interest back-from the development. Essentially, what the HRA was providing was snme financing and all the monev would come back eventually through a lease. He stated the property to be acquired for Phase 1, the 234 unit rental buildinq,was a little over two and a half acres. Mr. Commers asked about the estimated costs or projections as to the overall cost to the HRA at this time. Mr. Qureshi stated it was estimated to be in the neighborhood of $2 million 40 for the land and the parking facility. Mr. Commers asked about the. total parking spaces provided. Mr. Robinson stated there would be 300 parking stalls inside for a total of 425 stalls including surface parking. Ir., Commers asked if there was anyone in the audience_ who would like to make comments regarding this proposed project. Mr. Larry Kuechler, 202 Mercury Drive, stated he would recommend the HRA not approve the development agreement at this time. There still seemed to be too many things that were not known about this project. For example, how will the project affect traffic flow? There have been no studies or proposals done. His major concern was they simply do not know what this project is going to do to the neighborhood, and the HRA was being asked to make a decision to approve or not approve without adequate information. Mr. Commers asked Mr. Qureshi to address the traffic questions. Mr. Qureshi stated the HRA was aware that the City had plans to upgrade Mississippi St. The City intends to work with Anoka County to add two addi- tional lanes on the west side of Mississippi all the way from where the develop- ment starts to the intersection and to add one additional lane on the east side. He stated the proposed project provided for a "no right turn" sign for traffic . coming out of the development so all the traffic would be directed to the slip -off going south on University. The plan also provided access from the development directly onto Mississippi in at least three locations. These plans will also include the upgrading of the signal at the Universi v/rliss intersection. HOUSING &'REDEVELOPMENT'AITHORITY MEETING, NOVEMBER 14, 1985 PAGE 6 Ms. Schnabel asked when it was anticipated that the County and City would begin the expansion on Mississippi. Mr. Qureshi stated their hope was plans would be completed in 1986 and at least a portion of the project started in 1987 Ms. Schnabel asked if there were any projections as to the number of cars that would be generated by the whole development once it was completed. Mr. Robinson stated that by code the additional 120,000ssq. ft. of commercial office would require 500 -800 additional parking spaces, depending how much was commercial and how much office. The elderly housing would require 1/2 stall per unit. So, in addition to the 425 parking stalls for the rental, they would be looking at somewhere between 500 -800 parking spaces per code. Ms. Schnabel asked if there were any figures available on the amount of traffic currently on the University /Mississippi intersection since the Target building was built. Mr. Qureshi stated that presently there was in the neighborhood of 9-10,000 cars per day on Mississippi and over 30,000 cars per day on University. Mr. Robinson stated one other issue that was to their advantage was that a good deal of the retail would not be adding to the rush_ hour traffic. Mr. Ron Schoneman, 246 Mississippi, stated he would ask-the HRA to take their time and look at the site. He was not sure if the HRA was aware of the traffic that was cutting across the field behind Rice Plaza because people who live in Sylvan Hills cannot get onto Mississippi from the service road by the old Standard Station. It was almost impossible to get out of there at any time of the day. Mr. Schoneman stated that when this development all started several years ago, this was supposed to be "downtown Fridlev " -- commercial, not necessarily residential. Now, all of a sudden, they are going to have a 12 -story apart- ment building in something that was going to be "downtown Fridlev". Mr. Schoneman stated he knew the area needed something, but the business people who are there now are really going to be in trouble because they will be. turned out, and there was no place for them to go. If a developer could come in with some plans to build something that the business people could move into without turning them out, that would be fine. He stated he has been in Rice Plaza for 22 vears and almost everyone in the center has been there that long. Mr. Prairie asked if it would be possible to move the placement of the commer- cial building so it would be possible to house the businesses that are in the plaza now. 0 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT 'AUTHORITY MEETING, NOVEMBER 14, 1985 PAGE 7 Mr. Lundgren stated the second phase does require the taking of the plaza. He stated he does intend to speak to every tenant and landowner, and he would very much like to find a way of including them in the project. He stated they are willing to look at anything that was reasonable. Mr. Don Fitch, 280 tlisstssippi, stated his family has been involved in the Dairy Queen for the past 23 years in Fridley on that corner. The project when it was completed would allow no space for a Dairy Queen-. That was a big concern of his because he was a franchise establishment, and his franchise limited the area he could be in in Fridley. By not having a part of that corner, there might never be a Dairy Queen in Fridley. Mr. Fitch stated he agreed that serious studies needed to be made on the traffic flow and traffic pattern on that corner. He stated the. traffic flow now is a disaster without adding another 900 parking stalls to the situation. Mr. Kuechler stated the problem was not just the traffic on Mississippi St. The problem was really the 1,000 or more cars that would be coming out of the shopping center trying to get onto Mississippi. Mr. Qureshi stated they had the same situation with the service road on the north side of Mississippi. They moved the service road further to the west so there is more stacking room. A similar thing was proposed for the south- side. The service road was presently about 200 ft. from the tntersection, and it would be moved west to about 300 ft. from the intersection. Ms. Debbie Larson, 255 Mercury Drive, stated she was representing her parents, Mr. & Mrs. Richard Larson, 255 Mercury Drive, who could not be-at the meeting. She conveyed the following comments: "My understanding is that this bo lding will be 12 stories high and 140 ft. in length. I thought there was a height restriction which is a maximum of 6 stories or 65 ft. I do not appreciate the idea of seeing a 144 ft. brick wall outside by back door. This building will not fit in with the rest of the neighborhood. Do we really need a small IDS tower in Fridley? Where will the extra traffic go in the morning and evening rush hours? Mississippi and University already are overcrowded at this time. I feel the extra traffic will exit the south drive the complex, thereby coming through the residential neighborhood. This would, in my estimation, include a minimum of 240 -500 cars per day through my neighborhood. What does the City plan to do with the excess storm water run -off with all the concrete and blacktop in this complex? Will it overtax the present storm sewer? What will happen to the service drive that runs north and south between Burger King and Ryan's Auto? If this is closed, emergency protection which includes police, fire, and ambulance will have to enter the Sylvan Hills area at 61st only. This will cause a delay in equipment and emergency vehicles to service this area. I also feel this great wall of China may lower my property value and raise my taxes to support added services needed for this complex. Will this apartment complex add any taxes to the City-Is general fund? It is my under- standing the bonds will be financed by the taxes this building wt 1l generate • for 20 years, thereby none of these taxes will go into the City's general fund." Mr. Commers asked Mr. Qureshi about the height question of 12 stories. HOUSING`& REDS)tEL'OPMErfT'Al1THORITY MEETING, NOVEf'IBER 14, 1985 PACE 8 Mr. Oureshi stated this development will require two special use permits- - one for the height beyond six stories and one for the mixed use. It was his understanding the building as proposed included 234 housing units and 7 -8,000 sq. ft. of retail space in the first level which -was essentially geared to service the residents but was open to the public also. Both special use _bermiU will require notification to the neighborhood with a public hearing efore Planning Commission and action by the City Council., Ms. Schnabel asked about the question of storm sewer run -off. Was the present storm sewer adequate? Mr. Qureshi stated they have. adopted standards where they try to retard the flow of water with retention. When the Target building and narking lot were constructed, a green area was provided where water can be retained before flowing into the storm sewer system. A similar thing would be done with this project also. No detailed plans have been made at "this time, but he felt the present storm sewer would be adequate because they would use the retention approach. Mr. Mervin Herrman, 278 Mercury Drive, suggested that for traffic flow; tt b� one war going east from where Mercury Drive comes Into Sate1 l tte.. This would not allow the traffic to come back-into the neighborhood, and he felt tt was very important to keep the traffic out of the residential area. Mr. Hermann stated he felt the height of 12 stories was excessive. He thought 6 -8 stories would be more feasible. As far as the business people-who have been in the plaza for 20+ years, there should be some definite program so they can stay in their building until construction is completed and they can move into one of the commercial buildings. The one thing he would be concerned about there was that the higher rents would force them out. He stated he was not totally opposed to the development, but he was opposed to a bat- dt-ig 12 stories high. V Mr. Rod Trocke, 248 Mississippi, stated his business was next door to Ron`s Barber Shop, and he lived on 2nd St. He stated one consideration he had not heard mentioned at this meeting was the pedestrian traffic. Crossing University at Mississippi is very dangerous. He did not see where widening Mississippi would solve anvthing. They have to consider the traffic already-going up and down University and East River Road. Mr. Trocke stated he did not know how the City figured an apartment building could fit into the "downtown" concept. He felt "downtown" meant theatres, businesses, entertainment, etc., not a 12 -story apartment building. If the project does go ahead, he would like the City to consider an underground tunnel under Mississippi to handle the pedestrian traffic. Mr. Trocke stated Mr. Qureshi had outlined a traffic pattern that included a "no right turn" sign that would direct traffic out to the slip -off onto Mississippi. He stated people will make illegal turns to get out first during • peak traffic times. Right now there is a 3 -7 minute wait to get across the intersection, and more congestion is only going to make it worse. He was also concerned about emergency vehicles trying to get through. HOUSING &. REDEVELOPMENT 'A(JTHORITY'MEETING, NOVEMBER 14, 1985 PAGE 9 Mr. Commers stated this area has been studied for a long time. Some of the earlier proposals were to build a total retail type of project, but over a period of time, it has been obvious that a number of developers who have come in with plans have not been able to do anything of that nature. It is going to take some type of mixed retail and residential in order to develop this area. One resident stated that regarding the storm sewers in perj�)ds of _fieavy� rain, Svlvan Park becomes a lake. The streets are flooded and the water comes up in the yards and on the corners. If more open land is covered up, there is going to be even more run -off. Mr. Richard Peterson, 255 Mercury Drlve, stated Ms main objecti�on was- the apartment building, especially 12 stories high, He-stated it %s -a commercial zone and an apartment building is just going to increase the traffic and the traffic on Satellite Lane that thev do not need. A commercial development will come along eventually,and he did not see any reason for more apartments in this area. Mr. Ed Bialick stated he owned the apartment building at 221 Satellite Lane- directly behind Burger King. He thought the access problem into the residential area right now was much worse than had been voiced at this meeting. Adding more apartments was not going to cure the problem.. Mr. Peterson stated there should not be any traffic coming from either the proposed apartments or commercial center into the res identtal area, All the traffic should be directed to Mississippi or straight east from the apartment building onto the service road and not come out at all on Satellite Lane. Mr. Prairie stated he thought this was an option that should he studied. Ms. Schnabel asked if any thought had been given to the possibility of putting the 12 story apartment building on the west side of this development where the elderly housing was proposed, running it north and south at that point. She was looking at this possibility from two points of view: (i)_ The visual impact from the residential area would be minimized because the building would be turned. (2) There was the possibility then of keeping the traffic more toward Mississippi and perhaps even blocking any street into Satellite Lane because the building itself which would have the highest density would be closer to Mississippi. Mr. Lundgren stated he had no problem with looking at that idea and investi- gating it. He could not agree with any suggestions until he had a chance to give them some consideration. He stated he felt the suggestion made by a resident of running the road straight across from the apartment building to the service road with no access to Satellite Lane had some merit, and he would check into that with City Staff. Mr. Prieditis stated that as they study this project further, they should give some high priority to seeing if the present businesses can remain, possibly through the phasing of the development. HOUSING '& REDS`VEL'OPM­E`I Tt `AUTHOR­1TY'MEEl`IYIG, - NOVEMBER 14, 1385 PAGE 10 MOTION by Mr. Prairie, seconded by Mr. Prieditis, to close the public hearing. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Commers declared the public hearing closed at 9:10 p.m. 4. RESOLUTION NO. HRA 16 -1985 APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING'THE EXECUTION OF A MNrRACI 'FOR V. I Mr. Qureshi stated the HRA was being asked to approve the resolution entering into an agreement with the developer to provide housing in this area for 234 units. The development agreement did leave some flexibility for location but did not leave any flexibility with regard to the number of units. He wanted the HRA to be aware that if they dial approve the development agreement, they would be comnitting to 234 units plus retail. The development agreement would provide that they, lease the land and build the underground parking and that _both land and the housing structure be leased to the developer fora period of time and then the developer will -buy these after 15 years. "1r. Qureshi stated the developer has asked for $13,000,000 worth of housing revenue bonds. The developer is estimating the total cost of the plan to run $16 -17 million. If that was the right number, then there would be enough increment generated to pay for the land and the underground parking. Mr. Casserly handed out a print -out of the numbers on the project. In summary, he stated there was approximately $5 million in debt service costs and approxi- mately $8 million in tax increment and approximately $5 million in lease and purchase income which was over a 15 year period. Assuming the project was built according to what has been described, the project itself provided very adequate increment revenues in addition to the lease revenues. He stated the lease revenues were not shown because that was a separate issue. Mr. Newman stated if the HRA elected to approve the development agreement, he would recommend there be some additional language addressing the special use permits to make it very clear that by entering into the agreement, the City Council still reserved its right to put the application process through the entire hearing process and reduce the scope if deemed necessary; however, he would caution the HRA that in the special use permit application process, the City does not have the same flexibility in denying that application as they do in a variance or zoning request, and it was important not to confuse the two. Mr. Oureshi stated one problem was that there was a Housing Program that had to be approved and submitted to the Minnesota Housing Finance Association (1,1HFA) before approval of the bond. The MHFA has 30 days to review the program and approve or reject it. If the HRA did not approve the Housing Program which commits to 234 units, then they cannot submit the package to the MHFA. If the HRA were to delay this to their Dec, 12th meeting, it put the whole program into 1986, and it was possible with new legislation that the housing revenue bonds might not be available or severly restricted. HOUSING & REDEVEL'OPMEfVT'AUTHORTTY MEETIflG, 'NOVEMBER 14, 1985 PAGE 11 Mr. Commers stated the process seemed kind of backward as he felt the Planning Commission and City Council were the most appropriate bodies to decide the. appropriate size of the units and the building. That was not the HRA "s expertise, and the HRA dfd not want to be in the nosi'tion where their might lock- the. City into t1its number of units when they aren't the-appropriate body to decide tFiat. Mr. Prieditis stated that from hearing tha neighbors' comnents at this meeting, it seemed to be the general agreement that 12 stories was too high. Maybe it would be smarter to make some kind of compromise and maybe 8 stories was more appropriate. He did not think he was willing to enter into this kind of agreement with a fixed number of units. Ms. Schnabel stated she felt very uncomfortable with this whole situation. She stated she has served on the Appeals Commission and Planning Commission since 1971 and she knew from all her years of experience that nothing was cast in stone. They have always been able to be flexible and have always been able to work out agreements with people who come in with proposals. That was what made her uncomfortable with saying there had to be a certain number of units and this size building without having the benefit of having the public hearings where members of the community are able to come in and express themselves regarding density, variances to the city ordinance, special use permits, etc. She felt the ordinance was the protection the City had to help them in dealing with developments. Ms. Schnabel stated she did not think they should go ahead and approve the development agreement unless there was the understanding that it can be done for a lesser amount without any recrimination towards the. City. The fact was that with a special use permit, the burden of proof lies on the city, not on the petitioner, and that was a.whole different ball game than a variance where the burden was on the petitioner and not on the city. Ms. Schnabel stated she did think a development of this type would Probably be very beneficial to the "downtown" area of Fridley, but she thought there were enough concerns expressed by the business people and their displacement and enough concern expressed by the neighbors about the impact on the neighbor- hood that the HRA had to consider those concerns. Hopefully, some kind of compromise can be worked out with the developer so the project still could proceed. Mr. Commers stated it was his understanding that for Mr. Lundgren to get MHFA bonds, he had to have a set number of units that could not be varied. If that was not true and if there was some f1exib -11tty and they could put a contingency fin the agreement that said the number of units would be the number set by the Planning Commission and City Council after public hearings, the HRA might have different feelings about this. What they are trying to find out at this meeting was whether there had to be a definite set number of units in the agreement. • Mr. Lundgren stated the development agreement tries to do certain things for the city. If the city changes the number of units, they automatically change the cost or value, so if they put a range in one place, they have to_put HOUS ING'& 'RED EVELO'PtIOT'ALITHOR ITY JtEETBIG -, -NOV UIRER'1-4 198.5 PAGE 12 a range in another place, and then they have to change the promise of how much money the developer is willing to commit to. If they want to leave all the things open, they have an agreement that is really not an agreement at all. He stated his lawyers have been working with the city's lawyers and he thought everything had been worked out satisfactorily. Mr. Commers declared a 15- minute recess at 9 :50 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:05 p.m. Mr. O`Meara stated it was the HRA's legal counsel's suggestion that they leave the development agreement in place in terms of the size of the project, cost of the project, and minimum market value of the project, but add a provision that very explicitly recognizes the need for special use permits and to provide that not only are the HRA`s obligations under the agreement contingent upon obtain- ing those special use permits, but, if for some reason, those permits should not be granted, the developer would have the option to cencel or renegotiate. That left both parties with no liabilit,r until the permits came through. Mr. Commers stated the only problem was that if the units are substantially lower, the HRA might want to void the development agreement from an increment poitit of view. It should not just be the option of the developer to void the agreement. Tir. Newman stated they could say that either the developer or the HRA could void or renegotiate the development agreement. Mr. Commers stated it was his understanding there would be further negotiations regarding location, drainage concerns, traffic concerns, etc. MOTION by Mr. Prairie, seconded by Mr. Prieditis, to approve Resolution No. HRA 16 - 1985, "Resolution Approving and Authorizing the Execution of a Contract for Private Development with the Fridley Plaza Associates Limited Partnership, with the following provision: Recognizing the need for special use permits, not only are the HRA`s obligations under the agreement contingent upon the approvalof the special use permits, but if for some reason the special use permits are not granted, at that time, either the developer or the HRA can void or renegotiate the development agreement. Ms. Schnabel stated she still had some concerns regarding the traffic and the storm sewer water run -off, and the effect of the development on the adjacent neighborhood. She did like the language suggestedby Mr. O'Meara as it helped in terms of the special use permit. Mr. Lundgren stated he had no problem with the suggestion wade by the city`s attorney. He stated they do plan to go through the normal public hearing process and they are open to suggestions or comments that make good sense and are logical. Mr. Commers stated he was in favor of the project, but he hoped the City Council and those familiar with the actual zoning and special use permit requirements would take a good look. at the-se things. • P-.� 0 HOUSING &'REDEVECOPPtE ER`1'4;'1985" PAGE 13 Mr, Commers stated that regarding the traffic concerns, maw- they, should con, sider spending some money to have a traffic study done as they have done in other areas. This should be discussed on a future agenda. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Commers thanked all those in the audience for coming for giving their input. He stated the HRA certainly did their concerns. He stated there was still a long way to and he hoped they would continue to exercise their right the appropriate bodies who will be making the final deci shape of the project. to the meeting and understand some of go on this project, to b-e heard before . lions on the size and 5. RECEIVING AND APPROVING,- THE -'C -ITS° Oki F`I�IO�`S``ki9N�RtP;\`PRO `FOR�`T `�I�L`E� Mr, Oureshi` stated the City was re- qulre.d to submiit the_Housim .Progt^w for this `site. If the HRA was in concurrence with_ the_ program of developing housing in this area, then the HRA`s action would be to approve and pass it on to the City Council. He stated that, legally, only the City Council needed to approve the Housing Program, so if the HRA was uncomfortable with the program, they might wish to just receive it and forward it on to the City Council. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Prairie, to receive the Cite of r1 ey`s Housing Program for the Fridley Square Associates Limited Partnership Rental Housing Project in the Southwest Quadrant of Mississippi Street and University Avenue, and to forward it on to the City Council. Mr. Commers stated he recognized that the financing was going to dictate the market rentals. He felt the rents were a little high and he would hope they can make those rents as realistic as possible. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. CONTINUATION OF A �REOUEST'F`R(WSTORER -CABLE TELEVISION: Ms. Hughes stated she was a member of the CATV Advisory Commission. One of the reasons she wanted to come to the meeting was because of a matter that was brought to the Cable Commission's attention by Storer personnel about 2.-3 months ago. That was wfth- regard to charges they paid in terms of _burying cable that had already been strung overhead. Ms. Hughes stated the CATV Advisory Commission's role was to regulate the cable company and assure compliance with the franchise the City grants to the cable company, but they also promoted the use. of cable to the community as a resource and as a communication system. She stated one thing the Commtssf -on tries to do is represent the Cittr`s interests in cable TV.. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT -AUTHORITY '"EETING "NOVEMBER 14, -1985 PAGE 14 Ms. Hughes stated it came to the Commission's attention that Storer was asked to bury their service underground in the Center City projects, and had protested that because the other utilities, NSP and Northwestern Bell, had not been asked to pay for the project in the same way. She stated the discussion revolved around the question of what was fair and equitable in terms of how Storer was approached and handled regardless of what the franchise agreements say or don't say about those kinds of charges and what is appropriate for the City to do. In light of that discussion, the Commission passed a motion saying they thought it was an unfair charge to the cable company, and they would like to urge the HRA to treat them the same as HRA treated NSP and Northwestern Bell when these kinds of things happen in the future. 14s. Hughes stated she understood the same kind of request was gong to be made in relationship to the west side of Universitw. Some of the services that are currently overhead will be buried along Mississippi Street and along University Ave. The Commissfon would hope the HRA would take the Commfssion's recommenda- tion and treat the cable company the same as the other two utilfties. The Commission sees the matter as simply one of fairness. Ms. Hughes stated she understood the company was going to drop the first request for repayment of monies for burying the cable underground on the east side, and that this request was for the west side of Univeristy. Mr. Commers stated there was a difference between Storer and the other two utilities in that the HRA does not have a contractual agreement with the other utilities whereby they specifically agree to bear these costs. Mr. Keith Hennek, Storer Plant Manager, stated their main concern at this time was that for future projects, they be treated equally with the other utilities. Mr. Qureshi stated it was clear that legally the HRA did not have to pay any part of it. The issue coming down was that the cost would eventually affect the citizens of Fridley, and there might be-some issue to that. If the HRA did want to reconsider this request, Staff would suggest they be very specific that it would be for this particular relocation of line west of University and that there be some sharing of cost, possibly a 50/50 participation. Ms. Hughes stated the section of the cable franchise the City was referring to that the company will bury the cable and are obliged to do so when requested really applied to the initial stringing of the wiring, not where there was a perfectly serviceable operation and the City was asking the cable company to change it for other reasons. She stated that was the history of why this wording was written into the franchise. She stated it could be interpreted all kinds of ways and say it was a contractual obligation. One of the things that was different about cable versus the other utilities was the other utili- ties do have a monopoly in town. Thev do pass every household and everyone has electricity. That was not true in terms of cable. it did have a competitor in terms of "the over the air" cable service and there are many People who • will be affected by this. HOUSING & REDEVEL'OPMENT'AUTHORITT MEETING,'NOVEMBER 14; 1-985 PAGE 15 Mr. Newman stated his recollection of Section 4.05.06, subparagraph 2.of the franchise was it did not have a preamble which explained the underlying under- standing at the time it was adopted, but in just straight- forward language, it made reference to removal or replacement. He would stand by his recommenda- tion that the HRA was under no obligation to pay for any placement of cable underground. Ms, Hughes stated it was probably perfectly legal to use the language at face value, but she still thought the isse was what was equitable among the utilities. Ms. Hughes stated the franchise was coming up for reauthorization, and they will be dealing with this issue in the new franchise. Mr. Prairie stated he felt if the HRA were to appropriate some money only for this project, it would set no precedent. Mr. Prieditis stated he would agree to making an exception for this project. 140TION by Mr. Prairie, seconded by Mr. Prieditis, to make a contribution of un to ,000 as a one -time compensation to Storer Cable for the relocation of cable underground on the west side of Universitv Avenue, with the understanding that no precedent was being set and this did not waive any rights under the . contract. UPON A VOICE VOTE, COMMERS, PRAIRIE AND PRIEDITIS VOTING AYE,SCHNABEL ABSTAININr, CHAIRPERSOPI COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED. 7. CONSIDERATIOPJ OF A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE ENLARGEMENT BY THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CJTY-OFFRIDLEY OF REDEVELOPMENT P . JECT NO. 1, THE AMENDMENT OF TAX INCREMENT -AN RELATIVE TO TAX INCREMENT IN S ICTS 2 THROUGH 5 TO REFLECT INCREASED REDEVELOPMENT E INCREMENT J DISTRICT NO. 6 LOCATED WITHIN JD APPROVAL BY Ti F I HE ION OF E PROPOSED I Mr. Qur_eshi stated this resolution basically provided for the enlarging of Redevelopment Project No. 1 which would add the property known as the 100 Twin Drive -in property, and the establishment of Tax Increment District No. 6. He stated the actual public hearing would be before the Cite Council on November 18, 1985. Mr. Robinson state d this proposal was presented to the Plannina Commission meeting on Wednesday, November 6, and the Planning Comm. found the proposal to be consistent with the City's Comprenenslve Plan. Mr. Oureshi stated the President of Woodbridge Properties, David Weir, and • Sid Inman from Holmes & Graven, were in the audience. HOUSING & REDEVEL'OP14ENT' Ail TiMITY'MEETrRG,NOVEMBER'14, -1985 PAGE 16 0 MOTION by Mr. Prieditis, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to approve Resolution No. A�'7 -1985, "Resolution Relating to the Enlargement by the Housing & Redev-eTopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley of Redevelopment Project No. 1, the Amendment of Tax Increment Financing Plan Relative to Tax Increment Financing Districts 2 through 5 to Reflect Increased Project Costs within Redevelopment Project No. 1, the Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 6 Located within Redevelopment Project No. 1, and Adoption and Approval by the City of Fridley of the Modified Redevelopment Plan and Adoption of the Proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 6. P1r. Commers stated he thought there might be a problem in finding that the propperty qualified for a redevelopment district, and he thought this was going to be looked into. Mr. Inman stated that based on some recommendations from their legal counsel, it was their understanding this property qualified. They would bring whatever documentation was necessary to the City Council on November 18, 1985. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. / � ' O y 1 � t � � Y � IY � � 1 � ' iY • � Y ; Yr1 •.. � __ 1 � � � � Y a� 1 0 1� i YY� : c�� �� i ���A�c sP� Y a of Mr. Qureshi stated if the developer was going to be able to utilize the tools available this year which might not be available next year, then the require- ment would be for the HRA to set a public hearing for the sale and resale or other disposition of property on Dec. 12. This would in turn allow the HRA to enter into a development agreement with the property owner. Mr. Commers asked if there was a development agreement. Mr. Inman stated it was their opinion to take it a sten A+ a time and thev will have the development agreement before the December 12, 1985 meeting;; They do have a general understanding of the outline of the agreement, and he thought that had been submitted to the HRA. Mr. Commers stated the whole problem was that the HRA has tried to set up a procedure in order to get some up -front good faith commitment so the HRA knows the development is worthwhile before having a public hearing. Mr. Qureshi stated the whole issue was timing. He also felt uncomfortable because of the time restraint the potential legislative changes were imposing on them. This was not the normal procedure. He stated that if the HRA desired to take more time and take chances on the law, then they could proceed on that basis also. HOUSI14G & REDEVELOPMENT 'All`THORITY'MEETINfi NOVEMBER -14; 1985 PAGE 17 • Mr. Inman stated one of the issues that had to do with timing that had nothing to do with the laws was what happened with FMC and the fact that the developer was in the position he is in now some time ago, and that they jointly and collectively went off in that direction at Staff's request. Then that proposal fell through. That was what really created the problem with the timing as they had to redraw plans, come up with different ideas and concepts, etc. Mr. Prieditis stated he would be willing to go ahead with the Dec. 12th public hearing. MOTION by Mr. Prieditis, seconded by Mr. Prairie, to set Dec. 12, 1985, as a u lc Hearing for the Sale and Resale or Other Disposition of Property Generally Located in Auditor's Subdivision No. 155, Lots 3, 4, and 5; and in Donnay`s Lakeview Manor Addition, Lot 22, Block 5, in Fridley, Minnesota, relating to a Proposed Redevelopment Project to be Constructed by Woodbridge Properties. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Even though it was not required to send individual notices for this public hearing, the HRA members agreed to have notices sent to all residents within 350 ft. of the property lines and that these notices be sent and received in • ample time before the public hearing. rlr. Commers stated HRA`s concern was that this was a major project, and they need time to review it. He would like to get as many of the factors as possible resolved before the public hearing. 9. CHECK REGISTER: MOTION by Mr. Prairie, seconded by Mr. Prieditis, to approve the check register a e Gov. 14, 1985, totalling $3,889.80. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. OTHER BUSINESS: a, Acqutsttion /Relocation: 5747 Central Avenue N.E. Mr, Qureshi stated the HRA members had a copy of a letter from the property owner of thts property stating he was now willing for a period of 30 days, to sell his property'to the HRA for $71,000. Mr. Qureshi stated Staff was asking the HRA to authorize them to go ahead and purchase the property for $71,000 and also authorize the other costs for relocation totalling $86,423: • HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY- ME- ETING, NGVEMBER 14, 1985 PAGE 18 Purchase of Property $71,000.00 Relocation to Owner 4,323.50 Relocation to Tenants 6,750.00 Update of Abstract 150.00 Relocation Consultant Services - 21400.00 1986 Non - Homestead Taxes �SQQ:00 $86,423.50 The HRA members questioned the relocation cost to the tenants. Ms, Schnabel stated that if the tenants are on a month -,to-month lease, she did not know why they were entitled to relocation costs. -Jlr,, Commers stated he would agree to the $71,000, but maybe the consultant should come and tell the HRA how he arrived at the rest of the figures. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr., Prieditis, to approve the purchase pr- ri of the property and all other costs, except the relocation to tenants. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Commers stated they should get an explanation of how the consultant arrived at the relocation cost to the tenants. b. Resignation of Carolyn Svendsen Mr. Commers stated he had a letter of resignation from Carolyn Svendsen who has had to resiJn because of the relocation of her family to Northfield, Mn. He stated Ms. Svendsen had made a valuable contribution to the HRA. They really appreciated all the time and effort she put in over the past ten years. He stated he felt the City should recognize her efforts in some way. Mr. Qureshi stated something would be done to show the City's appreciation. Mr, Commers welcomed Ms. Schnab l to the HRA. He stated she would be a valuable asset to the HRA. ADJOUR14MENT: `i9@ -- TON by Mr. Prieditis, seconded by Mr. Prairie, to adjourn the meeting.. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Chairperson Commers declared the Nov. 14, 19.85, HRA meeting adjourned at 12:25 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lynne Saba Recording Secretary )a Suh. �l, Q A mom, /ff67 // d A4-0( 2— M foL- CDO jo.ao W A~jz LLI S 7 �"5"5 1nCACu,&y �— --it ),— --f