Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
HRA 04/13/1989 - 6395
NOISING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING THURSDAY, APRIL 13, 1989 7:00 P.M. Jock Robertson Executive Director of HRA City of Fridley A G E N D A HOUSING &REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG. APRIL 13, 1989 7:00 P.M. Location: Community Education Center 6085 Seventh Street N.E. CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 9, 1989 Woad CONSIDERATION OF AGREEMENT FOR CITY USE 0 FRIDLEY LAZ P. ; . . . . 1 - �z }� Yam CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR STINKSI HILLWIND OFFICE REDEVELOPMENT 75 T ONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT lE v� CONCEPT FOR KITTERMAN ADVANCE COMPANIES - [� COP�lERCIAL. �2E HABIIyI�Q�(,� JEC , . 3 3 CONSI.MTION OF U`UNXIVER3IJLTY A ENUE CORR OR 14ATNTENANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 4 D CONSIURATIONbF PsXRKING ET CEMENT 5 - 5A C� INFORMATI O DRAFT - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN 6 - 6B 1 � INFORMA I N ON DRAFT HRA OBJECTIVES FOR 1990 . . . . . . . 7 INFORMAT ONON SENIOP HOUSING SURVEY . . . . . . . . 8 - 8D W, &C, K- 1:34q-5. INFORMATION ON 1988 ANNUAL REPORT. 9 �l CLAIMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 I i OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT G� CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Larry Commers called the March 9, 1989 meeting of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority to order at 7:08 p.m. ROLL CALL.; Members Present: Larry Commers, Virginia Schnabel, John Meyer, Walter Rasmussen Members Absent: Duane Prairie Others Present: Jock Robertson, Executive Director of HRA Bill Burns, City Manager Rick Pribyl, Finance Director Mayor William Nee Councilwoman Nancy Jorgenson Councilman Dennis Schneider Councilman Edward Fitzpatrick Councilman Steve Billings James Casserly Cheryl Stinski Pat Fisher Barry Warner, Barton - Aschman APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 9 1989 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES• MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Rasmussen, to approve the February 9, 1989, Housing & Redevelopment Authority minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. INFORMATION ON TANURB PROPOSAL FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE & MISSISSIPPI STREET: Mr.= Commers stated a letter dated February 28, 1989 has been submitted to David Newman from Edwin Chanin which states that Tanurb has exercised its right to terminate the Purchase Agreements for the University Avenue Shopping Center parcel and the Rice Plaza parcel. Mr. Robertson stated he will attempt to obtain further information NOOSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 PAGE 2 from Tanurb and contact Coldwell Banker to determine why this project will not be proceeding. 2. INFORMATION OF WINFIELD PROPOSAL FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF 57TH PLACE: Mr. Commers stated Twin City Testing is not able to proceed with their contract with the HRA because of a conflict of interest. Mr. Robertson stated he has approached the Pollution Control Agency and they are evaluating the monitoring well data that Mr. Flaherty, the former owner, is obligated to provide. He stated Mr. Flaherty is submitting necessary documents to the Pollution Control Agency to satisfy requirements to receive reimbursement up to 75 percent of the maintenance evaluation and correction costs. Mr. Robertson stated the evaluation, of this data is taking place on a monthly basis. Mr. Robertson stated it might take up to six months to obtain enough data to prescribe a cleanup procedure and another six months to accomplish the cleanup. He stated he will report the results received from the Pollution Control Agency on a monthly basis to the HRA. Mr. Robertson stated Mr. Flaherty submits materials monthly to the Pollution Control Agency. Mr. Commers asked when this procedure began and Mr. Robertson stated it started in January. Mr. Robertson stated Mr. Fogerty felt the greatest concern was the contingency clause with Crosstown Bank in obtaining the billboard. He stated Winfield and Mr. Dorn are trying to make some kind of arrangement for Crosstown Bank's sign. He stated they would be willing to go to some length to tailor this sign to the City's satisfaction. Mr. Robertson stated since they have to wait for the soil correction, they will pursue the question of the sign simultaneously. Mr. Meyer was asked if defining the problem was not being accelerated because Twin City Testing had withdrawn. Mr. Robertson stated he would check into this question and submit a recommendation to the HRA next month. Mr. Commers stated it is thought the HRA had to complete the testing; however, since the Pollution Control Agency is now involved, they are making the original property owner responsible for this cleanup. Mr. Rasmussen asked the developer's reaction to the delay. Mr. Robertson stated he accepted it and indicated he would pursue the sign variance while waiting for the test results. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 PAGE 3 Mr. Meyer stated he cannot understand why the developer who was in such a rush before is now willing to relax the schedule for six months or more. He questioned why the contamination issue is not actively being pursued. Mr. Robertson stated staff was advised they had hired another firm to independently evaluate the data given them by Ashland a year ago. Mr. Meyer felt the time for the test results and correction should be accelerated. Mr. Commers felt staff should probably check if the six month period for testing could be shortened. Mr. Robertson stated this is a good suggestion, but the question is also how long the Pollution Control Agency has the soil samples before they are analyzed. Ms. Schnabel stated she is under the impression that the bank is very eager for the development and construction of their facility. Mr. Rasmussen stated he would agree the developer seemed eager to proceed and it seems peculiar that they are willing to wait for this length of time. Ms. Schnabel asked if anyone such as Mr. Flaherty or the Pollution Control Agency is on site. Mr. Robertson stated Mr. Flaherty is on site because he was the prior owner and responsible for the cleanup. He stated there are test wells on site. Mr. Commers felt the HRA should obtain further information before action is taken on an extension of the agreement. 3. CONSIDERATION OF EASEMENTS FOR FRIDLEY PLAZA OFFICE BUILDING: Mr. Commers stated he is concerned about the expenses and legal fees incurred with this issue as it seems additional legal opinions are needed from the HRA. Mr. Robertson stated, hopefully, the closing for the sale of this office building will take place this Friday. He stated in the course of preparing for the closing, a title issue arose. He stated the HRA entered into a long term lease of the adjoining parking facilities with the owners of the Fridley Plaza Office Building and an amendment entered into due to the HRA's decision to construct a structured parking facility on this site. He stated it has been brought to the City's attention that the HRA only owns the eastern portion of this parking facility, and the balance is HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 PAGE 4 owned by the City. Mr. Robertson stated the City's legal counsel, David Newman, is suggesting the City deed over that portion of the parking ramp located on City property to the HRA so that the lease agreement for the parking will be exclusively with the HRA rather than having two leases, one with the HRA and one with the City. He stated the City Council acted favorably on this suggestion at their March 6, 1989, meeting. Mr. Robertson recommended the HRA accept this parcel of land. Ms. Schnabel asked if the HRA incurs any legal obligations by accepting this property. Mr. Robertson stated he did not believe so and neither did the Assistant City Attorney, David Newman. Mr. Commers questioned if the HRA has liability coverage under the City's policy. Mr. Pribyl felt for that particular piece of property, the HRA is covered for general liability under the City's policy. Mr. Commers stated no action is needed on the part of the HRA. He expressed thanks to the Council for deeding a portion of this lot to the HRA. 4. CONSIDERATION OF STINSKI PROPOSAL FOR REDEVELOPMENT ON HILLWIND ROAD: Mr. Robertson stated Mr. Casserly has submitted his analysis of this project in a memo dated March 81 1989. He stated Mr. Casserly's report indicates it would take a drastic change in the HRA's financial assistance policy in order for this project to meet the request of the developer. Mr. Casserly stated he has had conversations with Mr. Fisher, Ms. Stinski's financial consultant. He stated he does not doubt their figures presented for this project. He stated they are proposing a very high quality project and need the assistance in order to meet the cash flow. He stated he is not disputing the numbers and Ms. Stinski and Mr. Fisher have provided all the information requested. Mr. Casserly stated, however, in providing assistance, the HRA has done so within some basic guidelines. Mr. Casserly stated assistance is usually provided in the form of a grant of 5 percent of the estimated market value of the project which would amount to approximately $150,000 or a loan amounting to 15 percent of the estimated market value of the project which would amount to approximately $373,000 and paid back with deferred interest over a 15 year period. He stated whether assistance is in the form of a loan or grant, the petitioner must still qualify, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 PAGE 5 and these funds can only be used for tax increment expenditures such as utility improvements, demolition, soil correction, etc. Mr. Casserly stated the developer is requesting a grant of 15 percent or $373,000 and not a loan. He stated he would recommend • grant of 5 percent or a loan of 15 percent or a combination of • loan and grant, but within those confines. Mr. Fisher stated the only way the project will work is to obtain a 15 percent grant. Mr. Meyer asked if it is necessary to have underground parking. Ms. Stinski stated it is necessary in order to meet City Code requirements for the parking. Mr. Robertson stated the proposed building is too large for the lot and the only way to meet the parking requirement is to have underground parking. He stated the other alternative is to acquire additional land to have all outside parking. Ms. Schnabel asked if the costs of this underground parking are consistent with the parking ramp proposed for the renovated Civic Center. Mr. Robertson stated these costs are consistent. Mr. Rasmussen stated as long as this is a quality building, he would be in favor of assistance on a loan basis or combination of a grant and loan. Mr. Commers felt some direction should probably be given to the developer as to the HRA's position. Mr. Robertson stated staff is not willing to spend much more time on this project unless it can be proven it will work. Ms. Schnabel stated she would have a difficult time justifying any deviation from their current guidelines. She stated she wants a quality development; however, there are other areas of redevelopment in the City which must also be considered. MOTION by Mr. Meyer, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to re- affirm the HRA's previous policy of assistance regarding the Hillwind office project. Mr. Fisher asked if financing for this project can be done within the HRA's guidelines, if it is approved. Mr. Commers felt if the developer can meet the guidelines, the HRA is willing to make the commitment for financial assistance. He stated the building itself has not been an issue and the HRA would welcome this type of facility. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 PAGE 6 Mr. Meyer stated he knows this is a high quality building, however, if the plan for the facility changes, he would want assurances that a lower quality structure would not be constructed. UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. CONSIDERATION OF BIDS FOR 1989 LAKE POINTE MAINTENANCE: Mr. Robertson stated bids were received for the Lake Pointe Maintenance Project #187 and staff recommends the contract be awarded to the low bidder, Greenmasters, Inc., for $34,220. He stated Greenmasters is very experienced in this line of work and this bid is slightly lower than the previous contract and the bid from the company who received the contract last year. Mr. Robertson stated there is also twice as much sod to maintain this year as there was last year. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to award the Lake Pointe Maintenance Project #187 to Greenmasters, Inc. for $34,220. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. CONSIDERATION OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS SCHEDULE: Mr. Robertson stated he reviewed the background and history of this project with the Council last Monday evening. He stated one of the major concerns was the compatibility between the light rail transit proposal and the landscaping design prepared by Barton - Aschman, Inc. He stated although there is no basic incompatibility between landscaping and light rail transit, the timing is critical. Mr. Robertson stated the opinion of Barton - Aschman, who is completing some work for Hennepin County on light rail transit, is that light rail is farther into the future than what is being discussed in Anoka County. He stated Hennepin County has set priorities for other lines, before one in Anoka County, and such a line needs Hennepin County's participation. Mr. Robertson stated the Council's concern is the private properties on University Avenue adjacent to the public right -of- way and what may be done to accelerate redevelopment of the underdeveloped properties to coincide with the improvements in the public right -of -way. Mayor Nee stated he has mixed feelings about light rail transit and whether or not it will become reality in the near future. He stated if this occurs in five or ten years really does not make a difference, if the investment can be amortized. He stated his own personal feeling is that things have changed since the University HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 __PAGE 7 Avenue Corridor improvements were discussed. Mayor Nee stated that Kirk Hart, who represents the Chamber of Commerce, stated the business community requested that University Avenue be cleaned up and something done with the grass and fencing. He stated although the businesses would not object to the improvement, they would not take credit for the expenditure of one million dollars or more for this project. Mayor Nee stated he felt he could not rationalize this improvement which is, essentially cosmetic, unless it is part of a plan to improve the entire area. Mayor Nee stated in looking at priorities, he felt there is a need to address the underdeveloped and vacant properties on University between 57th and 61st Avenues. Mr. Rasmussen stated he would concur with Mayor Nee's comments. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated the Council attended a retreat this past weekend and one of the items covered was the redevelopment policy and what the Council envisions for Fridley in the future. She felt to proceed with the present plan for improving University Avenue would mean blighted areas would still remain. Councilwoman Jorgenson felt it may be better to concentrate on a particular area along University Avenue for redevelopment between 57th and 61st Avenues since this is an entrance to the City. She felt if funds were spent just to improve the aesthetics by installing brick and landscaping, she did not know how the citizens would react. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated she is not against landscaping and improving University Avenue, but she felt this should be done in conjunction with a plan to also improve the blighted areas. Mr. Meyer stated he understands what Councilwoman Jorgenson is saying, however, if the cosmetics along University Avenue are improved, this may be the key to drawing more attractive businesses to the area. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated she is not against the improvement and would like some of it done, but they should also consider the properties between 57th and 61st Avenues. She felt if there is redevelopment, quality businesses will be attracted to the area. Mr. Meyer asked where the Council felt funds might be spent and not scandalize the community. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated she felt perhaps half of the amount proposed to be spent on improving University Avenue should be allotted for redevelopment of the area between 57th and 61st Avenues. She stated this is her personal opinion and she has not had a lot of comments from the residents. Mr. Commers stated there was public participation when the proposed improvement of University Avenue was originally discussed. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 PAGE 8 Councilwoman Jorgenson stated from Kirk Hart's comments, she felt the proposed plan for improving University Avenue was not exactly what was wanted by the business community. She stated they wanted a cleanup, weeds removed, and something done with the fencing. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated consideration also has to be given to the possibility of light rail transit. She stated if this becomes reality and the line proceeds along University Avenue, some of the landscaping proposed in this improvement plan may have to be redone. She stated she liked the idea for improving University Avenue, but did not feel the timing is right. Mr. Commers stated the timing may have changed, but it cannot be said that this project was not reviewed and assessed at the time it was first considered. He stated there was broad participation, including the Chamber of Commerce, and, at the time, the project seemed appropriate. He felt the economics have changed significantly so it does deserve reconsideration. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated she did not mean to insinuate that there was not active participation, but felt the times have changed. Ms. Schnabel stated she also has some reservations about this improvement even though she chaired the committee for these improvements on University Avenue. She stated it was felt if aesthetic changes were made to improve University, this might attract businesses to the community. She stated if a new bank is constructed at 57th Avenue, the rest of University Avenue might start to improve. Ms. Schnabel felt they have to arrive at a goal and then adhere to it. Financing is a critical part. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated there are some very nice developments on University Avenue in the northern portion of the City and thought perhaps concentration should be in the urban section rather than the rural section. Mayor Nee stated the City has faced this problem on the south portion of University for the last 25 years. He stated it will not change without some intervention. Councilman Fitzpatrick stated he agreed with Mayor Nee's comment. He felt improvement in this area should be an HRA project. He stated he cannot help but feel that light rail transit is many years away and should not be one of the biggest considerations. Councilman Schneider stated in the retreat attended by the Council, one of the goals was to improve the image of Fridley. He stated he supports the idea of aesthetic improvement, but not to the extent proposed. He stated in looking at the new development on East Moore Lake Drive, he wonders if this development would have taken place if other improvements had not been made in the area. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989_ PAGE 9 He felt if there could be some inducement to improve the area around 57th Avenue, it might benefit the entire area. Councilman Schneider stated he was concerned about the maintenance issue because if improvements are done and not maintained, it becomes very counter - productive. Councilman Billings stated even though he was not a member of the Council when the University Avenue improvement was considered, he was aware of it as he was Chairman of the Planning Commission. He stated the persons who are now speaking hesitantly about the project were the same ones who were hesitant when the project was originally considered. Councilman Billings stated there were funds available and the advice was if they were not spent, the City would lose the funding. He felt this influenced decisions on whether to proceed with this improvement. He stated he felt there has been some realization that some of the 'things expected have not materialized. Councilman Billings stated some of the Council members feel that a greater concentration of funds to improve the intersection and site at 57th and University would have a greater impact than spreading the funds throughout the University Avenue Corridor. He stated in analyzing the situation, the question is if it is better to do some improvements throughout the entire Corridor or to have an improvement that would make a significant impact to show the City is serious about making the City attractive to new businesses. Councilman Billings stated he is not necessarily speaking for or against the project for the University Avenue Corridor. He felt the concerns of the Council are the same as they were when this improvement was discussed and they are now taking a second look. Mr. Commers asked if the HRA cannot do something to improve the south portion of University Avenue, does the Council feel they should not proceed with this project? Mayor Nee stated he felt something should not be done this year. He stated if the City makes a highly visible investment and light rail would proceed, improvements that were done may need to be removed. Mr. Commers stated the City will be faced with light rail transit from now to the next century and may never well see it materialize. He stated he is concerned about tying light rail transit in with other developments, but there might be financial reasons to reassess the plans at this point. Mr. Commers stated if the HRA proceeds with redevelopment between 57th and 61st Avenues, a broad based plan is needed. Ms. Schnabel felt there should be a goal to which the Council concurs to allow them to begin their next focus. She felt the OUSING 6 REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 PAGE 10 Council should take the next step to determine what they foresee for the City. Ms. Schnabel asked if this would be acceptable if the original plan for improvement of University Avenue is scaled back to eliminate the lighting and paving and focus on the maintenance. Mayor Nee stated he would have no problem with this suggestion. Ms. Schnabel stated in the East Moore Lake Drive development there was a distinct advantage as a developer came to them with a plan. This is not the case at 57th Avenue. She stated there could be problems if businesses are cleared out, and there are no plans for development. Mayor Nee stated there is some rational to provide housing in some of this area, and it would be a major improvement. Councilman Billings stated he felt some of the concerns of the Council are that improvements might be done and then have to be removed because of light rail transit. Mr. Commers stated the HRA would like some direction from the Council regarding their priorities. There probably should be a joint meeting. Mr. Robertson stated that as a result of the Council meeting last Monday evening, the City Manager, Bill Burns, requested suggestions on ways to proceed. He stated the question was raised how much the original Phase 1 proposal would cost if it was done this year. He stated that both Mr. Warner of Barton- Aschman and he had independ- ently estimated about $700,000. He stated this amount is split between the rural and urban sections. Mr. Robertson presented a drawing which outlined the areas the Council felt were critical for redevelopment. He stated a rough estimate, using 57th Place as an example, for the total cost of redevelopment including acquisition, relocation, demolition, and utility relocation is about $700,00 to $750,000. He stated this amount is about double what the Assessor had as the estimated market value. He stated current sales are running about $2.50 to $4.00 a square foot. Mr. Robertson stated that to explore the possibilities for redevelopment would take some further research and felt a timetable to accomplish this work would be about six months in order to prioritize and have a better definition of the costs. Ms. Schnabel stated there are a lot of issues involved in this area. She felt the City cannot afford to have parking for light rail transit in this area. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 __PAGE 11 Mr. Robertson stated the present schedule for the improvement of the University Avenue corridor is that the Department of Transportation is reviewing the detailed plans and it is scheduled for spring bidding. He stated staff has been advised by Mr. Warner that bidding should not proceed until plans are definite. He stated if it is necessary to rebid, the HRA can incur some liability. Mr. Meyer agreed the HRA should not proceed with bids unless they have a firm idea that they would proceed. He felt they should regroup after hearing the comments from the Council members. He stated if the business community does not see any advantages, he did not see why the HRA should proceed with what has been planned to date. Mr. Rasmussen stated he has not been in favor of the plan from the beginning, but felt maintenance is almost a necessity. Ms. Schnabel stated some of the principals are gone that were originally involved so their lack of interest might be for many reasons. She felt perhaps the HRA could spend some funds for maintenance in the median and a program for regular mowing, weed control, and possibly re- seeding. Mr. Robertson asked about removal of the fence. Ms. Schnabel stated the fence in front of the businesses acts as a barrier. She stated the business owners feel it is keeping people from patronizing their establishments and this is a valid point. Mr. Commers felt staff should come back with costs for removing the fence and proper maintenance. Mr. Burns felt the maintenance is probably a high priority and should be intensified, however, there should be direction on how to proceed for the future. He stated he felt everyone's top priority is Lake Pointe. He suggested perhaps there should be some prioritizing and then determine what is feasible. Ms. Schnabel stated if the HRA were to categorize their interest at this point, Lake Pointe would be the top priority. Mr. Commers felt Lake Pointe has to be the number one priority. He stated until this issue is resolved, the HRA does not know their long -term financial position. He stated, however, he is not sure if he would place the 57th area over the Rice Creek Plaza area. Mayor Nee stated the priorities might be Lake Pointe, Rice Creek Plaza and then the area of 57th Avenue. Mr. Burns stated he would agree with Mayor Nee's assessment of the HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 PAGE 12 priorities. Councilman Billings stated he did not want the HRA to forsake this plan for the University Avenue Corridor improvement simply because it cannot be accomplished at this time. Mr. Warner, Barton- Aschman, stated based on the comments he has heard, he felt it would be prudent to go back to the original master plan that was prepared because it took into consideration improving the appearance of University Avenue without spending a lot of money. He suggested either calling the University of Minnesota for a Turf Specialist or the Department of Transportation for a Turf Grass Expert to review and evaluate the problem. He felt for a nominal investment, the appearance could be greatly improved until the Council is more comfortable with the urban improvements. It was the consensus of the HRA and Council members that Mr. Warner's suggestion should be pursued. Mr. Commers thanked everyone for attending the meeting and stated the HRA will look forward to some long term goals. 6A. RESOLUTION NO. HRA 2 -1989 OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE FRIDLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE REIMBURSEMENT TO BARTON - ASCHMAN FOR THE COST OF ADDITIONAL DESIGN SERVICES FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS. CONTROLS, LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPE MODIFICATIONS: Mr. Robertson asked that the HRA consider this resolution. He stated it is a housekeeping item to reflect the HRA's action taken at their February 11, 1988, meeting. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to adopt Resolution No. HRA 2 -1989. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. CLAIMS (1865- 1875): Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated there are some expenditures regarding the parking ramp and security for the ramp. Mr. Commers asked if these expenditures are within budget. Mr. Pribyl stated they are. Mr. Robertson stated there are some questions about the concrete and these are in the process of being negotiated. He stated there are some rough areas and in some places, the slope is not correct to permit run -off. He stated the clearance also does not meet the HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MARCH 9, 1989 PAGE 13 State requirement of seven feet and in some areas, it is about 1- 3/4 inches lower. Mr. Pribyl stated $80,000 to $90,000 has been withheld to insure that the proper follow -up will be undertaken. MOTION by Mr. Rasmussen, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to approve Check Register Nos. 1865 through 1875. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: Chairperson Commers adjourned the March 9, 1989 meeting of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority at 9:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Carole Haddad Recording Secretary 1 H ERRICK & NEWMAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW Virgil C. Herrick James D. Hoeft Gregg V. Herrick Of Counsel David P. Newman Jock- Robertson Executive Director City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue Fridley, MN 55432 March 22, 1989 RE: Muncipal Parking Ramp Dear Jock: I have previously provided you'with correspondence pertaining to the fact that the HRA does not currently have fee title to all of the property upon which the parking ramp is being constructed. It is my understanding that at the March 6, 1989 meeting of the City Council, the City agreed to deed the subject property to the HRA. However, it is also my understanding that the Cites ar.,equested an agreement with the HRA formalizing the fact that the City would have the right Muse this par ing_ facility. It is `for- t -Tris- purpose that I have drafted the attached agreement. agre faci City shou at least I would like you to note that in paragraph 2 of this ement I have provided that the HRA would maintain the parking lity. This is an issue which I do not believe the HRA or the have yet specifically addressed. However, it probably ld be part of this agreement and I believe that the HRA has DPN:jeb Enclosure informallv discussed the fae agreeable delete this ncluded this provision. ith this provision then I paragraph when they adopt incerely yours, avid P. Newman fact the d suggest agreement. Suite 205, 6401 University Avenue N.E.. Fridley, Minnesota 55432, 612 - 571 -3850 This agreement is entered into this 1 -A day of , 1989 by and between the City of Fridley ( "City ") and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley ( "HRA "). WHEREAS, the HRA is the owner of the property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and the City is the owner of the property described in Exhibit B attached hereto. WHEREAS, the HRA has agreed to construct a parking facility on the property described in Exhibit C, attached hereto, which parking facility shall be for the benefit of neighboring businesses including but not limited to the Fridley Municipal Center, and WHEREAS, in consideration of the City conveying to the HRA the property described in Exhibit B, the HRA wishes to enter into this agreement for the purpose of formalizing its understanding with the City that the City shall have the non - exclusive right to use this ramp. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties as follows: 1. That the City shall have the non - exclusive right to the use of the parking facility which is located on the property described in Exhibit C ( "Parking Ramp "). This use shall be for all public purposes which are compatible with the operation of a parking ramp including but not limited to vehicular parking, ingress, egress, and for pedestrian use.' That the HRA agrees to construct and maintain the parking ramp in a state of good condition and repair. 1 -B 3. That this agreement shall only be terminated upon the Dated: Dated: mutual agreement of both the City and the HRA. THE CITY OF FRIDLEY BY Its THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA By: Chairman By: Director THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Herrick & Newman Suite 205 6401 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Phone (612) 571 -3850 (AGR10 -14 H &N3/22/89) 1 -C EXHIBIT A Lot 15, Block 1, Fridley Plaza Center, Anoka County, Minnesota. 1 -D EXHIBIT B All that part of Lot 7, Block 1, Fridley Plaza Center, Anoka County, Minnesota lying easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 14, said Block 1; thence North 89 degrees 58 minutes 45 seconds East, along the north line of said Lot 14, a distance of 13.00 feet, to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 0 degrees 47 minutes 15 seconds East a distance of 213.23 feet to a point on the line common to Lots 6 and 7, said Block 1, said point being 3.00 feet westerly from the southeasterly corner of said Lot 6, and said line there terminating. Subject to a permanent non - exclusive easement for parking ingress and egress and other public purposes. 1 -E EXHIBIT C All that part of Lot 7, Bock 1, Fridley Plaza Center, Anoka County, Minnesota lying easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 14, said Block 1; thence North 89 degrees 58 minutes 45 seconds East, along the north line of said Lot 14, a distance of 13.00 feet, to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 0 degrees 47 minutes 15 seconds East a distance of 213.23 feet to a point on the line common to Lots 6 and 7, said Block 1, said point being 3.00 feet westerly from the southeasterly corner of said Lot 6, and said line there terminating. Subject to a permanent non - exclusive easement for parking ingress and egress and other public purposes. and That part of Lot 15, Block 1, Fridley Plaza Center, Anoka County, Minnesota lying north of the extension easterly of the north line of Lot 14, said Block 1, to the east line of said Lot 15. OUSING and REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2 COMMISSION MEMBERS: LAWRENCE COMMERS, CHAIRMAN DUANE PRARE VIR©WIA SCNNABEL WADER RASMUSSEN JOHN MEYER CITY OF FRIDLEY DATE: April 6, 1989 TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM:. Jock Robertson, Executive Director of HRA SUBJECT: Hillwind Office Project Messrs. Casserly, Newman, and I have met with the developer and prepared a draft development agreement (see packet). The draft is currently being reviewed, and we hope to have a revised draft available at the meeting. The assumptions we have used and the resulting conclusions are a ` t follows: 1. That the building and land costs are approximately $2,190,000. 2. A grant would amount to 1.65% (1/3 of 5 %) of the land and building costs or $36,135. 3. A loan from the HRA to the project would be made for 10% (2/3 of 15 %) of the land and building costs or $219,000. The loan would have the following conditions: interest at prime; Years 1 -3 no interest and no payments Years 4 -5 interest accrues but no payment Years 6 -14 interest payments only Year 15 interest and total of principal The interest that accrued in years 4 and 5 would simply be added to the principal. At the March 1989 meeting, the HRA approved in concept the above arrangements. See attached work sheets for details. There is an additional item which we would like to bring to your attention. Because of the land write -down, Mr. Newman drafted this document in such a way that title will be deeded to the HRA and then reconveyed to the developer. - He is concerned about the potential environmental liability that the HRA faces by entering EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: JOCK ROBERTSON 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. (612) 571 -3450 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 EXT. 117 2 -A Hillwind Office Project April 6, 1989 Page 2 into the chain of title. Granted, we are not aware of any contaminants on the site, but that certainly does not preclude their existence. We have not added this as a requirement, but it may make sense to require the developer to provide the HRA with an environmental audit before any of the conveyances occur. As a pra,ctical matter, we suspect that this may now be a financing requirement so it should have negligible impact on the developer, and we recommend that the HRA require it._ JR:ls Attachments M -89 -173 94f� I sdIo- I O ntrv/ 89 2=B TAX INCREMENT FINANCING - TIF ASSUMPTIONS a The completion date for Hillwind Office Project is projected for August 19 1989. Therefore, the projections for 1989 are based on a five month year. b The base rent for office tenants in 1989 is $10.50. Tenant leases will be written triple net. Base rent increases of 5% are projected to occur in 1992, 1995, and 1998. C The estimated tax expense, based on the preliminary assessment of the building, is $2.40 per square foot. Tenant passthrough costs are based on the net rentable space of 22,750. Full taxes will take affect in 1991, and are projected to Increase 5% per year thereafter. The taxes for 1989 and 1990 are based on actual taxes now being paid. d The estimated cost per foot for operating the Hillwind Office Project is $2.45. Operating costs are projected to increase 5% per year beginning in 1990. e It is estimated that 3,000 square feet of common area tax costs will be passed onto the office tenants starting in 1991. f It is estimated that 3,000 square feet of common area operating costs will be passed onto the office tenants effective immediately. 9 Vacancy is calculated at 20% for 1989 and 20% for four months in 1990. A 10% vacancy rate is used for the remainder of 1990. From 1991 on, a 5% vacancy factor is used. h Tax expenses are based on $2.40 per square foot for the gross square footage of the building, 31,135. i Operating expenses are based on $2.45 per square foot for the gross square footage of the building or 31,135. The tax increment will be paid out of the normal taxes beginning in 1991. j Mortgage payments are based on a principal amount of $2,345,605 at a 10.5% interest rate. The mortgage is projected to be interest only for three years with a 30 year amortization being applied thereafter. The mortgage will be for 10 years with a balloon for the amount of principal unpaid at that time. k Tenant improvement passthroughs are figured at a cost of $15 a square foot for 22,750 square feet to be amortized over 5 years. It is estimated that in 1990 only one -half of the tenant passthrough cost will be received due to the buildings occupancy. I There are 21 enclosed parking spots which will be leased for $55 per month. 3�m The second mortgage that will be placed on the building will be funded by the City in the amount of $239,106. It will be structured such that no interest will be paid in the first three years, interest will accrue in years four and five with the first payment being made in year six. The principal will be repaid at the end of the loan in 15 years along with the deferred interest of years three and four. There will also be a grant given by the City in the amount of $39,452. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ASSUMPTIONS PA-Rt�,, t0*4rOLI 2 --C b $10.50 x 22,750 square feet = $238,875 per year - 12 months = $19,906 per month x 5 months = $99,531. c $2.40 x 22,750 square feet = $54,600 per year. d $2.45 x 22,750 square feet = $559738 - 12 months = $4,644 per month x 5 months = $23,224. e Tax cost passthrough: $2.40 x 3,000 square feet = $7,200 f Operating cost passthrough: $2.45 x 3,000 = $7,350 - 12 months = $613 per month x 5 months = $3,063. g 1989 vacancy: - $133,268 x 20% = $26,653. 1990 vacancy: - $358,102 - 12 months = $29,842 x 4 months = $119,368 x 20% vacancy = $23,874. - $358,102 - 12 months = $29,842 x 8 months = $238,736 x 10% vacancy = $239874 - $23,874 + $239874 = $479748 1991 vacancy and beyond is calculated at 5% of total revenues. h 1991 Taxes: 31,135 square feet x $2.40 = $749724. i 31,135 x $2.45 = $76,281 per year - 12 months = $6,357 x 5 months = $31,784. J The total debt would be $2,345,605 x 10.5% interest = $246,289 per year - 12 months = $20,524 x 5 months = $102,620. k 22,750 square feet x $15 a square foot = $341,250 - 5 = $68,250. 1 10 parking spots x $55 per month x 5 months m $2,191,064 + $2009000 = $2,3919064 a. Grant - $2,391,064 x 1.65% = $39,452 b. Second Mortgage - $2,391,064 x 10.0% = $239,106 TOTAL = $278,558 The interest on the loan will be .1% below prime fixed or 10.5%. Therefore, the interest charge for the loan will be $25,106 per year. PROJECT COST BREAKDOWN Land Building 3 Floors (office) 31,135 square feet Underground Parking 6,777 square feet Total 37,912 square feet Construction Cost 37,912 square feet @ $51.43 a square foot $1,849,814 Tenant improvements 22,750 square feet @ $15 /square foot 341,250 Indirect Costs Marketing and Leasing 350000 Insurance 79000 Permanent loan cost @ 1% x $2,200,000 22,000 Construction loan cost @ 2% x $2,200,000 440000 Construction loan interest $2,200,000 x 10.5% x 50% x 12 months 1159500 Taxes During Construction 4,700 TOTAL COST OF PROJECT 15% TiF From City ($221919064 + $200,000 = $2,391,064) Total Cost of the Project After TIP * �o�xrrl���,`�W, Sa- $ 200,000 $2,191,064 228,200 $2,619,264 ($ 278,558) $2,340,706 4wiaa4r 101 t4y'C9 ? 2 -D OUSING and REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 3 COMMISSION MEMBERS: - LAWRENCE COMMERS, CHAIRMAN DUANE PRARE VIR ©NW SCHNASEL WALTER RASMUSSEN JOHN MEYER CITY OF FRIDLEY DATE: April 6, 1989 TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Jock Robertson, Executive Director of HRA SUBJECT: Outline of a Development Agreement for Kitterman, Advance Companies, Commercial Rehabilitation Project fl We have previously reviewed this proposed project at the April and May 1988 HRA meetings. At that time, staff recommended the standard HRA 15 year second mortgage for $30,000, no payments the first three years, interest only the next two years, and the remaining balance, principal, and interest the last ten years. The HRA directed staff to work on drafting a development agreement for the members to review at a subsequent meeting. (See attached minutes from April 14 and May 12, 1988.) Since the proposed second mortgage amount was insufficient to complete Mr. Kitterman's financial package, he subsequently applied for and received a preliminary commitment of secondary financing through the SBA 504 loan program for $156,000 (copies included in the packet). Mr. Kitterman commenced work on the project late last summer and was substantially completed by February of this year (see attached photos). He has already received his certificate of occupancy and has moved into the building. Although we had originally discussed the standard HRA 15 year second mortgage, two modifications are required by the SBA: 1. Since the SBA is taking a second position, the HRA must take the third position on its $30,000 loan. Dave Newman and I feel quite comfortable with this in that the improvements have already been completed. The City Assessor estimates the property assessed value at $330,200 which is approximately 95% of the market value based on current sales ratios. Moreover, Mr. Kitterman has been able to demonstrate that the total project cost is $500,000 (see page 2 of the SBA loan form). Since we used project costs for determining the amount of the 15% mortgage on other HRA projects such as the Shorewood Restaurant, this loan amount is consistent with past HRA actions. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: JOCK ROBERTSON 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. (012) 571 -3450 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 EXT. 117 3 =A Outline of Development Agreement for Kitterman April 6, 1989 Page 2 2. The remaining policy decision involves the SBA requirement that the financing run concurrently with the SBA 20 year financing duration. Again, since the project is substantially completed and the mortgagor continues to pay principal and interest over the additional five years, staff has concluded that this is not a significant change. The interest rate would be pegged at a point below prime at the time of closing. Staff recommends the to prepare the final JR:ls Attachments M -89 -174 HRA approve this concept and di ec` the staff "i development agreement. br�1 3 -B BEFORE - MW 1988 AFTER - FEBRUARY 1989 3 -C by the City again as has been cone in the past. tie ERA has two options how they wish to reimburse the City for this contract: (1) on a m basis; or (2) in one lump sum. Mr. Rick Pribyl explained to the BRA that it was muds easieyfor city staff if the reimbursement was on a monthly basis. � Even though there was some concern on the par the ERA, the members agreed to reimburse the City for the contract.,M a monthly basis. NCTION by Mr. Prairie, seconded by Mr. ussen, to direct the Chairperson and the Executive Director to ente nto the development agreement with Moore Lake Associates. OR?ON A VOICE VOlE, ALL V Ate, VICE- aIAIRPERSON SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CUUMD UN AN Y. by Mr. rie, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to authorize the City Council to proceed w' the 51.2 million improvements to Rice Creek Road, ST 1988 1 and 2. VOICE V03!E, ALL V(F= ANEO VICE-CHAIRPERSON SCHNABEL DECLARED THE CKRRIED UNANIKUSLY. Mr. Robertson stated that at the April 4, 1988, City Council meting, the City Council approved a special use permit for this property. In granting the special use permit, the City Council asked that the BRA seriously consider providing some assistance to Mr. Ritterman for improving the outside appearance of the building. 7lhe proposal is to completely renovate the eastern and southern elevation, giving it the appearance of a new building, and substantially contributing to the improved appearance of Central Avenue in this vicinity. Mr. Robertson stated that at the time the HRA. agenda was prepared, they did not have the cost estimates. He received those f ram Mr. Ritterman that afternoon. Mr. Robertson distributed them to the BRA members. Mr. Robertson stated that in his cover letter dated April 14th, Mr. Kitterman stated he has budgeted approximately 560,000 to renovate the office. repair the roof, paint the exterior of the building, and repair the fencing. The next two pages of the exhibit showed an estimate for renovating the exterior of approximately $130,000, and the rest was for the Interior at 897,000. Yz. Robertson stated staff had just received those cost figures that day, but he still needed some direction fram the ERA at this meeting As pointed out in his memo to the HFA dated April 7th, the BRA has provided assistance in the past in the form of a second mortgage. 7he most conventional thing would be to do wing similar to that done for the Shorewood Inn. -4- 4. 3 -D Mr. Robertson stated Mr. Dan Coplan was at the meeting representing Mr. Rittenman who could not be at the meeting. Be stated the property was purchased in April for approximately $240,000; and with the exterior improvements and the interior Improvements, the total value of the property would be approximately 5450, 000. M[. Dan Caplan stated Advance Company was a two division company: (1) A general contractor - they specialize in insurance reconstruction; i.e., disaster reconstruction, fire reconstruction for mobile homes, standard residential homes, commercial property, and their major clients were in the church and school line. A major client was the Archdiocese of the metropolitan area. (2) Advance Carpet and Floors - this division was newly formed in Nov. 1987. There they direct all their business towards the commercial construction as a subcontractor in carpeting and floor coverings. One of the reasons for moving f ram 1800 Central Avenue was for expansion purposes. They need roam for the floor covering division. Since they direct their focus towards building contractors, they need a showroom for their clients. It will not be a showroom for the general public. They have to carry a large inventory of carpeting and floor awerings. The reason for the amount of money being put into the interior of the building was to project the quality that their customers expect to see. Along with that, they are redesigning the interior to go along with the quality of the exterior so they can project a good image to their clientele. Mr. Robertson stated that at this time, staff has not discussed any dollar amount in terms of HPA assistance. The closest analogy was the Shorewood Inn renovation. That was a total market value of $506,000, with a second mortgage of $70,000. The proportion for a second mortgage has-generally been around a 10 :1 to 5 :1 ratio. Ms. Schnabel stated the redevelopment proposed by Mr. Ritterman would certainly be a major improvement to that site which has long been an eyesore. ISe BRA members were in agreement that the BRA should provide some redevelc1hent assistance to Mr. Ritterman for the Midwest Van Building, and they directed staff to proceed in putting together some figures on the amount of assistance with similar terms to what was done for the Shorewood Inn property. ! Mr. Robertson state the BRA was aware, when the county has tax f orf eit f laud, they give irst con ation for the use of the land to the cities. Tfie City of Fricney is being as o provide the land, an empty lot, to the ACMKP for as urban homestead. AMP to take ode of the homes along Bast River Road that has to be condemned be of the widening of East River Road. Their total cost to move that house to undation they will build on this lot and bring the house and lot up to code w roximately $25.000. They .would then con duct a lottery for those candidates ies ) -7- 3 -E WrION by Mr. Meyer, seconded by Ms. el, to approve the NSP Agreement for the uadergronmd electri stems for Rice Creek Road in the amount of $67,914. 3. UPDATE ON REQUEST FOR REDE.'VELORAFM ASSISTANCE FOR MIDWEST VAN & STORACzE BUILDIlG BY FRANK KITlERMAN: Mr. Robertson stated that he had handed out an amendment to the memo from Samantha Orduno dated May 5, 1988 (page 2 of HRA agenda) . This memo indicated the type of assistance the HRA has provided on comparable projects. He stated the assistance for Shorewood was 12 %, but the percentage for Apartments was much higher because those were loans instead of soil correction and write -down. It was important to make that distinction. Mr. Robertson stated staff was rec that the BRA direct the staff to Proceed with the Shorewood mod Staff would recommen approximately a �30,0��-�seoo��d mortgage s 15 year mortgage that has been done before with no payments the first 3 years, interest only the next 2 yeas, and the _ remaining balance, principle, and interest the last 10 yearsl If the` - a9r eman wo a development agreement along those lines. He stated they believe the assistance is justified because it is a redevelopment type situation which they have known they were going to face more frequently. It is in the neighborhood of Moore Lake Commons, across the street from the new fire station, and staff feels it is ivportant to do it to set the tone for the redevelopment of the whole neighborhood. Ms. Schnabel stated this project is more a rehabilitation project than many of the other projects they have participated in. From the information received at the last meeting from Mr. Cbplan, representing Mr. Kitterman, there were a lot of problems in the building with water, electricity, etc., more problems than what the HRA has had to deal with in other projects. There were a nu ber of construction projects which were new construction projects. Shorewood was probably the only one that came close to a rehabilitation project. She had been t=ying to think of ways to define this project so they could get a better handle on the dollar amounts they give to developers; in other words, the rehabilitation of an existing structure that is being updated and brought up to code, versus brand new construction. She was trying to acme up with a way to rationalize or justify this type of assistance. Mr. Robertson stated Mr. Kitterman was proposing extensive exterior remodeling work which was not really needed; but if it was not done, it would look just like an old building that has been repainted. There wre also a lot of interior improvements that needed to be done. -4- 3 -F Mr. Comet's stated the Co missicn had to be careful in setting any kind of precedent. The first project ever cone was Johnson Printing. 7bey tried to maintain that as a benchmark and obviously they were not overly suovessful. Mr. Newman stated there was a significant difference between pure land write -down and a second mortgage. Mr. Oomm s stated he would agree with that. Ms. Schnabel stated that at the last meeting, Mr. Coplan had stated the estimate for the exter�cr ing ovements was $130,000 and the estimate for the interior improvements was $90,000. The HRA members expressed concern that if they did agree to assist Mr. Kitterman, there was m guarantee that all these improvements would be done. Mr. Newnan stated one thing they have to do is come up with a development contract. They can ask the City Assessor to look at the plans and give his estimate on what value he would put on the improvements and what the assessments would be. Mr. Meyer stated that as far as the HRA was concerned, the best thing was to get rid of the eyesore, particularly the exterior appearance. If the HRA should agree to assist Mr. Kitterman, he felt it would behoove Mr. Kitterman, no matter what the amount of assistance is, to be specific on what be will do on the outside of the building, and then maybe the HRA would assist him according to the specific improvements that would be done. Maybe the HRA could also make a shopping list that applied to the inside of the building. Mr. Newman stated that was a good point. They did something similar with Springbrook Apartments where they had the developer provide a page of amenities the City wanted him to provide in order to get the quality the City wanted. He felt it was appropriate for city staff to sit down with Mr. Kitterman and go over his list of improvements item by item, get a description of what will be done, and incorporate those items in the agreement. Mr. Meyer stated he would be comfortable with the level of assistance presented by staff ($27,000), because it was certainly going to help inprvve the area. If they want to talk about justification, he thought one major justification would be to create something much moare pleasing than what is there now. Ms. Schnabel stated she could see spending the money for rehabilitation of an existing property that is rundown or in state of disrepair if it is going to be a larger percentage than what they have normally done, providing the end result is accomplished. It was the concensus of the HRA members that staff work on drafting a development agreement for the members to review at the next meeting. OUSING and REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 4 COMMISSION MEMBERS: . LAWRENCE COMMERS, CHAIRMAN DUANE PRANE VIRGNU1 SCHNABEL WALTER RASMUSSEN JOHN MEYER CITY OF FRIDLEY DATE: April 6, 1989 To: Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Jock Robertson, Executive Director of HRA SUBJECT: Information on University Avenue Corridor Maintenance As a follow -up to our extensive discussion with City Council members at the last meeting, staff has accomplished the following items: 1. Public Works has contacted MnDOT and obtained specifications from their Turf Grass Expert on how to best execute increased maintenance for improved appearance of the Corridor. 2. Two specifications have been prepared and bids are currently being received. Bids are due on these specifications by April 11, 11;00 a.m. (see attached special provisions sheet and location map). The duration of the contract of the maintenance work is scheduled for a seven month period commencing April 15, 1989, and ending November 15, 1989. 3. The staff and legal and financial consultants have researched financing options. HRA funds cannot be used for maintenance; however, they may be used for equipment. Therefore, there are two basic financing options. a. The annual maintenance contract would be financed out of the City of Fridley Is General Fund in an amount proposed by the lowest bidder; or, ff xt _ZD b. The HRA could urchase maintenance e i ment fo'r` P �N P sum estimated not to exceed $40,000, which would then be straight line amortized over a minimum of a four year period. The City of.Fridley would then pay for labor estimated to be six people at $6 /hour plus insurance and materials, which might roughly equal $40,000 on an annual basis. Staff rec mm -ends this option. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: JOCK ROBERTSON 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. (10 12) 671 -3460 FRIDLEY, UN 5 6432 EXT. 117 Q u 4 -B 8-1.1 G=OLMds The term grounds shall mean all WW's as shown on attached map. Prospective bidders should ask for an an -site inspection of the grounds - prior to submission of their bid. 8-1.2 Month A month for the purpose of this agreement shall be a calendar month. 8-1.3 Representative The term "representative" shall mean the individual appointed by the Engineer to cam micate with the Oontractor for the coordination of the maintenance of the grounds, and shall be authorized to act an behalf of the Oontractee. H-1.4 Bering CIOMW Siring cleanup is started as soon as ground conditions and the weather permits. 1. Picking up any fallen tree limbs. 2. Pickup up garbage and trash from all areas. 3. Hand raking around light poles, shrubs and other obstacles as needed. 4. Raking and power blowing leaves off of sidewalks and graveled area 5. Removal of debris from site. B-1.5 Mowing and Trimming All turf areas will be mowed on a weekly schedule to provide a well - manicured �. 1. Large tractor mowers will be used in open areas. 2. Smaller tight areas will be mowed with walk behind mowers. 3. A cutting height of appradmately 2 1/2" will be maintained the growing season. 4. Excess grass clippings will be collected (in specified areas). 5. Power triamers are to be used in areas around light poles, fire hydrants, trees, shrubs, sidewalks and all other obstructions to assure a well - groaned appearance. 6. A power blower will be used to remove all debris away from sidewalks, graveled areas and all other corrwreted areas. 7. Pulling of weeds in landscaped areas. 8. Debris to be picked up on all sites once a week after initial clearn�p. _ The City Inspector will work with the corporate maintenance supervisor in setting one day each week for mowing. This will enable setting a time to work in with any irrigation or other important scheduling in providing the best mowing results. 3 .I. i 8-1.6 Fall Cleanup This will be cmpleted at the end of the seascns between OctdNer 15 and November 15, depending %= weather oaniitians. 1. For last mowing cutting height will be 1 1/2" and excees Clippings will be removed from specifier) areas. 2. All leaves and any other debris will be raked and picked up. 3. All debris and leaves will be removed from site. All ansite questions should be addressed to the crew supervisor, and he is totally responsible to senior managesaent. 8-1.7 Proper Bignage All R/W maintenance procedures to have the proper flashing lights, flags, warning sign as required by MnDO►T. Oontractor to furnish list of all equipment to be used and must include year and model rnzd:)er. 8-1.8 weed Oomtsol Weed control along fences will be a=zplished by using roundup and surf lan as needed. A spring applications of Trimec will be applied to all center medians and boulevards with the riot- of�,ray for i,an control. 8-1.9 Project Areas T<S The areas covered by this project include: A. University Avenue from 45th Avenue to 85th Avenue B. East Moore Take Drive from Old Central to Highway #65 C. East River Road from Mississippi Street to I-694 and from Logan, Parkway to Rickard Road Contractors must familiarize themselves with the project. Areas of concern include ditches, fenoes and landscaped areas. 4 CM OF FRMLET OCHM ED • • i J J OT 1M-.AVE 11ED1 NCLUpEp LA m s EN LATER 61 J t _ �- �` I 4L 1ww160 It if 1.1 if lot �'1` -- _ •� `�:I:LLI� z� �' = s '� to - -} n � P= n � -- _ 5 rn=;p1VtTi'tMso fur — e City of Fridley Viilca vi Slow v6.1 616%se•waw• ^� 6431 Univor3lt7 Avenue N.E. William W. Burns Fridley, Minnosota 55432 Phone (612)571-3450 I j TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY CODNFIL ROM: WILLIAM W. BIIRNS, CITY MANAGER f 1 � 1 DATE: APRIL 31 1989 � 1 � SUBJECT: PARR CONSTRIICTION SETTLEMENT I am happy to report that we've reached a prelimina settlement on the ramp issue with Park Construction. The terms of the settlement are as follows: 1. The City will provide the sum of $18,500 or 1/3 the anticipated cost for tearing out the lower level slab and replacing it. We will seek recovery of this amount from Boarman & Associates, our Architect, and Bossardt /Christenson, the original project manager for the Municipal Center project. 2. Park Construction will provide the remainder of costs associated with the ramp reconstruction. 3. The City will recognize responsibility for delays that forced Park Construction to complete the City Parking Garage more than one month later than what was originally agreed to in our contract with Park Construction. Our share of these costs is $10,701.68. This amount covers the cost of placing and removing blankets, rental of blankets, cost of heating the space above the lower level ramp, the construction: of a ramp enclosure, and the cost of heating concrete. 4. Park Construction is asking for the sum of $3,800 as a reimbursement for Concrete Specialties, Inc. The owner of Concrete Specialties, Kevin Kahmann, requests that he be reimbursed for grading that he did in preparation for the pouring of concrete. While the City feels that Kevin did not acquire the appropriate authorization for the grading before he did it, we will seek to recover the A 5 -A reinburacment from Gammon Brothers. We do not, however, accept any responsibility for payment of $3,600 with the City funds. 5. There are a number of other items for which Kevin Kahmann was promised reimbursement by Jim Eichman. Total cost of these items is $2,162.00. The City will submit these items for review and potential approval by Kraus Anderson. 6. Park Construction recognizes that it will provide direct supervision for the work that is required for reconstruction of the lower level ramp. 7. Park Construction agrees that the rebuilding of the ramp will take two weeks and that the process. will begin as soon as informal approvals have been acquired from the City Council and the HRA. 8. Park agrees further that whenever possible they will do the portions of the ramp removal that are closest to the temporary Police Department headquarters after 4:00 or on Saturday. I have discussed these arrangements with Jock Robertson and John Flora. Additionally, I have spent considerable time in conversations with all of the participants to this controversy and believe that terms of the settlement are fair to the City as well as to the other parties involved. In view of this, I recommend Council's approval. MIB /1a i OUSING and REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY COMMISSION MEMBERS: 6 LAWRENCE COMMERS, CHARMAN DUANE PRARE VIRGINIA SCHNASEL WADER RASMUSSEN JOHN MEYER CITY OF FRIDLEY DATE: April 6, 1989 TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Jock Robertson, Executive Director of HRA SUBJECT: Information on Draft Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) As you can see from the schedule in the attached memo dated December 6, 1988, we are at the review stage of updating our 5 year CIP. Our last updates occurred December 10, 1986 (see "Conceptual Plan" in packet) and November 12, 1987 (see my memo dated November 18, 1987, in packet). The current update has been divided into seven categories: 1. streets 2. storm sewer 3. building /lands 4. water 5. sewer 6. parks 7. private redevelopment assistance Currently, the staff is preparing individual worksheets for each project summarized in the packet. (The HRA currently has no parks projects.) Please give me your comments. A follow -up joint conference with the City Council is currently being scheduled. JR:Is Attachment M -89 -176 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: JOCK ROBERTSON 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. (012) 671 -3480 - FRIDLEY, MN 55432 EXT. 117 MEMORANDUM City of Fridley ® 6431 University Avenue M.B. :1 Fridley, Hinnesots 33432 Phone (612)571 -3460 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT MANAGERS WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER DECEMBER 6, 1988 Office of the City Manager William W. sums FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANNING PROCESS I would like to begin a five year capital improvement planning process that eventually displays capital improvements* in three different ways -- chronologically, by function, and by budget or fund. In order to complete this process before the budgeting season arrives, I am suggesting the following schedule: 1. Request to Department Managers: 12/30/89 2. Departmental review preparation: 1/1/89 - 2/13/89 3. Public Works Director review: 2/13/89 - 3/27/89 (City Manager's review included within this time frame) �,4u 4. Conference review: •3y 5. Public review: 3/28/89 - 4/16/89 6. Further conference consideration: 5/8/89 7. Formal adoption by Council: 5/15/89 There are several other concerns that I will mention at this time: 1. All of this is predicated on the belief that Council must be given their budget work sections sometime during the month of May 2. I will be asking you to prepare departmental goal and objectives during the first quarter of 1989 3. I an assuming that Parks capital improvements will be planned by the Recreation and Natural Resource Department and reviewed by the Parks and Recreation board 4. I an not assuming any other board reviews= perhaps the HRA should be involved. What do you think Jock? 5. I believe that several new funds will be created as a result of this process i.e. water construction fund. Rick, you and I will need to talk about the creation of these funds and the rationale for doing it. Please let me know your reaction to my timetable. I will look forward tom working with you on this worthwhile project. IOUSING and REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 7 COMMISSION MEMBERS: LAWRENCE COMMERS, CHAIRMAN DUANE PRARE VIRGINIA SCHNABEL WALTER RASMUSSEN JOHN MEYER CITY OF FRIDLEY DATE: April 6, 1989 TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Jock Robertson, Executive Director of HRA SUBJECT: Draft HRA Objectives for 1990 Budget As in integral step in the 1990 budget process, I presented Community Development Department's recommended top four 1990 objectives to the City Council at their March 14, 1989, conference meeting (see packet). They were: 1: Provide adequate permanent staff 2. Revise and update the comprehensive plan 3. Increase recycling participation 4. Resolve the Lake Pointe Development Agreement for potential 1990 construction. The first three pertain to the Planning or Building Divisions. The fourth is what we discussed with the City Council on January 30, 1988. Please review and give me your comments. Budget packets are being prepared and reviewed this month. Thank you. JR:ls M -89 -178 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: JOCK ROBERTSON 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. (612) 671 -3460 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 EXT. 117 OUSING and REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY COMMISSION MEMBERS: LAWRENCE COMMERS, CHAIRMAN DUANE PRAT E VMQN1A SCHNABEL WALTER RASMUSSEN JOHN MEYER CITY OF FRIDLEY DATE: April 6, 1989 \ TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority FA... V . FROM: Jock Robertson, Executive Director of HRA Barbara Dacy, Planning Coordinator V � �„ YW ��� SUBJECT: Senior Study � Pat McCullough from Health Planning and Management Inc. (HPMR) will be present at the meeting to present the findings of the attached senior study. The Executive Summary contains the analysis of the demand for senior housing, the socio - demographic profile of Fridley seniors compared to neighboring suburbs and the metropolitan area, a summary of services and housing available in and near the market area and a summary of the findings from the interviews, focus groups and mail survey. The Executive Summary was reviewed by the Planning Commission on April 5 and the Human Resources Commission on April .6 respectively. We will provide their comments to the HRA at Thursday's meeting. This item is submitted as an information item for the HRA; however, we would encourage the HRA to identify any issues /criteria which staff should include in developing policy alternatives to determine the level of financial assistance to senior housing. Summary of Demand for Senior Housing and Recommendations for Development The consultant recommends that the City "commence planning to respond to the alternative housing needs of the seniors in Fridley, if there is a desire to retain seniors in the local community." The consultant estimates an immediate need of an additional 72 units of senior housing, with Sit of those units (59) for moderate and lower income households. In 1993, the consultant estimates that the need will increase to 155 units, with 126 of those units for moderate and lower income households. Soaio- Demographic Profile of the,City of Fridley While the City of Fridley is experiencing an increase in the growth of the elderly population, it is slightly-lower than the rate of growth of the total metropolitan area and our neighboring suburbs. Note also, however, that in 1993_, - -the amount of persons aged 55 -64 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: JOCK ROBERTSON 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. (a 12) 671 -3450 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 EXT. 1117 Senior Study April 6, 1989 Page 2 remains relatively constant. Therefore, while the consultant identifies an immediate demand for elderly housing units, the need for senior housing and services will still be present beyond 1993. In regard to income distribution, survey respondents indicated the following: 35% - less than $15,000 - low income households 32* - $15,000 - $24,999 - moderate income households 33% - $25,000 and above - upper moderate and high income households When age and income are cross tabulated, approximately 64% of the respondents are aged 65 -74. Of this age group, 37% have moderate incomes and 34% have low incomes. Approximately 20% of the respondents were in the 75 -84 age group. Half of the persons in this age group have incomes less than $15,000. Only 10 respondents were in the 85 and over age group, but seven of these respondents have incomes less than $15,000. The consultant is preparing a three criteria tabulation on age, income, and housing preference to determine any strong relationships between these factors. She will present this information at the meeting. Summary of Services and Housing Available In a Near the Market Area The study confirms that the City of Fridley has "a service -rich environment" for seniors. Many services are available through various providers. Many seniors are satisfied with the amount of services provided. Approximately 52% indicated that the senior center was adequate for senior activities. Currently, there are a total of 11 subsidized senior housing projects in surrounding communities providing a total of 878 units. These projects reported no vacancies and many report two year waiting lists. There are 11 market rate projects in the surrounding area which provide a total of 935 units. Only one of these projects is 100% occupied. We have surveyed adjacent communities to determine the level of city assistance given to market rate projects (see attached chart) . Assistance varies from 10% to 23% of the project value. More information on other cities will be available at the meeting. Senior Study April 6, 1989 Page 3 Summary of Findings from Rey Interviews, Focus Groups and Senior Housing Survey The consultant found a consensus of opinion that there is a need for low and moderate income senior housing in the focus groups and personal interviews. The seniors want affordable housing to be available in Fridley so that they can remain in Fridley. Also, they were concerned about the size of apartments, because many felt that the subsidized housing units were too small. Some also endorsed the concept of developing a senior center as part of a senior housing project. The response rate of the mail survey was unusually high and probably indicated the high degree of interest in housing by Fridley seniors. The following summarizes the graphics on pages 24 -27: 1. More than 40% of the respondents preferred a one story housing type with an outside entrance. A multi -story building with • main entrance was preferred second (slightly above 30 %) and • one story structure with a main entrance was third (approximately 25 %). 2. Approximately 45% preferred a one bedroom apartment with a den, about 35% preferred a two bedroom and 20% preferred a one bedroom. 3. About 26% of the respondents stated that they would be willing to pay $400 to $500 per month for rent. 4. Almost 35% of the respondents stated that they would move to senior housing in order to eliminate housekeeping and maintenance responsibilities of a single family home. Health conditions was about equally important. About 28% felt that personal security issues would influence them to move to senior housing. 5. Almost 75% of the respondents stated that they would "yes, maybe" consider moving into a senior housing development in Fridley. Slightly less than 20% stated "yes, definitely" and less than 10% indicated that they were not interested. 6. Approximately 70% of the respondents did not know a time frame for moving into senior housing. About 10% indicated that they would move within one to three years. About the same percentage indicated that they would move over three years. Senior Study April 6, 1989 Page 4 7. About 35% remained neutral on the issue of willingness to pay more taxes for the City to subsidize low income senior housing. Less than 5% strongly agreed with this concept; about 21% agreed and an equal percentage disagreed and about 15% strongly disagreed. Summary The senior housing study has determined a need for low to moderate income housing within the City of Fridley. The survey has also served its purpose as an indication of senior preferences for housing style and housing features. Also indicated was the ability and willingness of the seniors to pay for certain types of housing. The HRA should initiate discussion of potential issues /criteria for staff to develop policy alternatives for the level of financial assistance to senior housing. JR /BD:ls Attachment M -89 -177 8 -C H E H U W O a a z H •7 .A E E y H fA a H z H Rd 8 -D 1 ou C 41 m U dp dp dp dP O V •r1 •n rl r� N I�m>a0 a� >a o g :A y14 0.o ma o0 0 0 0 00 0 O 00 00 qr 00 C; O O sr o E> NN0 N N N 44 U O (\ 10 0 to 0 O C ti O V O 0 m 0 N O N d V). a, 0.1 d 1 d mdo O+ b $$4>•b+C 00 .1400 WOc t~ 0 4) mVC0) H-r1 01 (A O A0. 0-A ••+ > > G) •ri -.I A E V 4J 0 o+ 0 m m -A i t >. U b 3 ++ -A it o 0. 0% ft C 1000 r( m m C 00 cN0 O u m :I •r1 O • +4 H m 44 ri +4 N C x GI 4) 7. 00 O b O N d m -1 UA U-.4 0 0 14 44 r-4 44 m 440 ..A O 1D to O 0 0 000'Om10 0 -.0 m at o cx44 m m C -1 k -00 M o, my m C d+ m 00 m00 n o 0.9 = y 00>, Coro r♦ 0 14 o 911 4J 'U w O iJ N (1) of .00 0) O •4 14 0 14 ON m e m o R C I- 14 1+ N O +1 •.i •p rf V O O O V 44 •r+ 90 C4 - di m 7 N to m ca 0 V i! 1 0) N 90 m -14 m Ir 0 0 V 0Opg44 r. cLCL 1 0 IV U> C 140V 0 Cm r4000 0r•1 Om •000 4 1 IV -4 0 i e03 0 "' 0 9410 Vm0g 41 r!m yy�DC)C•rI0 0 9 4) 0 W- 1-1114 90. QNG)011 wdOdg14 w0. ONa••4U 04) Oath uV).$4 U••+ A H1414 >00 o E 0.0,09044 m 1 1 1 1 cc 00 00 00 +1 00 00 00 cc O O 1` It) O In O In co N V %D Ow In P •r1 9: :. b r♦ a N N N N vw N N N m V c .I 01 N w N 44 fp N I` 0 r� 0.0 of U 14 z V Vam .i3� ago o"e ad 010 mc-1 �o m 0.o+ u0 Q, 4+ 0. 0 °a rAlm- u Baca mm ou .� V �, r4 c o+In c C) 44� fn� m o° aMm 0 4 8 -D I MEMORANDUM DATE: MARCH 311 1989 TO: JOCK ROBERTSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: JAMES FROEHLE, PUBLIC INFORMATION SPECIALIST RE: HRA BROCHURE I will have the prototype of the 1988 year end report for the Fridley HRA to you by your Tuesday deadline, and hopefully by Monday afternoon. The pictures have to be inserted still, but the copy is set unless changes need to be made. Last year's HRA year end report cost about $3,500. A quote indicated that this year's would be about the same, maybe a little less. Since the report was delayed, I will be able to retake the picture of the commission, hopefully all of them will be able to be there. I hope this session will go a little better. It would work best if the pictures are taken before any business discussion is started. I am only going to take a group shot, but I would like to take it in a couple of spots, inside as at the last meeting and outside. I hope to get a picture that is a little interesting, so the reader will read it, instead of pitching it. I 10 .CLAIMS CAT MEETING)