Loading...
HRA 08/13/1987 - 29643CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING AUGUST 13, 1987 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Commers called the August 12, 1987, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Larrp Commers� John Meyer, Duane Prairie, Virginia Schnabel Members Absent: Walter Rasmussen Others Present: Jock Robertson, HRA E�ecutive Director Mark Burch, Asst. Public Works Director Rick Pribyl, Finance Director Julie Burt, Asst. Finance Director Jim Hill, Asst. City Manager Virgil Herrick, City Attorney June & Louis Lundgren, 343 Kellogg Blvd., St. Paul, MN, 55tOt Gera�d Sunde, Sunde Engineering � Mervyn Mindess, Subterranean Engineering APPROVAL OF JULY 9, 1987, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHO�ITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. MEYER, TO APPROVE THE JULY 9, 1987, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES. Mr. Meyer indicated that on page 7, paragraph 8, line 3, the first word of the line should be "cost" per cubic yard, etc. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS, DECLARED THE MINUTES APPROVED AS AMENDED. 1. CONSIDERATION OF LOU LUNDGREN'S LETTER OF CREDIT Mr. Lundgren stated he had several things going, but at this t une does not have a financing commitment. He has received from Miller & Schroeder the conditions under which they will sell bonds which includes taking the risk out of the construction aspect. The construction lender would need to include a breakeven occupancy. L�nders do not like to do this; however, he is working with a local bank to undertake this condition. This should happen next week. Mr. Lundgren has been approached by the Towle Company and will help make the project work. They have indicated two persons who may be interested in financing, but they have not yet responded. Other avenues are available under the same terms as before but they require someon.e to pick up a large �"�., amount of equity. Mr. Zundgren stated he was closer to an agreement and very opti.mistic. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 13, 1987 PAGE 2 Mr. Schnabel asked Mr. Lundgren how feasible he thought it would be to meet the requirements of Miller & Schroeder. i� Mr. Lundgren thought it was feasible, but just had not worked. He stated that he could show staff his numbers. There is money available, but the terms are not easy. Mr. Lundgren stated that he is determined to get done and will do what it takes to accomplish it. Mr. Meyer asked what the area market is for housing. Mr. Lundgren indicated that, when Mr. Maxfield was here, there was a market here while perhaps there was not in other areas. The Towle Company approached him because they are convinced there is a market here and Towle is a very substantial, good firm. Mr. Commers reminded Mr. Lundgren that still pending before the commission is the revocation of a letter of credit which has been and remains tabled. Since no other proposal has been brought before the commission, this item remains tabled. 5. CONSIDERATION OF LAKE POINTE PAD A EXCAVATION CHANGE ORDER Mr. Robertson reported that last Wednesday he was notified by the project ° engineer that an error was discovered for r�located Pad A, which was initiated in April/Ma.y. Subterranean Engineering was asked to redesign the Pad to �he south so the earth work would.equal out to the original. Through a series of correspondence between Subterranean and Sunde, the extra cost was not found until Enebak was about to begin work. In the mea�time, in July, Woodbridge ^ had approved the relocated Pad A. He•said that he met�with.Mr. Sunde and�Mr. Herrick. T�e choices were.to: 1) proceed with a.modified Pad A and later assign extra cost, 2) order Enebak to stop all.�ork and pay him to wait for HR� decision, or 3) order Enebak to proceed with modifications of a reduced Pad A to eliminate the extra cost, After consulting with Mr. Herrick, Woodbridge was.notified of the errar and asked to make a deci5ion. They �ere quite reluctant to:approve the extra cosx. "The letter�of July 10 st�tes they would not agree wiCh the extra cost. �E asked Mr. Sunde and Mr, Mindess to be here this��vening to give a mo�� detailed description of wha�,happened. The Commission has before them a reco�endation to proceed with Change Order ��4, dated August 10, for $38,750. Mr. Mindess.stated that in calculating the volume of earth work they allowed no more than norma.l. But, this job is unique in that it has extra large pads to allow Woodbridge flexibility in positioning buildings. The error in calculation affects the east half of the south portion of Pad A. Also, when digging began in this area, peat was found which changes the volume. To his understanding, based on the borings, Subterranean drew an excavation contour and had a contour plan prior to bidding. This is an unusual project because some of the other buildings on the west portion of the site were suggested to be constructed on piles, but are going to be built on footings. Mr. Prairie indicated that change orders are totalling $222,000 and asked if the work was nearly completed or could they expect additional change �,-.\ orders . HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 13, 1987 PAGE 3 Mr. Sunde indicated that the only possible change order he. could foresee would deal with excess material at the end of the job and that Enebacx � maintains it is not their responsibility to haulit away. Approximately - 600,000 yards of dirt are in this project. The ori�inal contract stateu it is the contractor's responsibility to dispose of it off the site. For some reason, the arbitrator says if you have to impa�t sand, we pay to = for importing sand. If material is to be hauled away,we would pay to haul it away. There is a difference in interpretation. Mr. Sunde felt there would not be a significant excess of materials on the job. Any excess materials would more than likely be black dirt or o�ganics. The position is that tney will not pay to haul away excess materials. He felt the job would balance. If there is excess black dirt on the site, it can be�left there and the City will use it on other projects. There must be 6 inches of top soil on the site. Mr. Prairie questioned if this would not have happened if Woodbridge had put up the building in January. Mr. Sunde stated that if a definite building is going in, there is no need to have the over-size pads. When looking at the section at the south end of Pad A, there is about 5-6 feet of poor quality sand, 5-6 feet of black dirt, below that is clay that had to be removed to support a foundation. Mr. Prairie stated there are four contracts and asked when they would be completed. Mr. Sunde felt they would be done by the end of October. Eneback plans to get the turf cover down to cut erosion. � Mr. Burch indicated that the landscape contractor plans to finish this fall also. Mr. Meyer asked for clarification of what the $2.50 per yard for soil excavation by backhoe would include. Mr. Sunde stated that the layer of organic soils must be removed which will be done by backhoe. This accounts for the excavation of soils that cannot be bulldozed and is only i.n the extended area of the pad. Mr. Meyer stated that on Change Order ��3 the agreement is to buy sand at $1.00 per yard and compact and replace at 25¢ per yard. Where does this come in? , Mr. Sunde stated this was the price agreed upon for sand mining for the hotel pad. For Pad A, the hole can be filled with compacted clay at a very high density. The reason is that the building for Pad A is a low rise building with a lower footing pressure. Mr. Meyer asked at what rate the clay goes back to fill the hole, $2.50 per yard? Mr. Sunde stat@d it would basically be $1.25 for excavation and replacement. The big h61e wiii ��:dub°out arid".��iled,back in-=for`a`�ota� of-$1.Z5=p�r��ard. �"'� The organics would be dug out and replaced with something else for $2.50 yard. Mr. Herrick stated the change order should state that this price includes removal, replacement and compaction of materials. The assumption is that it would be done according to the plans and specifications, but it would not hurt to refer to a specific portion of the plans and specs. HOUSING � REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 13, i987 PAGE 4 Mr. Sunde stated their intent is not to pay for putting materials back in. He will clarify this question on the change order. �` MOTION BY MR. MEYER, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER ��4 WITH THE ASSUMPTION OF PRICE OF EXCAVATION OUT AND MATERIAL IN IS $2.50 PER YARD AND THAT ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION BE MADE TO THE CONTRACTOR AS TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF WHAT THE MATERIAL IS AND TO BE COMPACTED. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLA.RED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. INFORMATION ON LAKE POINTE DETENTION POND - POTENTIAL CHANGE ORDER AND IRRIGATION Mr. Robertson stated this is n.ow a consideratzon of change order. request from Woodbridge for two additional change orders. Item ��6 on th� agenda concerns the change order for design and finishing of the retention ponds. Mr. Burch estimates in consultation with the landscape architect that the change in the retention ponds will improve the appearance and save from $30,000-$50,000 in actual costs. Members were referred to correspondence dated August 10 from Jon McClure requesting the change order. Mr. Burch thought the change is somethingthat would be desireable. This item was dis.cussed several weeks ago. 9�fter discussing with Woodbr�d.ge,. they agreed with the change, ' Mr. Herrick indicated his impression is that Woodbridge is trying to keep costs down. This is one area where costs will be reduced as well as the next proposed item which is consistent. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO APPROVE THE CHANGE. ORDER WITH RESPECT TO THE PONDING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Robertson indicated that the change order regarding irrigation is to omit the irrigation in the original contract. We received the request in writing in a letter of August 10, 1987, from Jon McClure to John Flora. Staff recommends that this change order not be considered based on the City Council's expression that they wished the areas to be seeded and irrigated to prevent erosion problems and for aesthetics. Thee�timated,.savings is $20,000. Mr.Herrick stated the original plan that was submitted by Ernst provided there was to be irrigation on all undeveloped areas. Earlier there was discussion to eliminate irrigation from Pad C assuming it would be built on this fall. To his understanding, anything not built upon would be irrigated, including Pad C. When asked if this was included in the p�.�� approved by Woodbridge, staff provided a positive answer� Mr. Robertson stated that the temporary irrigation costs about $20,000. The � entire area would have pipes. As buildings were constructed, the pipes and � _ __K heads would be removed . HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 13, I987 PAGE 5 Mr. Robertson stated that the intent is that during the 15-year development project the City wanted a good ground cover to reduce wind and water erosion ;r�� until the project was completed. Water for irrigation is furnished by the City. Ms. Schnabel asked if there were other ways to accomplish the same end. Mr. Robertson stated the irrigation was felt to be the most cost effective way to maintain. Other methods are labor intensive which is very costly. Mr. Burch stated there are two ground covers - seed and sod. The sod is along the boulevards with automatic irrigation. No debate exists over this. The other areas are seeded areas where building will be built in the future and that is where the question arises. The intent was to have those areas irrigated to have a green area and to have it look good and to prevent erosion. On the original contract, all that was included except Pad C. Several weeks ago, the commission considered a change order where irrigation was added to Pad C because there is no commitment to build. The request now is to eliminate irrigation on all seeded areas where buildings are to go. Ernst Associates, when asked about the savings, estimated it to be $20,000 - half to be paid by the City and half by the HRA. Mr. Her�ick indicated there is an argument about the payment. If the City's view prevails, the City would pay half and Woodbridge would pay half. Woodbridge wants the City to pay all. By eliminating irrigation, Woodbridge appears to be attempting to reduce costs on a non-essential item. Ms. Schnabel felt that $20,000 on a 15-year proposal was not a big item. �' MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO RECEIVE THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO JOHN FLORA, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, DATED AUGUST 10, 1987, FROM JON MCCLURE REGARDING THE ELIMINATION OF THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Meyer asked if there was any legality that the letter was addressed to Mr. Flora rather than the HRA. Mr.Herrick stated that this is not a concern. Mr. Flora is appointed as engineer for the HRA so he can transmit documents to the commission. MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST AND TO DENY THE REQUEST TO DELETE THE IRRIGATION CONTRACT THE YIPES AND WATER SYSTEMS ON PAD SITES. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COIrIlrIERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Commers requested Mr.Herrick instruct Woodbridge in writing what the commission has decided. � HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 13, i987 PAGE 6 Ms. Schnabel stated that she had not yet been to the Lake Pointe area and requested arrangements be made for an on-site tour of the area so that the �.•.� commission would be more aware of what they are dealing with. Mr. Commers agreed that a tour would enhance their understanding of the issues and asked Mr. Robertson to make arrangements for a tour of the area prior to the next HRA meeting. Mr. Robertson stated another area of concern is access to the site when the work is done. Should the area be open, barricaded, or closed with a gate which can be opened by a key? The set-up needs to allow the City to finish their work and allow Woodbridge to bring in potential customers. Mr.H.erriek stated the City's liability would be the same as other public properties. The City has umbrella coverage. The greatest liability is now when there are holes and mounds of dirt. After leveling_ is done, the risk is not any greater than in the parks but there are chances of vandalism, theft, etc. Mr. Commers requested Mr. Robertson to develop a proposal and present to the commission. Mr. Prairie stated that in the public hearings with home owners there are certain things they could use. Mr. Burch stated that homeowners can use the walkways. Mr. Herrick recommended that the road not be open to general traffic. � 2. CONSIDERATION OF RICE CREEK ROAD AND VICINITY ENGINEERING FEES, SCOPE OF SERVICES AND ESTIMATED COSTS Mr. Robertson indicated that along with the detail cost estimates requested by �RA, h� had asked SEH-to �nclude other items in the area of T,H. 65 and Moore Lake area that are on the agenda for improvement.,� Mr. Robertson felt there might be some cost savings if other portions of the project were undertaken simultaneou-sly or in seque�ce with each other. �he components�as included in the agenda tot�al from $115,000 to'$127,000 wi•th no �ackage d�scount. "The commission was a�ked to consider the Rice Creek Road package. It is the desire o f th� City.Council tha.t this be done:.as �non as possible with the intersection between Old Central and_�.H. 65 which is under con��act raria.d'er SEH. This is necessary to state Ric� Creek Road immediately to serve the Moore Lake Commons which was approved by City '�ouncil last month. This includes both the estimated fees of $42,000 to $52,500 for pla�s, specifications, etc., and $50,500 for construction related services. Ms. Schnabel asked if it was common practice to take salary rates and multiply by 2.1. Mr. Meyer stated this is low. Generally the factor of 2.5 is used. Mr. Robertson suggested staff be authorized to negotiate a package discount if SEH were to do more of this than just Rice Creek Road. � HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 13, 1987 PAGE 7 Mr. Robertson stated.that the construction would not be done but the engineering ���ld p�oceed_tHis fall. We have a preliminary design for Rice � Creek Road and this proposal is for detailed designs. The plan provides two lanes for traffic in each direction plus an additional left turn lane. Mr. Burch stated that the future plans will consider tu�ning Old Central into a parkway. Mr. Robertson stated they have looked at the estimates for Rice Creek Road and asked if staff should try to negotiate a package. The question was raised as to why staff was working with SEH on this project rather than another firm. Mr. Burch indicated the City started working with SEH on this project because of their expertise on this type of project. Their engineer had formerly worked with MnDOT and knows their requirements. They are the experts on intersection design. Staff had interviewed other companies; but SEH is besti-qualified. MOTION BY MR. MEYER, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE THE PROPOSAL AS GIVEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. CONSIDERATION OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE (T.H. 47) MEDIAN TREATMENT � Mr. Robertson stated that at the July meeting, Mr. Barry Warner presented a number of alternatives for treatment of inedians. Staff was asked to review the options and come back with a recommendation. Staff tried to consider the trade off in additional investment in landscaping and maintenance implications. What staff proposes after looking at the twelve alternatives is a scheme where an additional investment is put in at the intersections, but to save costs this be confined to the intersection. Between intersections it is recommended to proceed with a bit more visual variety through shrubs and wildflowers. MnDOT is working with native flowers, which do not have the mowing and maintenance costs, are very hardy, provide better moisture retention, and add color. These are recommended for demonstration sections. The negative part is that, if the entire median were done in wildflowers, there may be a perception by some of the public that it is untended and wild. At this ti.me, the wildflowers would be interspersed with turf. Mr. Prairie asked about weed control with wildflowers. Mr. Robertson stated that once the wildflowers are establish they tend to choke out weeds. Schematics of the designs were presented. The intersection treatments would extend only as far as the turn lanes which is where traffic slows and treatments would get the most attention. The recommendation is a combination of treatments and staff have no costs at this time. � HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST '13, 1987 PAGE 8 Mr. Robertson stated the demonstration intersections would be from 57th to 63rd and from 73rd to Osborne for a total of 4 intersections. This can then � be evaluated to see if we like it. If the commission likes the recommended design, staff will go back and get the costs. Ms. Schnabel stated she liked doing a number of different treatments, but felt it could get too busy. Mr. Robertson stated a lower cost alternative is to plant the.medians exlusively �n wildflowers which could be achieved� Mr. Prairie indicated comments on the park for the first few years was that the wildflowers did not look good. Mr. Burch noted that after efforts to disk and reseed,the area looks better. People that know wildflowers like the look. Ms. Schnabel stated that new turf would be an improvement to a lot of people. Mr. Herrick indicated the other side is maintenance. MnDOT mows 2 or 3 times per summer. Mr. Burch stated the city took over maintenance this year and the appearance was better. � Mr. Robertson stated that the fence between 63rd and 69th was painted black to see what the impact was. The designs included along University will be � used in other areas also. Ms. Schnabel stated she would like to see a mix of trees and that they be placed away from traffic. Mr. Robertson stated that the schematic used a variety of trees. The design has trees in clusters with different trees being used in each cluster. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, FOR STAFF TO GO FORWARD TO THE NEXT STEP WITH THE UNIVERSITY AVENUE PROJECT. Mr. Meyer asked if Jersey barriers would be included in the urban section. Mr. Robertson stated barriers would be used to protect the trees but would not run the entire length. Mr. Burch stated the barriers could be poured in place, could be painted, or constructed with treated wood. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. CONSIDERATION OF COMPLETION OF PASCHKE PONDING AREA � Mr. Commers requested an update on this item. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 13, "1987 PAGE 9 Mr.Herrick indicated that in discussing the issue with Mr. Burch, if he is not able to get the problem resolved and if he can document what Mr. � Paschke has done does not meet what the plans called for, then we proceed. � As long as there is evidence to establish that what Mr. Paschke has done does not correspond with the plans3 he suggested someone else do the work. At this point a decision must be made. MOTION BY MR. MEYER, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO GO FORWARD AND AWARD BIDS TO FINISH PQNDING TO THE LOW BIDDER IF THE CITY DOES NOT REACH A SATISFACTORY AGREEMENT WITH MR. PASCHKE. Mr. Meyer indicated that the letter of March 6, 1987, is an agreement to do a numbers of things, including a hedge, roll up fire door, and overflow control structures. Completion should include all items. Mr. Burch stated that the only things in the bids includes grading and seeding of the pond and construction of an overflow. Mr. Commers asked staff to report on all items at next month's meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. INFORMATION ON CIVIC CENTER BI-LEVEL PARKING RAMP Mr. Robertson stated this is an information item. The commission and City Council have acted on the preliminary approval of the concept. Borman � Associates are proceeding with estimates for a parking ramp along with the redesign and remodeling of the Civic Center. The estimate for the ramp is $765,000. Mr. Robertson stated he checked with several independent sources and their rate was essentially $8,�00 to $8,50� per stall. The cost is for e�cavation below ground. Mr. Commers questionned the financing of the ramp. Mr. Robertson said the•.records indicated that the HRA�intended to participate. Mr. Pribyl stated there are no assessments at this time. Mr. Prairie asked if there was a parking problem by the clinic. Mr. Robertson did not think there was but there is a problem outside the Civic Center. Mr. Prairie asked the status of the clinic. Mr. Pribyl stated the clinic has one year to go on their option on that land. Otherwise, they lose their option. Mr. Meyer felt the figure of $7,500 per parking stall was a high estimate. Mr. Robertson stated he had gotten a rule of thumb figure of $8,000-$8,500 � for the same thing. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AUGUST 13, 1987 PAGE i0 Mr. Robertson stated that, in the development district, there are some cross agreements to provide parking for the office building. � Mr. Pribyl stated that part of the original agreement is to provide a certain number of parking spots. The City has provided the appropriate number of spots that are in the agreement. The parking ramp itself would be in the tax increment district. Mr. Commers stated the commission needs to know how the ramp would be financed. Mr. Pribyl stated he was going through the accounts and taking every expenditure and applying it to a source. The money for the ramp would come from an unrestricted pool. Mr. Commers asked about funding for the city hall expansion. Mr. Pribyl indicated that the City has set aside funds for City Hall. 8. CLAIMS Mr. Pribyl stated that the commission would be acting on Clai.ms ��1631-1646. Mr. Commers asked if the City has an on-going trial balance for HRA. Mr. Pribyl stated the city has the information and could prepare a summary trial balance for the commission. ^ Mr. Commers requested staff to prepare a summary trial balance for the HRA. MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE THE CHECK REGISTER AS SUBMITTED. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. MEYER, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE AUGUST 13, 1987, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ) Lavonn Cooper Recording Secretary �