HRA 02/11/1988 - 6516HOUSIiJG .0. R IEHLOPMEff AUTHORITY MITIWG
FEBRUARY 11, 1988
City of Fridley
AGENDA
HOUSING & REDEVFLOHME AUTHORITY MTG. THURSDAY, . FEBRjARY 11, 1988 7,: 00 P. M.
C - -
Location: Council Chamber (upper level)
CALL CEiDER:
Housing & Redevelopment Authority Minutes: January 14, 1988
CONSIDERATION OF LOU LUMGREN'S PROPOSAL: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 — lE
CONSIDERATION OF A MARKETING FIRM FOR THE SOM&MT QLIIUWU
OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE & MISSISSIPPI STREET: . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 2
CONSIDERATION OF URBAN DESIGN FEATURES FOR THE UNIVERSITY
AVENUE CDRRIDOR: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 — 3G
CONSIDERATION OF MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR LAKE POINTE SITE
DURING THE 1988 OWING SEASCN: . . . as , , a I I I I , a , 0 , , � � � 4
INFORMATION CN Sr. WIM1AM ELDERLY HOUSING: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
CLAIMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 — 6A
OMEfR BUSINESS:
i
CITY OF RUMEY
HCUSING & REDEVEi,MUM AU73CRITY MIM ES, . JANUARY 14, 1988
SAU TTO ORDER:
Chairperson Commers called the January 14, 1988, Housing & Redevelopment
Authority meeting to order at 7:06 p. m
ROT T. f U T.
Members Present: Larry Commmers, Virginia Schnabel, Walter Rasmussen,.
John Meyer
Members Absent: Duane Prairie
Others Present: Jock Robertson,.Executive Director of HRA
Rick Pribyl, Finance Director
Julie Burt, . Asst. Finance Off icer
Dave Newman,.HRA Attorney
Lou & June Lundgren, . 343 Kellogg Blvd. , St. Paul
Mervin Mindess, 6824 Candlewood Circle, Brooklyn Park
Alan Rouse, 1786 Hennepin Ave. S. , Mpls.
Pat Pelstring, Business Development Services
• • ;O/;_ OF yEEM 10, 1987, HOUSING NT • a4�:• ; 14M 11211) 4 DR
y•J O1 by - - seconded by m - to approve the December 21
Housing & Redevelopment • minutes
UPON A VOICE • • r i -CHAn1PERSCN COMM DECLARED THE NOTION
1. CONSIDERUTON OF IQU LUNUM'S-LE= OF CH=:
Mr. Robertson stated he would like to give the HRA a summary of his memo
to the HRA dated January 8, 1988. Essentially, what Staff was saying
was that the Development Contract with Lou Lundgren was terminated in
1986s, and Mr. Lundgren has acknowledged that the contract was lawfully
terminated and he has since then consistently acknowledged that he is
operating without the protection of any development contract. Staff was
recommending that the HRA draw on the entire letter of credit in the sum
of $2001,000 as partial liquidated damages and reimbursement of expenses,.
with the understanding that all or part of that sum could be refunded to
Mr. Lundgren if he is sucoessf ul in securing f inancing for the project.
Mr. Robertson stated he could enumerate a number of reasons why he felt
the HRA should call the letter of credit, but he would wait until the
appropriate time when the HRA decided to call on him for those reasons.
Mr. Lundgren stated the status as of that day was he had been told he
would receive a letter of intent on Monday or Tuesday of that week f ram
the Carnegie Evans group. He stated he has not yet received that
letter. He was hoping he would have gotten something before the meeting
-1-
that would have indicated that the letter of intent was on its way. He
was told yesterday that Carnegie Evans was
still working on the letter of credit and that he would have it very
shortly. He realized the BRA has heard all this before, . and he has
heard it before. He stated he had no difference of agreement with Mr.
Robertson's report. He was hoping that possibly by Friday or Monday he
would have that letter of intent, . in which case he would. present it.
Mr. Lundgren stated what the plan was under that operation was that if
they get the letter of intent, At would give the conditions under which
the commitment would be made. At that particular point in time, . he
would go directly to meet with the lender and,.presumably,.also with the
contractor at the same time. The contractor was supposedly will ing to
issue three letters of credit: (1) one letter of credit would be for
the construction loan and /or any gap that appears between the commitment
amount and the total construction amount; (2) a letter of commitment to
take place to cover that gap between the construction period and the
rental period; (3) a letter of credit to take up a guarantee period of
about four years on a diminishing scale -4% guaranteed the first year, .
going down to 3% the following year,.etc. --to cover any possible gaps in
the early years of the project.
Mr. Lundgren stated he did suggest to Mr. Robertson the possibility that
if he was able to come in within a few days with a letter of intent, . if
the BRA wished, . he could probably supplant the letter of credit which
the BRA now has with an identical letter of credit with a date of 60 or
90 days after that point. 7his was an option the BRA could have if they
wanted it.
Mr. Robertson stated the HRA has until February 1 to actually execute
the action on the letter of credit. He was sympathetic with Mr.
Lundgren; and if the letter of intent was arriving within a couple of
days, . the BRA would still have time to act. If Staff was authorized to
act under certain conditions, .he woud ask that he and Mr. Newman be
authorized to negotiate such an extension.
Mr. Newman stated that from what he was hearing, . even if Mr. Lundgren
gets this letter of intent, .what the letter will do is represent the
conditions that have to be met before the financing will be issued. He
suspected that at this point, . those are significant. Secondly, they do
not have a development contract, . and they are not going to have a
development contract before this letter of credit expires, because the
BRA will not be meeting again and they are not going to be able to draft
one within two weeks. If the BRA was inclined to follow Mr. Robertson's
suggestion, his initial comments would be: (1) Before the BRA agrees to
this extension, . that Mr. Lundgren be required to provide evidence of
100% of the financing. He believed the BRA would want the entire
package in place before there were any extensions. (2) Mr. Robertson is
going to have to be vested with the discretion as to whether or not the
"laundry list" of conditions is so extensive, . it is just not feasible.
If the BRA was inclined to follow Mr. Robertson's suggestion, he would
suggest they set a deadline of no later than 5 :00 p.m. on Tuesday, .
-2-
Lundgren provide to the Executive Director evidence of any or all other
financing which might be necessary in order to finance 100% of the
anticipated cost of the construction of the project; (3) on or before
5 :00 p.m, on Tuesday, . January 26, 1988, Mr. Lundgren provide to the
Executive Director a substitute letter of credit which would run f or an
additional period of between 60 and 90 days.
If these three items are accomplished on or before 5 :00 p.m, pn Tuesday,
January 26, 1988, the Executive Director will be directed not to act
upon Mr. Lundgren's letter of credit. If Mr. Lundgren has not
accomplished these three items.. then the Executive Director will be
directed to act upon Mr. Lundren's letter of credit.
Mr. Meyer stated that at this time he would like Mr. Robertson to give
his reasons why Staff feels the letter of credit should be revoked.
Mr. Robertson stated the history of this project on this piece of
property goes back 4-5 years ago. At least two other developers have
come to the City and the HRA with a promised development, and then did
not deliver. With one of those developers,. the HRA committed to
purchase the building which was now the municipal liquor store. In both
instances, . the HRA got both the property owners,,. the tenants, . and the
neighbors particularly involved, . either positively or negatively, about
the project. In both cases,. the projects did not happen. Based on
experience,,. they all agree there is a need for a potential developer to
put some money up front to indicate the developer's seriousness and to
avoid taking property owners,.tenants,.and neighbors through this
process needlessly.
Mr. Robertson stated Mr. Lundgren defaulted on the agreement with the
City in August of 1986. At that time, . the HRA could have called the
letter of credit; and if they had,- the HRA would have accrued
approximately $30,000 in interest since then. In effect, . the HRA has
aleady given Mr. Lindgren another $30,000. Finally, he felt the HRA's
and the City's reputation was going to be scrutinized by other
developers to see if the HRA is really serious about an indication of
commitment to the project up front. He stated he would feel very
uncomfortable if they did not do this.
Mr. Meyer stated he was very skeptical of the possibility of Mr.
Lundgren being able to deliver a commitment of any kind by late January.
His comments were directed to what he consdered to be the heart of the
matter, .assuming the default will take place in accordance with the
languages of the motion —that the HRA would then automatically revoke
the letter of credit.
Mr. Meyer stated that in his opinion there was no question but that the
HRA had a legal right to this money. He wanted to talk about the
subjective or the intangible part of the proposal. He stated Mr.
Robertson had given an outline of the history of this particular site.
Mr. Lundgren has been a true friend of the purposes of the BRA regarding
this property; far more so, . than anyone else who has ever attempted to
develop this property. Mr. Lundgren has prepared plans and
-4-
specifications for construction for the specifics of this particular
property, . which probably would easily be worth several hundreds of
thousands of dollars on the markets,. not paid for by anyone but Mr.
Lundgren's group. He stated they have not seen any "real" construction
plans or documents from the Lake Pointe people. They seldom,?. if ever, .
get any kind of construction documents from any of the other
developments they have had. No one , has bothered to give the kind of
heavy financial commitment that Mr. Lundgren's group has given.
Therefore, .Mr. Lindgren has put his money on the line in terms of being
a bonaf ide interested player on that property.
Mr. Meyer stated that, . in addition, An order to back up this heavy
investment of hundreds of thousands of collars in working drawings, . Mr.
Lundgren has gone to the point of establishing a $200,000 letter of
credit, .which tells the world even more so that he is deadly serious
about the development of this property as he proposed it and as the HRA
wished it to be developed. To him, .those were very strong indications
that Mr. Lundgren has not been using the HRA or the City as perhaps
other developers have on the same site. In the inter im,.Mr. Meyer
stated he realized that after Mr. Lundgren defaulted on the agreement, .
the HRA could have pulled the letter of credit.
Mr. Meyer stated he realized Mr. Lundgren was protecting his own self
interest also,.but at the same time, the fact that Mr. Lindgren has come
before the HRA month after month and has spent unbelievable amounts of
time and money to try to get this project going and the fact that he has
rigorously and faithfully pursued trying to find someone in this very
poor market, . has all been of great benef it to the BRA. At least they
know one person has been fighting hard to get the area developed as the
HRA wishes it to be developed. Other major players in the development
game have looked at the property and have evidently been less than
impressed, . but Mr. Lundgren has stayed the course.
Mr. Meyer stated that for those reasons, . he felt it was inappropriate
for the HRA to draw on this letter of credit,. On the other hand, he did
recognize the fact that they do have a responsibility to the public.
Here is $200,000 which was legally theirs, .and in a sense, .the public's.
But, .he would feel very confident in explaining to any member of the
public who questioned him that,.yes,.the HRA had the legal right to this
money, but they did had done nothing to earn that money. They were
treating Mr. Lindgren and his group the same as any member of the public
would want to be treated —that Mr. Lundgren was caught in a bind because
of the falling market, . he has put his money where his mouth was with
heavy collars, . and he has been caught short by the exingencies of the
moment.
Mr. Meyer stated, . again, . Mr. Lundgren's conduct and his whole
development stood in shining contrast to other developers.
Mr. Meyer stated it would be nice to grant Mr. Lundgren a categorial
letter of extension for three months or six months, . but unless new facts
came to light, . in all honesty, he would still, . even at the end of the
Z#
three month or six month time period, .vote against calling the letter of
credit. So, . he was not really suggesting they extend the letter of
credit categorically.
Mr. Rasmussen stated he understood exactly what Mr. Meyer had said, . but
he worried about the credibility of a contract. To say the HRA or the
City has not put any money into this project would be to belay the fact
that they have been here considering this letter and this project for
quite awhile,. and Staff has certainly sent a lot of time on it. The
HRA and the City definitely do have an investment in it,. along with Mr.
Lundgren.
Mr. Rasmussen stated he felt if they are going to make contracts and
hire legal staff and pass resolutions that will be later void because of
hunanitary reasons or whatever, .then he felt they lose their credibility
as a sitting body. 7hen, . what deal cannot be cancelled? Also, . other
developers will take this as a precedent and use it, . very justifiably.
Ms. Schnabel stated she appreciated Mr. Meyer's ooaaments, . because he has
obviously spent a lot of time thinking about this. She stated Mr.
Robertson made a comment in his memo dated January 8th about the
possibility of refunding a portion of Mr. Lundgren's letter cf credit if
he succeed in securing financing for the project. She stated that if
the letter of credit was cashed as outlined in the motion, . and Mr.
Lundgren is able to secure the financing and get things together, . but it
goes beyond the January 26th deadline, . and is,,. say March 10, was it
legally possible to refund a portion of that letter of credit back to
Mr. Lundgren? What was Staff's position on this?
Mr. Newman stated that was something that would be up to the HRA's
discretion. It would upend a great deal upon what Mr. Lundgren
presented to the HRA 60 or 90 days down the road. To be very candid, .
the HRA had to realize and recognize that if they call Mr. Lundgren' s
letter of credit,. by doing so, . the impact may make it literally
impossible for Mr. Lundgren to proceed with the project. He did not
think the HRA should be misled that there was an easy way out.
Mr. Rasmussen stated he just felt the HRA had an obligation to honor a
contract. He felt the HRA has been very considerate of Mr. Lundgren
Mr. Meyer stated Mr. Rasmussen cited the fact that the staff has spent a
great deal of time on this project and that, .therefore, . was HRA money.
Mr. Meyer stated he respected that cpinion, and yet, . in principle, . they
have never bothered to "chalk up" the staff expenses on any of the other
projects. Zherefore, . he did not think it was fair that they surcharge
staff's time to this particular project when they have not bothered to
do it before. As far as staff time,. the Lake Pointe costs are just
beginning, . and there will be no compensation for that.
Mr. Lundgren stated that Mr. Allen Rouse was at the meeting, . and he had
some more information he would like to present to the HRA at this time.
He stated an individual from the Carnegie Evans group was supposed to be
-6-
O
getting in touch with him by telephone the next day to arrange for
transportation in order to set this project up. Mr. Lundgren stated
this was encouraging news,.but,.on the hand, .the time was very short.
Mr. Lundgren stated Mr. Newman was probably not incorrect in saying that
if the HRA calls his letter of credit, . his ability to continue with the
project would probably be limited or terminated.
Mr. Lundgren stated that if the HRA could get a new letter of credit for
90 days, . it might give the BRA time enough to get this particular deal
squared away and closed. Mr. Newman had also suggested, . and correctly
so, . that there are a number of elements involved in this. There were
all kinds of legal things that had to happen, . and these all take time.
Mr. Lundgren thanked Mr. Meyer for his good comments. He stated he did
not disagree with Mr. Rasmussen's omments either. He stated the HRA
has been fair and patient with him through all this, . and the HRA had to
do what they felt was best.
Mr. Meyer stated Mr. Rasmussen had a good point regarding the HRA's
credibility as an agency that means what it says when it has a contract, .
and he agreed that would be so if they had exhibited a reason to draw on
the $200,000, such as the HRA being hurt in some fashion. An example
would be if they had turned away prospective developer (s) or if they bad
incurred some extraordinary expenses or something of that nature. That
would tip their hands to all other developers that the HRA was an easy
mark, . or worse. But, . he did not think that was the case. In 1 ine with
his comments regarding the staff times- etc. , he really did not know and
did not understand how the HRA or the City has been hurt. The reason
for the letter of credit, . as he understood it, . and its issuance in the
first place as a requirement was to ensure that the HRA and the City
would not be hurt. If they had been hurt, . and they still draw on the
letter of credit, then then he thought it was right for the HRA to ask
themselves: By drawing on the letter of credit,. for which they have
done nothing to earn that money,.were they not destroying their
credibility as a responsible Authority to other developers, . when other
developers see the HRA using their power to draw on a letter of credit
when there is no demonstrable way in which they have been hurt? That
was the way they could lose credibility in the development community.
Mr. Newman stated this was a very difficult decision to make. The HRA's
involvement on this project probably began about a year before Mr. Meyer
came on the commission. There had been a number of public hearings, .
soil borings were done, . and zoning requests and setback requests were
processed by the City. Before this, . another development contract was
entered into with Mr. Lundgren It was drafted by Mr. O'Meara. Miller
& Schroeder were involved. Bonds were sold. The point of this was that
the HRA entered into a ca mitment with Mr. Lundgren Because of that, .
it was impossible for anyone on staff to say they had given up certain
development opportunities, . because of the commitment to Mr. Lundgren.
They did not know what those opportunities were. They were under
contract with Mr. Lundgren; and because they were under contracts,. they
-7-
did not talk to any other developers. The property was pulled off the
market, . and it was dif f icul t to say ther a wer a no damage s suf f er ed, .
because they did not know.
Mr. Meyer stated he recognized that was a possibility; but, . of course, .
there was no evidence to prove that was the case.
Mr. Commers stated there were two sides to this, . as there were to any
question. He felt everyone was sincere about how they looked at this
and the way they feel about it. Mr. Meyer had spoken very well on
behalf of Mr. Lundgren, . and it was obvious this was a very diff icult
decision for all the BRA members to make at this time. He stated the
only thing he would disagree with was that he was not sure it was
appropriate to say that the BRA has had to have suffered or been hurt in
order to collect on the letter of credit. The letter of credit was
required by Mr. Lundgren to show his good faith that he was intending to
go forward with the project,. because they had defaults on prior
projects, . and they were taking the project off the market. Otherwise, .
Mr. Lundgren has faithfully come to every meeting and has kept the BRA
informed as to the status of he project; but, . unfortunately, . he has not
been able to put the project together. On the other side,. the BRA has
refrained from exercising its rights for quite some time. It was a
difficult decision but one they have to make.
Ms. Schnabel stated Mr. Lundgren has been a businessman for quite a
number of years,. and she was sure he was fully aware of all the
ramifications of the letter of credit when he sided it. It was a
standard business procedure in many areas,. and she did think that
everyone who signs contracts and understands them realizes that at some
point that contract might be called or might cease for some reason or
another. Because the BRA has continually extended the time on the
letter of credits— she did not feel that the BRA was acting harshly by
making the motion they had made — giving Mr. Lundgren the additional time
and the additional opportunity,. even to come up with an additional
letter of credit, . if he chooses another extension. She thought they
have, . in effect, . given Mr. Lundgren more time; they are just doing it in
a different method because they have a business contract which he
willingly signed and the HRA willingly signed at one time, but now that
contract is up.
Mr. Lundgren stated he did not disagree with either Mr. Commers or Ms.
Schnabel. He would certainly expect the BRA to act in whatever way they
have to. On the other hand,. it was the HRA's self interest to get that
development done in the right way. It might be in the BRA's best
interest to go along with him for a couple more months. That was the
decision the BRA was going to have to make. If the letter of credit was
called,. and he cannot make the January 26th deadline, . then the BRA will
have to find someone else to do the project. There might be someone
more capable than he or more willing than her. or there might not be
anyone. They have been talking all along about a quality project,. an
upscale project from what most people think belongs in Fridley. He felt
his project was what was wanted there and what should be there.
Mr. Meyer stated that as far as his view cf contracts, . in the business
comunity, as many contracts are broken as are enforced down to the
letter. So, .he was not concerned that they have an ironclad contract
that can never be changed.
Mr. Rasmussen stated he felt they have given Mr. Lundgren many, many
chances on this project, . and Mr. Lundgren has presented the BRA with
many, -many future deals; therefore, the BRA has not acted arbitrarily
with him. 9bey have told him many times that February 1, 1988, was the
f inal deadline.
Mr. Pribyl stated that back when this project f irst came cn line, . bonds
were sold (Dec. 28, 1985) in conjunction with this project and
capitalized interest was included in the bond proceeds to carry it into
a point in time in which the taxes generated on that property would
carry the debt service. Within the next year or two, . that value must be
added to that property to carry the debt service, . otherwise it will
start costing the BRA money. That was something for the BRA to keep in
mind as far as future costs associated with the property.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, . CDMMERS, . SCSNABEL, . RASKJSSEN VOTING AYE, . MEYER VOrIM
NAY, .mmimm Comm LEamED THE MDTION GUUUED BY A VOTE OF 3-1.
Mr. Robertson stated that at the last BRA meeting, . the BRA instructed
Staff to meet with representatives f rom Subterranean Engineering to
discuss the questions raised at the November and December meetings.
Staff has done that,. and based on Mark Burch Is discussion with Mr.
Mindess, . the recommendation was that those charges were legitimate and
should be paid. He stated he had asked Mr. Mindess to be at the meetng
in case the BRA had any questions.
Mr. Meyer stated his concern was satisfied by the fact that this had
been discussed mutually between City Staff and a Subterranean
representative.
Mr. Cbmmers stated he hoped Mr. Mindess could understand the BRA's
concern about these costs and some of the things that took place, . but as
long as Staff and the Subterranean representative have discussed it, . he
would entertain a motion to approve Change Order No. 2.
MCTT BY Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Meyer, . to approve Change Order
No. 2 on Lake Pointe soil engineering in the amount of $3,202.59.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, . ALL VOTING AYE,. CHAIRPERSON COMMER.S DECLARED THE
MDTION CRRRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
c eZ * •;P_M Z.6 •M F:.Zip ek1
Mr. Robertson stated this was for the wall blocks that were ordered by
-9-
the contractor based on an estimate of how many blocks were needed.
When the contractor was in the field and it became apparent as the wall
was being constructed that more blocks were needed, .while the contractor
was in the field,.Mr. Robertson authorized those additional wall blocks
so the wall could be completed as specified. He, stated he had taken
that responsibility at the time in order to save some money.
HQU.0N by Ms. Schnabel, . seconded by Mr. Meyer, . to approve Change Order
No. 4 in the amount of $880.
UPON A VOICE VOPE, . ALL VOTING AYE, . CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MDTION CMUZIED UNANIMOUSLY.
40 r1_M -Q'
Mr. Cogmaers stated that as has been customary for the past few years, .
they have designated Fridley State Bank as the official depository for
the Fridley BRA. He continued to ask the same question: Why do they
continue to use Fridley State Bank all the time when the Bank has not
been cooperative with the HRA or the City of Fridley?
Mr. Pribyl stated the BRA has the option not to approve this resolution,.
and they could look for another source of banking services. From his
perspective, . it has allowed a source of convenience for the city staff
just for the process of checking,,. and that was really the only
involvement they had with Fridley State Bank. As far as investments, .
the BRA has nothing there. It was up to the BRA as to whether they
wanted to approve this resolution or not,.but it would provide the staff
with a more complicated process for depositing the checks. Also, . there
was not a lot of choices as far as banking services within the City.
There were a number of banking facilities just outside the city limits.
Mr. Pribyl stated he was thinking about attempting to write an RFP
regarding banking services to see what the market has out there for
other banking services. He stated he would have that report to the BRA
before June 30, 1988.
Mr. Conners stated a written f inancial policy would be in everyone's
best interest. He stated they have discussed this before, . and he would
like to see some priority given to it.
Ms. Schnabel stated the BRA could, . in addition to approving the
resolutions, pass another motion directing staff to provide the BRA with
an analysis of alternate banking services so that before the next year's
resolution comes up, . they will have that informaton and can make a
decision at that time.
Mr. Om m►ers stated that was a good suggestion.
T By Ms. Schnabel, . seconded by Mr. Meyer, . to approve Resolution No.
1- 1988, a Resolution Designating Official Depositories for the Fridley
-10-
Housing & Redevelopment Authority.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, . ALL VOTING AYE, . CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANDE)USLY.
M=0 By Ms. Schnabel, . seconded by Mr. Rasmussen,, that within and no
later than the third quarter of the coming fiscal year, . the HRA be
provided with an analysis of banking services and a financial investment
policy so that the HRA is able to make a decision regarding bank
depositories before the resolution comes up again next year.
UPON A VOICE VOTEl.ALL VOTING AYE,. CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
NOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. CONSIDERATION OF =QK= t`TON FOR LWOMW POMIIt SERVICE A1QW RICE
('RF.F.K FQQ:
Mr. Robertson stated the reason for the recommendation that the electric
utilities be undergrounded was because the Rice Creek Road project was
being finalized right now for bidding and spring construction. When it
came to light that these utilities were there and could be put
mderground,.Staff felt now was the appropriate time to do it since the
area is going to be all dug up.
MOTT by Mr. Rasmussen, . seconded by Mr. Meyer, . to approve Resolution
No. HRA 7 - 1987, a Resolution Authorizing Improvement Expenditures for
Projects within the Tax Increment District for Construction in 1988.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, . ALL VOTING AYE, . CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. CLUMS (1701 - 1708]:
MOTT by Mr. Rasmussen, . seconded by Ms. Schnabel, • to approve the check
register as presented.
UPON A VOICE VOTE,. ALL VOTING AYE, . CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
NOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ruff.—Wrp c l
Mr. Robertson stated that in the audience was Mr. Pat Pelstring, . Vice
President of Business Development Services, . one of two organizations
that has submitted proposals to the City to market the property
discussed in agenda item no. 1 on the southwest corner of Mississippi
and University.
Mr. Rasmussen asked Mr. Aelstring if he had any plans for this area.
Mr. Pelstring stated that at this stage,.he now recognized where the HRA
was as far as negotiations with Mr. Lundgren, . and he felt it would be
inappropriate at this time to get into a lengthy discussion on how they
0
would approach the project. His reason for coming to the meeting was to
gain a better sense of the status of the current project and the
relationships that exist there.
Mr. Pelstring stated he was not trying to represent himself as the
developer. His firm was presently located in Fridley, . although they
would soon be moving their offices to Coon Rapids. They were
specifically municipal professional consultants,,. private business and
finance business, .and work on a day - today basis with major developers.
At this stage, they have had an opportunity to review the property in a
development sense,. run some of their own numbers,. and make some
estimates on what they think can be done. If the BRA had any interest
in pursuing this in the future, he would be happy to share those ideas
with them.
Mr. Commers asked how old the company was and who were the other
principles or parties that are associated with him
Mr. Pelstring stated the company was five years old. His partners were
Michael Mulrooney, .former Director of Business Development for the State
of Minnesota, , and Ken Nielsen, . who was the Regional Manager for Glacier
Park Company. He stated they have a five person staff. He stated his
background was actually in banking, .and most recently Development
Director for the City cf Coon Rapids prior to forming his own business
five years ago.
4s) "'N VW1 lwpv
Mr. Robertson stated that concerning the Lake Pointe development,.it
was tax time; and he would remind the BRA that the Development
Agreement specified that the developer would pay the taxes on the
property or make payment in lieu of taxes if the BRA was holding
property. The City was now reassessing the property based on the
improvements cone. He was letting the BRA know that although the
project has been delayed, they are proceeding, , subject to approval
by Mr. Haik, , to to take the Johnson parcel off exemption status, .
treat it as part of the development, . and tax the entire parcel on
the same basis that is used for the rest of the City.
Mr. Newman stated the reason this was being brought to the BRA's
attention was because the developer has paid the taxes up to this
date. If for some reason he would decide not to do so, . the BRA
would have to make those tax payments.
Mr. Gmrmers stated that if the developer fails to pay the taxes, .
that would be another condition of default.
Mr. Newman stated that was correct.
b. University Avenue Corridor
Okz
Mr. Robertson stated that included in the "Information Packet" was
some background information on the University Avenue Corridor
process. He stated they expect to come to the HRA with a package
for recommendations for action at the February HRA meeting. He
wanted to alert the HRA to one item the staff was proceeding with.
He had included some cross sections of lighting treatments. The
reason he was bringing them to the HRA's attention was because in
November they talked about the globe -type light in conjunction with
the decorative lighting for commercial frontage roads. They want to
actually test this concept on Rice Creek Road along the Moore Lake
Commons project. They are comparing costs between the two globe
gooseneck -type fixtures versus a three globe straight -arm type of
light. The staff will pick one to try out on the Rice Creek Road
project commercial frontage; and depending on how they like the
looks of it, . they will adopt it for the University Avenue Corridor.
Mr. Robertson also included was information on staff's analysis of
the prairie flowers and prairie grass recommendations by
Barton- Aschmann. Essentially, .the staff's conclusion to date was
concerned with the fact that the prairie flower /prairie grass
alternative takes 2 -3 years to establish itself before they can
really evaluate the resulting appearance. On the other hand, . they
have all these other hard -type improvements they want to proceed
with as quickly as possible for those two test sections. Staff
recommends that the HRA then do a comparison on a significant
stretch of the Corridor with these prairie flowers and prairie
grass, . with the understanding that it is not going to look like its
final state for 2 -3 years. They will not commit to the entire
Corridor until they evaluate the test segments. The rest of it they
will def er except to mow the existing turf more f requently, . but not
spend money on sodding or new seeding until they evaluate the
prairie grass segment.
Ms. Schnabel stated she felt everyone would be happy if the grass
area were mowed and cleaned up better, .maybe given some fertilizer
or something to green it up. Anything is an improvement over what
it has been.
Ms. Schnabel stated she had read an article recently in the
Minneapol is /St. Paul magaz ine which f eatur ed Ms. Betty Me ch f rom
Fridley talking about winter plantings. Ms. Schnabel stated Ms.
Mech is very well known and well respected in the community and
might be a good resource person for the BRA regarding what is being
planned for plantings.
Mr. Commers stated that was a very good suggestion. He agreed that
Ms. Mech was very well known and would be an excellent resource
person.
Chairperson Commers declared the January 14, 1988, Housing & Redevelopment
-13-
Authority meetng adjourned at 9:05 p. m.
Respectfully submitted, .
Lynne Saba
Recording Secretary
J
ana -REDEVELOPMENT- AUTHOWY
CITY OF FRIDLEY
DN MEMBERS:
1
LAWRENCE COMMERS, CHAIRMAN
VRQNIA SCHNABEL WALTER RASMUSSEN JOHN MEYER
MENU TD: Housing & Redevelopment Authority Members
FED FROM: Jock Robertson, Executive Director of HRA
MENU DATE: February 5, 1988
RFrARDING: Lou Lundgren's Fridley Plaza Apartment Complex Proposal
Subsequent to initiating proceedings to
cash Mr. Lundgren's Letter
of Credit
we have received a proposal
from him to
revive the project. You can see from
the attached material the
financial
package would consist of
a lenders
commitment of $7, 252, 000,
an equity
commitment f ram the J. M.
Thompson
Construction Co. of up to
$1,000,000, an equity contribution
from Mr.
Lundgren and Associates Co.
The balance funding would be provided by the HRA by two methods:
1. HM would purchase and clear the land required, recovering costs through
the Tax Increment.
2. HM would provide an additional contribution of $850,000 as a second
mortgage.
An updated letter of commitment f rom J. M. Thompson Construction Co. is
expected to be available at the February 11, 1988 meeting as well as
additional explanations from Mr. Lundgren.
JLR/dm
M -88-21
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: JOCK ROBERTSON 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. (6 12) 571 -3450
FRIDLEY, MN 55432 EXT. 117
FRIDLEY PLAZA ASSOCIATES A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
February 4, 1988
Mr. John L. Robertson
Executive Director
City of Fridley HRA
Civic Center
Fridley, MN 55432
Re: Funding for Fridley
124 Unit Market Rate
Fridley, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Robertson:
HAND - DELIVERED
Plaza Apartments
Housing Complex
Enclosed is a letter from Jacobson Consulting, Inc., a
financial consultant, to the Fridley Plaza Associates
indicating that if the F.P.A. request made to you on
Friday, January 29, 1988, is granted all the financing
required is available.
Also enclosed is a letter from the J. M. Thompson Con-
struction Company indicating their interest in partici-
pating in the project and their ability and willingness
to make an equity commitment of up to $1,000,000. Also
enclosed is information concerning the J. M. Thompson
Construction Co. and its financial statement.
We have been acting in good faith to achieve a mutually
desired project.
As my consultant, Russell D. Jacobson, and I explained
to you on January 29, 1988, we have arranged for all of
the financing, if we can get the help requested from the
Board of the City of Fridley HRA. On several occasions
the HRA Board has asked us, "What can the HRA do to help
you get the project built ?"
We need a loan of $850,000 which will be used to construct
the parking structure under the building. We have previously
discussed a similar idea. This money would have to be ad-
vanced or commited as of the mortgage closing date. The
HRA and the Fridley Plaza Associates would enter into a
lease - purchase agreement which would call for the Fridley
Plaza Associates to design, build and operate the parking
structure. We would be responsible for operating costs,
343 East Kellogg Blvd.
Saint Paul, MN 55101 of g-Wding. s1. pouf, min ne sot a 55 10 1
61 2-224 -4765
Fli_
FRIDLEY PLAZA ASSOCIATES A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
February 4, 1988
Mr. John L. Robertson
Executive Director
City of Fridley HRA
Civic Center
Fridley, MN 55432
Re: Funding for Fridley
124 Unit Market Rate
Fridley, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Robertson:
HAND - DELIVERED
Plaza Apartments
Housing Complex
Enclosed is a letter from Jacobson Consulting, Inc., a
financial consultant, to the Fridley Plaza Associates
indicating that if the F.P.A. request made to you on
Friday, January 29, 1988, is granted all the financing
required is available.
Also enclosed is a letter from the J. M. Thompson Con-
struction Company indicating their interest in partici-
pating in the project and their ability and willingness
to make an equity commitment of up to $1,000,000. Also
enclosed is information concerning the J. M. Thompson
Construction Co. and its financial statement.
We have been acting in good faith to achieve a mutually
desired project.
As my consultant, Russell D. Jacobson, and I explained
to you on January 29, 1988, we have arranged for all of
the financing, if we can get the help requested from the
Board of the City of Fridley HRA. On several occasions
the HRA Board has asked us, "What can the HRA do to help
you get the project built ?"
We need a loan of $850,000 which will be used to construct
the parking structure under the building. We have previously
discussed a similar idea. This money would have to be ad-
vanced or commited as of the mortgage closing date. The
HRA and the Fridley Plaza Associates would enter into a
lease - purchase agreement which would call for the Fridley
Plaza Associates to design, build and operate the parking
structure. We would be responsible for operating costs,
343 East Kellogg Blvd.
Saint Paul, MN 55101 of g-Wding. s1. pouf, min ne sot a 55 10 1
61 2-224 -4765
lE
Mr. John L. Robertson
City of Fridley HRA
February 4, 1988
Page Two
including insurance, and would receive all the income. The lease - purchase
agreement would call for a four year period interest free from toe date of
the mortgage closing.
On the 49th month after closing, regular payments would be made to the HRA
of not less than 8% interest and principal payments so that the interest
and entire principal of $850,000 are paid by the end of the eleventh year
or fifteen years from the mortgage closing, at which time fee title for
the ramp and property would transfer to the Fridley Plaza Associates.
If the HRA agrees to this proposal, we would finalize all arrangements for
the financing.
These figures, in accordance with the Centennial Mortgage, Inc. analysis,
are as follows:
Equity:
1. Cost
of project less land
$10,207,722
2.
Less:
Mortgage amount $7,252,000
B.S.P.R.A. Pledged 927,975
8,179,975
2,027,747
3.
Add:
Cost to purchase land if not owned
to obtain clear title if mortgaged
-0-
or
(95,019)
Less:
Discount Points
98
4.
Equity Required
000,000
5.
Less
Contractor Equity Pledge
850,000
Less
HRA Equity Pledge
Less
Previous Investments of Fridley
82,727+
Plaza Associates
Add cash required at closing
- -
Further, it is suggested that the cash proceeds from the cashed Letter of
Credit be returned to the Fridley Plaza Associates upon the mortgage closing.
This lease - purchase agreement, we feel, would result in minimal precedent
setting for the HRA.
Very truly yours,
FRIDLEY PLAZA ASS IATES
Lo IF s R. Lundg en
Ma gin General Partner
LRL:rz
enclosures
1 C
�1]LI�J
J. M. THOMPSON CO., INC.
GENERAL CONTRACTORS SINCE 1921
January 28, 1988
Mr. Louis R. Lundren
City Design Development Company
343 East Kellogg Blvd.
Saint Paul, m 55101
RE: Fridley Plaza Apartments
Fridley, Minnesota
Dear Lou:
Pursuant to our conversation of January 27, 1988, please find enclosed a brief
introduction to J. M. Thompson Company.
As you know, J. M. Thompson Company is primarily a general contractor, with
development becoming more of a priority on a daily basis.
Our formula for becoming a development partner is very simple. Over the
years, we have found that in some cases we can make a project work by simply
adding cash or letters of credit to the front end. We view this exposure as
being little more than guanranteeing what we say we are, "a damn good general
contractor."
I look forward to our involvement on this project with you and stand ready to
proceed at your pace.
sincerely,
J g, �aldro
A. W p
vice President of Marketing
and Development
Enclosure
DAW /PW
!2A` C�a
SKILL AE3PONS18'`4 INTEGRITY
7101 Hillsborough Road • P.O. Box 26086 • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 . Phonr' '^'01 R51 -1611
E
Mr. John Robertson
page 2
February 2, 1988
4) The anticipated rental rates, inflationary factors,
absorption period and debt service calculations appear
to result a in combination which will result,in a
project which would sucessfully compete within the
marketplace.
As a result of the factors. identified above, it is my
considered professional opinion, that the project appears to be
reasonably structured given the data I have available to me.
cc: Louis R. Lundgren
PS. Until remodeling in my building is completed, I can be
reached at:
1309 5th Ave. North
Virginia, MV 55792
(218) 749 -3346
- OUsING and REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
2
COMMISSION MEMBERS: LAWRENCE COMMERS, CHAIRMAN
DUANE PRAIRIE VIRGINIA SCHNABEL WALTER RASMUSSEN JOHN MEYER
CITY OF FRIDLEY
NAND RO: Housing & Redevelopment Authority Members
MEND FROM: Jock Robertson, Executive Director of HRA
Mao rATE: February 51, 1988
REGARDING: Marketing Firm for Southwest Quadrant of University Avenue and
Mississippi Street
Coldwell Banker (CB), Commercial Real Estate Services and Business
Development Services, Inc. (BDS) have approached the HRA with proposals to
assist in the marketing of the southwest quadrant of University
Avenue/ Mississippi Street. 7bey have asked to be placed on the agenda to
discuss their proposals directly with the Board.
As you can see from the copies of the proposals in your packet that these are
quite different approaches. The CB proposal is a more traditional real
estate broker /marketing services to package and disseminate information on
the development site, present marketing material to prospects from tenant and
developer propospect lists and procure developers at the best possible terms.
EW, on the other hand, .places more emphasis on preparing a market analysis
of the site fram the developers prospective in order to determine minimum
level of HRA assistance to induce redevelopment.
Both firms have the personnel and experience to carry out their individual
approaches. I recommend we review the approaches with these firms and,
depending on Lundgren's progress, make a decision by the March 8, 1988
meeting.
JLR/dm
M -88 -23
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: JnCK ROBERTSON 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. (6 12) 571 -3450
FRIDLEY, MN 55432 EXT. 117
1
OUSING and REDEVELOPMENT AUTHOWY
3
COMMISSION MEMBERS: LAWRENCE COMMERS, CHAIRMAN
DUANE PRAIRIE VIRGINIA SCHNABEL WALTER RASMUSSEN JOHN MEYER
CITY OF FRIDLEY
MEND !rO: Housing & Redevelopment Authority Members
MW ERC14: Jock Robertson, Executive Director of HRA
MEND DATE: February 5, 1988
RWARDING: Consideration of Urban Design Features for University Avenue
Cbrridor
At the November, .1987 BRA meeting, . the Board authorized staff to pursue
improvements amounting up to $1.5 million within the University Avenue
Corridor. This included hardsurf ace flooring, . landscaping, ground cover,
traffic signal improvements and corridor lighting
Ibr landscaping, staff recommends that the BRA approve the proposal to test
and oompare:
1. Installation and maintenance of new turf.
2. Increased maintenance of existing turf.
3. Installation and maintenance of prairie /wildflower treatment.
Staff reoommeends that in Phase I the 73rd Avenue to Osborne Road section
test the increased maintenance of the existing turf together with
installation of shrub and tree planting,. the installation of a
prairie /wildflower treatment between 69th Avenue and 71st Avenue,.adjacent to
the Community Park and Ice Arena and finally the turf restoration segment
together with shrubs and trees in the urban section between 57th Avenue and
61st Avenue.
Regarding traffic signals, .staff recommends the signal and light standard
maintenance or replacement schedule as outlined in the Barton- Ascimnan memo of
December 9, 1987, attached. This will be approximately $109,000 for the
Phase I demonstration segments.
The maintenance of these segments outlined in John Flora's memo of annual
maintenance costs should not exceed $25,000.
Staff recommends that BRA approve these items and direct Barton - Aschman to
prepare final plans and specificiations for review and approval by MnDOT and
contract letting as soon as possible.
JLRldm
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: JOCK ROBERTSON 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. (16 12) 571 -3450
FRIDLEY, MN 55432 EXT. 117
� PLANNING DIVISION 3 A
MEMORANDUM
unoF
FRIDLEY
W= M: Jock Robertson, Community Development Director '
MEND FROM: Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator /
DARE: . January 14, 1988
FWARMG : Prairie Treatment On University
One of the more difficult decisions related to the detail design development
for the University Avenue corridor project is question of how to treat the
median and shoulders. On July 9, 1987 Barry Warner presented six concepts
for handling the median. One concept, which included prairie /wildflower
planting, was further refined by staff and discussed with the BRA on August
13, 1987. Ron Bowen of Prairie Restoration Inc. discussed the pros and cons
of prairie plantings with the BRA on October 8, 1987.
The consensus of staff is that the median and shoulders present a special
design challenge due to their large area and harsh environment. The three
basic options for treating these areas include: L a manicured landscape with
turf shrub and tree plantings, with or without a jersey barrier= 2. a
prairie/wi1dflower treatment with complementary shrub and tree plantings,
with or v- ,,-bout a jersey barrier= 3. maintain the existing turf with
increa.,: ahtting with appropriate shrub and tree plantings, with or without
a jersey carrier.
The overriding problem with a manicured turf area is the maintenance
requirement to maintain grass ground cover at this scale. Without
maintenance which includes regular weed treatment,. fertilizing and watering
the outcome of a turf restoration effort would be the same weedy unkempt
groundoover conditions present today. Recall that MnDOT will not increase
their maintenance program beyond mowing 2 -3 times per season.
The most compelling reason to use prairie is the reduction of the maintenance
requirement. After planting, prairie would require 2 -3 mowings the first
year and only one thereafter. Wildflowers would be seeded with short (6 -8
inche) native grasses to achieve up to 50% flowers with full season blooming
sequences. The major drawback to prairie is the three year maturation period
needed to attain significant flowering and thus full appreciation of the
concept. A more subjective concern is the imagery of prairie and the desired
Image for Fridley and the corridor.
In order to evaluate prairie, in contrast to a manicured lawn treatment, two
test segments could be implemented (see diagram) . This idea would involve
complete installation of all other corridor elements (intersection
treatments, lighting and plantings) except new median and shoulder ground
cover would be installed in the prairie test and turf test segments only.
A11 other existing turf would receVe additional mowing only. Shrub and tree
plantings would still be installed at intersections and on shoulders. These
plantings would be planned to be complimentary to either turf or prairie.
W
Prairie Treatment
January 14, 1988
Page 2
Iris test would enable the city to evaluate the maintenance associated with
manicured turf while reviewing the visual qualities of the emerging prairie
segment.
If this scenario seems reasonable to the HRA staff will work with Barton
Asdunan to develop the concept. This is the last major unresolved issue
delaying the completion of the final design.
1 -88-08
85TH AVENUE
81ST AVENUE
OSBORNE ROAD
73RD AVENUE
69TH AVENUE
MISSISSIPPI
61 ST AVENUE T
c�a
57TH AVENUE
CITY OF F_ R 10
"ma oouwy. WWASOTA
• � w Mf. wr
11.wt�0� tI/M I.IM .tN M.1
p l.. p11I
pII. (4tM
pN. M1
. nR•n
4tp..I
[RGG Iiv. I..pI...II
.op ..
M Mlr
...... 4
p
o.
• 3 -C
PHASE 1
73RD INTERSECTION
TO OSBORNE
IMPROVEMENTS
PRAIRIE TEST SEGMENT
OPTIONAL
PRAIRIE TEST SEGMENT
PHASE 1
57TH TO GIST
TURF RESTORATION
TEST SEGMENT
PW88 -29
Parks
Streets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jock Robertson, Executive Director, H.R.A.
FROM: John Flora, Public Works Director
DATE: February 4, 1988
SUBJECT: Public Works Maintenance Requirements - H.R.A.
3 -D
With the implementation of redevelopment projects and the proposal to upgrade
the "Fridley Image" there are continuing maintenance and operation costs that
should be understood and borne by the H.R.A.
The Lake Pointe site will require upkeep of the grounds and sprinkler system.
This work could best be accomplished by contract for approximately $25,000.
In addition there is a cost for watering the site of approximately 581,000.
The University Avenue Corridor shoulder areas can be maintained by either
City or contract forces. Based upon this years efforts, it could be
accomplished for approximately $25,000.
Recommend the H.R.A. approve the expenditure for maintaining the Lake Pointe
site and University Avenue Corridor for approximately $58,000 - plus
authorizing the City to execute any contracts to complete this work.
Looking to the future of the University Avenue Corridor, Rice Creek Road,
Highway #65 and the Central Avenue Parkway, the maintenance of these areas
for the shoulder, medians, shrubbery, and lighting could amount to $176,000
annually. As these projects come to fruition, the continual maintenance,
operation and equipment costs should be provided for.
XF /mh
/_
cnYOF
MDLLLY
Engineering
Sewer
Water
Parks
Streets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
TO: File Aa88 -24
FROM: 'fin G. Flora, ,rutlic Works Director
DATE: :February 1, 1988
SUBJECT: University Avenue Corridor
I met informally with the MnWr District 5 Engineer and his staff on Friday,
January 29, 1988 and discussed the University Avenue Corridor project. At
the meeting, I attempted to find out if there is any cost sharing available
from MnDDT and what type of procedures would be required to obtain permits or
agreements.
The District understands our desire to improve the corridor and has no real
objection to the concrete curbs, red brick and bus stop concepts. They
understand they have no cost associated with that work. They also understand
our desire to standardize the signalization at the various intersections. If
the equipment installed has aged or is due for replacement orupgrade, they
would share in those costs during the corridor work. Each individual
intersection will have to be looked at separately.
The District has no objection to lighting the corridor but only has an
obligation for the intersection lights. If the MnDOT standard light poles
and fixtures are used in the corridor, we could probably execute an agreement
whereby MnDOT will maintain and replace any damaged equipment. Use of any
other type of poles and lights would be the City's total responsibility. It
is understood that NSP would probably repair the light fixtures for the City
at a cost based upon the City maintaining stockage of any parts which are not
MnDOT standard.
We discussed the possibility of the District contributing a fixed amount of
money to the corridor project. While this was a desired approach, they are
required to support their expenditures by line item charges. If any costs
are to be shared by the District outside of normal maintenance and repair, it
will require an agreement to be processed through the main office. This
agreement traditionally requires more than 6 months to complete.
The personnel of the District were not enthused about prairie grass and
flowers within the corridor but appear to have no strong objection to its
use.
IJGFAs
cy"
3-
cc: Nas)= 4ureshi
L,d6ck Robertson
!Sark Buren pF
Rick Pribyl DAY
Barton- Aschman Associates, Inc.
1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454
PE 13PANUM TO: Jp& Robertson
ohm Flora
CDPIES TO: Harty Warner
Dave Warzala
FRCM: Kenneth Horns
Barton- Aschman Associates, Inc.
3- F
612- 332 -0421
DATE: December 9, 2.987
SUB=: University Avenue Corridor - Intersection Improvements
Pole Rxmiations at 73rd Avenue and Osborne Road
Barton -Asc bman has determined which of the signal pole foundations need to
be replaced to permit onion of the proposed urban design inprovements
at the above referenoed intersections. The City of Fridley provided Barton -
Aschman with data on the existing pavement and ground elevations at each of
the intersections. On Deoember 8, Barton- Aschman conducted field surveys to
determine the elevations of each of the traffic signal pole foundations.
Based on this data, we have determined which of the signal pole foundations
need to be replaced to provide a finished foundation elevation above grade
and insure positive drainage away from the foundation.
At the intersection of 73rd Avenue and University Avenue, the pole
foundations on the southwest corner and in the median on the south side of
the intersection need to be replaced. Me pole foundations on the northeast
corner and in the median on the north side of the intersection do not need
to be replaced. the sidewalk in the median an the north side of the
intersection will have to be sloped to drain to the north. It is assumed
that the traffic signal pedestals on the southeast and northwest corners
will be replaoed with light standards on new foundations. The cost estimate
for possible traffic signal modifications given in our memo of December 7,
1987, should be modified as follows:
M
1 2 each @ $7,000 = $14,000
2 2 each @ $4,000 = $ 8,000
3 5 each @ $ 200 = $ 1,000
4 lump sum 25 000
Subtotal $48,000
0�
3-6
Barton- Aschman Associates, Inc.
At the *ersection of Osborne lmad and University Avenue race of the
traffic signal pole faur3aticns need to be replaced. Again, it is aw=ed
that the traffic 'signal pedestals on the southeast and rwrthwest corners
will be replaoed with light standards on new fcurrlations. The estimate for
possible traffic signal modifications given in our memo of Deoexuber 7, 1987,
should be modified by the deletion of items 2 and 5. 'thus, thew, estimated
cost for possible traffic signal madificaticns at the intersection of
Osborne road and University Avenue should be $21,000.
The grand total for possible traffic signal modifications at all of the
referenoed intersections: given in our m®o of December 7, 1987, should be
Barged to $109,000.
jkC
4
Engineering
Sewer
Water
Parks
Streets
Maintenance
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jock Robertson, Executive Director - HRA PW88 -28
FROM: Mark L. Burch, Asst. Public Works Director
DATE: February 3, 1988
SUBJECT: Maintenance of the Lake Pointe Development Site
The Lake Pointe Development site will require substantial maintenance during
1988 to ensure protection of the HRA's investment in landscaping and other
improvements. Maintenance during 1988 should include mowing of the seeded
and sodded areas, operation and maintenance of the irrigation system, shrub
and tree pruning, plant bed groaning and general site cleanup to include
reroving debris fran the stormwater detention Ponds.
We have investigated several contractual ways of having this maintenance
work performed and estimate that a contract for the maintenance of the
Lake Pointe Development site for 1988 will cost between $15,000 and $25,000.
If the BRA desires, we will prepare contract documents and proceed with
contracting for the maintenance of the Lake Pointe Development site for 1988.
NLB /ts
ADO,
NP up
'.,s. C J. .
•
5
COMMISSION MEMBERS: LAWRENCE COMMERS, CHAIRMAN
DUANE PRAIRIE VIRGINIA SCHNABEL WALTER RASMUSSEN JOHN MEYER
CITY OF FRIDLEY
MEMO TO: Housing & Redevelopment Authority Members
WO FROM :. • Jock Robertson, Executive Director of HRA
MEPV DATE: February 5, 1988
RBGARDING: Status of Proposed St. Williams Elderly Housing Project
Muff ie Gabler of CDC has informed me that they have received a preliminary
architects estimate for the 69 unit elderly housing project of $37,000 to
$40,000 per unit. This estimate includes approximately 63 covered parking
spaces underneath the dwelling units at $5,000 per stall plus some additional
surface parking. There will also have to be approximately 10,000 cubic yards
of soil correction.
This leaves a gap of approximately $14,000 per unit to keep the proposed
project below the 80% - 100% of median income guideline. CDC is working with
the architect to ref ine. these preliminary estimates and will be back to us
within a month or so with an updated request for financial assistance on this
project. Currently we have earmarked $150,000 for elderly housing in our
overall budget.
M -88 -22
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: JOCK ROBERTSON 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. (B 12) 571 -3450
FRIDLEY, MN 55432 EXT. 117
1707 - 1720
AMW
�AASEH
ENGINEERS I ARCMI7HCTS I PLANNERS
222 EAST LI'TLE CANADA ROAD. ST PAUL, MINNESOTA 55117 612 484.0272
City of Fridley
6431 University Ave. N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
ATTN: John Flora
Director of Public Works
6
INVOICE
January 19, 1988
T.H. 65 /LIGHTING
INVOICE NO. 1321 SEH FILE NO. 84142.02
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: FOR PERIOD NOVEMBER 15 THRU DECEMBER 26, 1987
For T.H. 65 street lighting from I -694 to Rice Creek Road.
Project Manager 4.5 hrs @ $55.58/hr =
Robert A. Eller Associates
$ 250.11
2,475.00
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE AND PAYABLE THIS INVOICE . . . . . . . . $2,725.11
MAXIMUM FEE: $6,375.00
INVOICED TO DATE: $3,868.09
pate Vf Iffitts mbt SS
COUNTY OF RAMSEY. CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Donald E. Lund In said CouM and State, being duly sworn.
on oath says that he rs Vice President
of the Short- Elhott- HerKincltson. Inc.. that the foregoing account 6 just and true: that the services therein charged were actually rendered.
and of the value therein charged: that the fees or amounts charged therefore are Such as are allowed by law: and that no part of such
account has been paid
Subscnbed and sworn to before me this
My cormmssron expires
SHORT ELLIOTT
HENDRICKSON INC.
day of 19
19
ST PAUL,
MINNESOTA
CHIPPEWA FALLS,
WISCONSIN
6-A
ROBERT A. ELLER ASSOCIATES. INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS (ELECTRICAL)
3313 VALLEY 914 941- 2889DINA..�N 55435 RECEIVED
SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON, INC.
December 14, 1987 DEC 16 1987
Short - Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc.
,
222 East Little Canada Road
ST, PAUL
St. Paul, Mn. 55117
Attention:
Mr. David J. Pillatzke, P.E.
RE: Request for Payment T.H. 65 Lighting
Project
Fridley, Minnesota
SEH File No.
Gentlemen:
in accordance with our agreement, I am submitting the
following
billing to
you for professional engineering services rendered
in connection with the above street lighting project.
The period
covered by this billing extends from March
2,1987 to
December 11,
1987. The following is a breakdown of my
hours
rendered.
10/11/87
Photometric data /preliminary layout
2 hours
10/12/87
Meeting at SEH to discuss project
3 hours
3 hours
10/16/87
Work on preliminary layout
2 hours
10/19/87
Meeting SEH deliver /explain layout
10/19/87
Working on specifications
Paul /Mn /DOT requirements
3 hours
3 hours
10/20/87
Meet Mn /DOT St.
2 hours
10/20/87
10/26/87
Working on specifications
Meet Mn /DOT Dist. 5 / exist. lights details
2 hours
10/28/87
Meet NSP at site/ service points
3 hours
3 hours
11/04/87
Working on specifications
2 hours
11/23/87
Meeting SEH to discuss project
6 hours
11/24/87
11/25/87
Working on specifications
visit site/ base bolt circle measurements
2 hours
11/25/87
12/04/87
Working on specifications
visit site /anchor bolt measurements
4 hours
2 hours
12/09/87
Working on specifications
Meeting SEH deliver /explain specifications
2 hours
2 hours
APPROVED
FOR PAYMENT
12/11/87
Total
-5•@' hours
'OB P
�1
ACCT
Payment is
services at
charges to
period and
g����Q
14-41 �-4 P W18
i� for rr6- hours of A--DGC
requested in the amount of iyyD
$55.00 per hour. This billing represents my total DWE
Short - Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. for the above stated
project.
very truly yours,
Rober E ler 31ss ciates, �nc.
BY
R ert A. Eller, P.E.
GRG
(� C1
RE
DEL
SEH COST
CHG CLIENT 2r