Loading...
HRA 12/14/1995 CANCL - 6293HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING THURSDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1995 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC COPY m 9 bl 043 as to 0 a .� 0 M O o � 'b 0 a0% H a+ m m � R 2 batoi a� -i w b+ -r4 b 0 r+ V a, b O b m 0 (1) a v b tp 0 yr a4w O 0 0 o m dl V H 0 O d1 ed "0 0 • ?1 to a LO H 0 ± >4 0O - .t M 0 > yr O . b .m 0"+ dP W U m V al m 3 tr k O C o M b .z. o-% O "' o� n�Ol m O • QOM >4 .0 tn aq� OA V oa91 ed .. H 4) m to -H b • bb o A Cd0 C 0 m a am • p' C 00 cd $4 cd t • -ri O a° 04 $4 b m 0 ON O .N m >1 r. -rt -� o A $4 to p 0 Omw9 O Q 41 H a r-1 x to o V O d1 0-a ed 0 a. (dooWa + �.m H 1�i 0 0 H 1 rXb O t- mmm a1 a a » O m -•-1 0 W nwA .. .. V a -H 00 p0 O H 0 P, � a 2 ami 14 O O -ri w r-I s.�b U � b O +.) m N ON o �o rn rl dl V H � N 44.0 -� b 0"+ dP W U m 0 0 m .0� O C o O 09 %0 Lin � aq� OA V am b dP -H � � C a am • -m m N A $4 to p O A Chid 9 V O a.mw ed 0 W O > mmm a1 a a O m -•-1 0 W nwA .. .. V a � 00 po, H a � a ii 2A i W oe 0 i c� z 4J to 0 N V $4 b tr to W O a, r�%D r40 m 0 � to rn (1) �l Chi � r-(a-I -� v} $ U -HN �mw m0 -ri W V -r l U N N b+ b+ - -1 rd Amtr# H a0 .000 in -4 010 O W Ob9 00 44' 4J V-4 0 •• 04-) - � .� m -H >41-r4 9 3 -v 0 0 O+ b "1� � + A 00 ° d� � ac 0 v ma a� d1 H 9 N id .r 4J � • m m 43 910 d) -ri cn $1 O a +� 00 V r. b o 0 0 to U ��� � O p, V ri + 0 ° -r i w i A - qr alai Id w °bb o do °i 4J N M 0 O r4 W • � 9 V4 +� -� m -� � -m U 0 ° � q $4 O 0 � UA W Ln al�UA f �0W wrd G) �tkd 0: rZ cd -r4 k�°'O ego -1 V Cq 3 m U A to to m to 0 A U A N 0+ ao p0� N O a a z 2A i W oe 0 i c� z 7 I (Q�� Np N m �y cpp 8 Np v. aD O N �J .- a V of Im N lJ W N .>:• `N,m +A::./9. O r CD 01 1 m Go 40 40 9 7 romp ��p} 1� �Vp �tO1 opD O O�I � 8 ADD W pp��1Np bO O O ,. QI A e^- N N� Cb V I I O 0 , 1 z c� I ri l o app 8 app {pN+y 8 ' pl 01 0 N N � W M 1 NqO Q a C D N I A ova 1 1 ,y, m ri ci N Z lu b a 6 N t7 V 6 i �Y ^ IL< N K 1 Z In 1 o ICZ4 cj .Z u' � 1 LU I g� ���pp�� ��py � ►. dap 1pp I Qp or cr C co QQ 1 LL c I l7 po I I v N (d ID CIL I I 11 > lu i X11,1 I JU - -lea a 0 ON 3i in ^ a os .d 3 Al o A W � � O S- 9 D ,� 3 1996 MEETING DATES HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - 7:30 P.M. Thursday: ♦ January 11th ♦ February 8th ♦ March 14th ♦ April 11th ♦ May 9th ♦ June 13th ♦ July 11th ♦ August 8th ♦ September 12th ♦ October 10th ♦ November 14th ♦ December 12th 4� CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING NOVEMBER 9, 1995 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Commers called the November 9, 1995, Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Larry Commers, Virginia Schnabel, Jim McFarland, John Meyer, Duane Prairie Members Absent: None Others Present: William Burns, Executive Director Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Jim Hoeft, HRA Attorney Jim Casserly, Financial Consultant Rick Pribyl, Finance Director Grant Fernelius, Housing Coordinator Craig Ellestad, Accountant David Zuk, 122 - 102nd Avenue Carl Zuk, 281 Rice Creek Terrace Dave Ristamaki, 18225 Deerwood Lane, Wyoming, Minnesota Oliver Tam, 1160 Fireside Drive Brad Dunham, Whitney Homes Diane Schommer, 543 Janesville Street PPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 14. 1995. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING: MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Prairie, to approve the September 14, 1995, Housing and Redevelopment Authority minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON CONNERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA: I. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CONTRACT FOR PREPARATION OF TRAFFIC, NOISE. AND AIR STUDY, AND PREPARATION OF INDIRECT SOURCE PERMIT APPLICATION 2. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH LARKIN HOFFMAN DALY & LINDGREN, LTD., FOR IMPLEMENTATION SERVICES FOR LAKE POINTE ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS A I HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9. 1995 PAGE 2 3. CONSIDER RESOLUTION PLEDGING INCREMENTS FOR THE SERIES 1995A BOND ISSUE 4. HYDE PARK HOUSING PROGRAM UPDATE 5. HOUSING PROGRAM UPDATE 6. HOUSING REPLACEMENT PLAN AND SCATTER -SITE PROGRAM UPDATE 7. SOUTHWEST QUADRANT BUDGET UPDATE 8. REVENUE AND EXPENSES Mr. Ellestad distributed copies of additional expenses for approval. These additional expenses reflect the pay off of the three -year temporary bonds issued in 1992. These bonds are maturing in December. Mr. Hoeft stated the 1995A bonds are the same type of bond. This is a three -year issue and would have the opportunity for early call and reissue. Mr. Commers asked what expenses are associated with the issuance of these bonds. Mr. Ellestad stated the total allowable expenses budgeted is approximately - $10,000. Mr. Commers asked if there was any payment or principal reduction on the original issuance. Mr. Ellestad stated no, there was only interest. This will be only interest also. NOTION by Mr. Prairie, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to approve the consent agenda as presented. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COM ORO DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CTION ITEMS: 9. CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SALE OF PORTION OF 533 JANESVILLE STREET N.E.. AND APPROVE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE THEREOF NOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7 :35 P.M. HOUSING A REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG.. NOVEMBER 9. 1995 PAGE 3 Mr. Fernelius stated the area in question is approximately 1,375 square feet of the parcel located at 533 Janesville Street. One parcel measuring approximately 20 feet x 50 feet would be conveyed to Mr. John Olson at 538 Kimball Street, and another parcel measuring approximately 15 feet x 25 feet would be conveyed to Mr. John Koehler at 528 Kimball Street. Both parties have indicated an interest to pay the HRA $875.00 ($0.60 per square foot) plus any survey and legal costs involved in the transaction. Mr. Fernelius stated the sale was subject to approval of a Lot Split by the City Council. The Planning Commission approved the Lot Split on October 18, and the request will be considered by the City Council at their next meeting. If approved by the City Council, the sale can proceed. Ms. Schnabel asked if there were any easements through these parcels. Mr. Fernelius stated no. No one was present from the public to comment on this item. NOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Prairie, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COM ORO DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC NEARING CLOSED AT 7:39 P.M. Mr. Commers stated, since there are no objections or comments, he would recommend approval of the request. NOTION by Mr. Prairie, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to approve a Resolution to Approve the Sale of a Portion of the Property at 533 Janesville Street N.E. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COM ORO DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SALE OF SIX LOTS, LOCATED AT 5720 POLK STREET 5973 - 3RD STREET, 5981 - 3RD STREET,_ 5924 -2ND STREET 533 JANESVILLE STREET, AND 623 LAFAYETTE STREET AND APPROVE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SALE THEREOF NOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COM ORO DECLARED THE NOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:42 P.M. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 4 Mr. Fernelius stated six sites were advertised for sale under the. scattered -site program. Staff advertised for bids in the Twin Cities Builders Association and also placed signs on the lots. From that, staff received approximately 30 inquiries. Staff has received offers on the lots, as follows: 5720 Polk Street - Four offers were received. The high bidder is Whitney Homes with a bid of $20,000. 5924 - 2nd Street - Three offers were received. The high bidder is Tam's Inc. with a bid of $12,000. 533 Janesville Street - Five offers were received. The high bidder is Diane Schommer with a bid of $19,500. 5973 - 3rd Street - Three offers were received. The high bidder is Tam's Inc. with a bid of $6,000. 5981 - 3rd Street - Three offers were received. There was a tie in the bidding with Tam's Inc. and Whitney Homes both bidding $4,000. 623 Lafayette Street - Three offers were received. The high bidder is Tam's Inc. with a bid of $18,500. Mr. Fernelius stated, at this point, the high bidders will need to execute a sale and development agreement with the HRA within 45 days or December 24, 1995; and provide proof of a letter of credit. The HRA would then approve the sale and development agreements either in December or January. After the agreements are approved, each bidder would then need to submit their house plans and site plans for the HRA to review and approve. The bidders then must finalize their construction schedule and close on the actual sale of the lots in order to have title to the property. They would then proceed to get the building permits and any other approvals required. Work can then begin with the understanding that the work is to be completed by June 30, 1996. Mr. Fernelius stated staff's recommendation is to award the sale of the properties to the high bidders subject to each bidder agreeing to a sale and development agreement with the HRA by December 24, 1995. Staff also recommends the HRA reject the offers received for 5981 - 3rd Street and that this property be rebid with a deadline of December 1, 1995. Mr. Conners asked the location of this lot. Mr. Fernelius stated both the 3rd Street properties are located near the slip -off ramp from University onto 3rd Street. The lots back up to University Avenue. This is a high traffic area and there are several multi - family propertios in that area. There is HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 5 a concern on the part of the bidders that the house values may not be very high. The bids reflect this concern. Mr. Meyer stated the HRA has had experience with Whitney Homes. He asked Mr. Fernelius what staff knew about the other high bidders. Mr. Fernelius stated he had done some checking. Mr. Tam is the owner of Tam's Rice Bowl in Fridley. He has built a number of homes, one of which was local. He has submitted some drawings of the potential house plans that he would offer to prospective buyers. He is licensed by the State of Minnesota as a building contractor, and he has provided a list of his materials providers and subcontractors. He is in the process of obtaining a letter of credit from Northeast State Bank. He should be getting approval on that in the next few weeks. If the award is made tonight, he will have 45 days to provide that letter of credit and firm up the house plans to be submitted for approval. Mr. Fernelius stated Ms. Schommer is working with Four Diamond Builders based in Coon Rapids. They have built 15 homes in the two years they have been in business in the $90,000 to $145,000 price range in the northern suburbs. They are a licensed building contractor. According to the City's building official, they have a good reputation. Staff believes all bidders who have submitted bids are responsible bidders. Mr. Meyer asked if, in the case of Ms. Schommer, they were dealing with an individual or a company. Mr. Fernelius stated they were dealing with an individual in terms of a development agreement. The builder will be providing a letter of credit on Ms. Schommer's behalf. She has a building contractor set up who would like to proceed. The builder has submitted plans for a split entry home that he would like the BRA to approve so they can get the building permit and start construction this fall. Mr. Meyer asked why the builder was not the bidder rather than the individual. Mr. Fernelius stated this was not set up as a requirement. The bids were open to anyone who could meet the requirements. The biggest requirement was a letter of credit. Whether the individual or builder provides that letter of credit, the HRA has the security it needs and Ms. Schommer has met the requirements in that regard. Mr. Prairie asked if both names could be put on the agreement. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 6 Mr. Hoeft stated they could but Ms. Schommer will be the only party that is liable. The builder may want to be included on those documents because he will be the one putting out the cash. Mr. Commers stated he presumed Ms. Schommer would live on the property. She has a builder to build her home. He did not see that as being unusual. Mr. Meyer asked, if we are giving a builder property to build a home, why enter into an agreement with an individual. Mr. Hoeft stated the homeowner is buying the lot. Mr. McFarland stated the HRA is protected by the letter of credit and the mortgage. The HRA has ample collateral. Mr. Hoeft stated the bidder must meet all the requirements. Mr. Meyer asked why staff recommended the property at 5981 - 3rd Street not be sold. Mr. Fernelius stated this was done to get a higher price and to resolve the issue of who will actually get the lot. Mr. Meyer stated there is also the option of selecting another bidder than the high bidder. If we wish to award the lot to Habitat for Humanity for $1.00, do we have the option of doing that? Mr. Fernelius stated the guidelines adopted by the HRA indicates the bids would be awarded to the highest, most responsible bidder. Mr. Hoeft stated, because we have determined through staff's investigation that the two bidders who tied for high bid are responsible, we cannot just kick them out and award the bid to someone else. We have the opportunity to reject the bids in this case because there is a tie and then the HRA could make a policy decision that, instead of putting this property on the floor, they want to donate the property or sell the property for $1.00 to Habitat to Humanity. He did not feel the HRA could do that at this point because that is not how the bids were presented. Mr. Meyer stated, if we have determined a lot is not highly esteemed by the bidders and there is a possibility for Habitat for Humanity coming in and building a house, he would be o interested in considering something like that. Mr. Hoeft stated this has done that a number of times in Columbia Heights where they have a number of new houses under the same type of development contract. They have had some success there. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 7_ Mr. Commers asked for comments from the public. Mr. Dunham stated Whitney Homes has the financing approved at the same bank so they do not need the 45 days with respect to their bid on 5981 - 3rd Street. They have a letter of credit for all the lots for which they have bid. He felt Whitney Homes had done a good job on those lots they have done. He provided pictures of the homes built on these lots. He would like to suggest they get the second lot. Mr. Commers stated he was not sure that would make-a difference in terms of the criteria. They have had good experience dealing with Whitney Homes. Mr. Dunham stated he makes the case that Whitney Homes is responsible and ready. They have all the licenses, the letter of credit, and would not need the 45 days. Mr. Prairie stated the rebid date is December 1, which is relatively soon. Mr. Hoeft stated, with regard to the responsibility factor, staff has made its investigation. On that information, we have made a determination that Tam and Whitney are responsible bidders. While he understands Whitney Homes' position, Whitney must remember they were in the same position as Tam's in the last round of bids because we had no experience with them either. Whitney proved to work out well, and the City had success in dealing with them. We do have criteria that allows Tam's Inc. to provide the financing and security in 45 days. If they did not do that and because the award is contingent, the HRA would not then have to rebid these properties but could move down to the next highest responsible bidder. At that point, they could award the bid to Whitney. Because Tam's Inc. in a responsible bidder, we*have to allow them to meet the 45 day requirements. If they do not perform, then we have a history to use for any other lots that come up subsequently. Mr. Conners asked if there were any other lots available through the scattered -site program. Mr. Fernelius stated one lot is now available. The goal for next year is to have the same number as this year. Through the housing replacement program, they can do up to ten lots per year. Mr. Tam stated his family has been in Fridley for 23 years and operates a restaurant here. They have been operating the restaurant all that time. That shows they are just as responsible as any others in the community. He appreciated all the help and assistance from the City over the years. f HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 8 Ms. Schommer stated she made the bid herself. The lot is next door to her mother's house. She has been pre- approved. She has checked the builder. She has given Mr. Fernelius the plans. The house plan that she picked is already built in Elk River, if anyone would like to look at it. She has all the financing and every is set to go. They plan to close on February 29, if everything goes well. She did not know what else she would need. There were no additional comments from the public. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Prairie, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:03 P.M. Mr. Commers stated staff's recommendation was included in the agenda packet. He asked to make a recommendation to award the lots to the five highest bidders and to withdraw the lot at 5981 - 3rd Street from consideration of the award. Mr. Fernelius distributed a revised resolution which reflects the this information. OTION by Mr: Meyer, seconded by Mr. McFarland, to approve a Resolution Authorizing of Sale of Real Property. Mr. Meyer stated he assumed the omission of 5981 - 3rd Street becomes a mute point and that this does not need to be mentioned in the resolution. Mr. Prairie asked if they needed to move to rebid this property by a certain date. Mr. Fernelius stated this could be done by a separate motion. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Prairie, to authorize the rebidding of the property located at 5981 - 3rd Street with the bids to be submitted by December 1, 1995. Mr. Meyer asked if there was any interest in assigning this lot to Habitat for Humanity. Mr. Prairie felt this would have to be done before the property was open for bids. Ms. Dacy stated that a Councilmember had suggested the same idea. Staff concluded that, for the purpose of this process, it would HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 9 be best to continue the process as outlined and to rebid the property. However, if the HRA wants to identify some of the lots in the scattered -site program for low to moderate income housing program and assign the property to Habitat for Humanity, that is within the HRA ,1s purview. Habitat for Humanity has completed two homes in the City. The first building constructed is in need of maintenance. The second home is newer. Because we have gone so far in this process, staff recommends to continue as outlined. In the future, it is certainly an option. As a word of caution with the housing replacement program, staff wants to include those in the replacement program in order to get the property back on the tax rolls. Lots for Habitat for Humanity would not be tax exempt. She felt a policy statement should be developed. There are costs involved with acquisition and demolition. Mr. Prairie asked, if the HRA were to do this next year, would you want to identify a parcel before bidding. Ms. Dacy stated yes. Mr. Commers stated, if the property were sold through that program, the taxes would not be affected. Ms. Dacy stated this was correct. Habitat for Humanity indicated to Mr. Fernelius when they made their proposal that they would need at least.one year to construct a home in order to-put together the volunteer effort. If the City wants to pursue that, perhaps they could find a neighborhood.to sponsor a lot and some of the work. This is an opportunity for neighborhood involvement. Staff has not, at this point, had time to put a policy together. Mr. Commers asked if there was any lot criteria. required. Mr. Hoeft stated there are currently two properties in Columbia Heights under contract. Habitat for Humanity wants a one -year contract for one property and a two -year contract for the other. They were interested in two other lots but there were some soil concerns so they did reject those two lots. Mr. Meyer stated the HRA was not out nearly as much money on a $4,000 lot as they would be next year on a $15,000 or $20,000 lot. If there is any interest in giving a less expensive lot to Habitat for Humanity, the HRA would not lose as much money. Ms. Schnabel stated they must also consider the cost to acquire the lot and for demolition. This has nothing to do with what the bid is worth. Mr. Meyer stated the HRA goes through similar expenses on all the lots. If the lot is given to HaRRJtat,, there would not be extra HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 10 costs incurred. Mr. Commers stated he felt, in this instance, they were too far into the process to do this. Ms. Dacy stated staff's reason for not recommending that as part of this process is that we have responsible bidders ahead of Habitat. Mr. Hoeft stated in this case there is not a problem because of the tie bid so it does provide an opportunity to make a policy decision before rebidding. He agrees they may be too far into the process. From a policy standpoint and from his experience with Habitat, it may be better to approach them now with regard to some lots we may have available in the spring or summer because we can then have things up and running with them. They sometimes require two years to get something on the lot. The HRA must decide if they want property to sit empty for a period of time or do they.want to work with Habitat to get something in place. Mr. Meyer stated he would assume that, if they made a bid, they are ready to go. They may still want two years. Are we saying we would preclude any interest in Habitat operation because it may be one or two years? Regarding the statement that we are too far into the process, we are rejecting bids and want rebids by December 1. It is rather odd for us to claim we are too far down the process to reverse our tracks. He brings it up for discussion. It seems that this is an ideal time and an ideal lot to do something for Habitat. Ms. Dacy stated she did not disagree, but there is a policy issue that the HRA and City Council needs to establish. In meeting with Hyde Park residents, staff has told residents this would be a part of the scattered -site program and that market rate housing would be constructed. Staff has made some assurances to the neighborhood. Staff continues to recommend that the lot be rebid and that staff be directed to establish a policy for the future. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON CONNERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. CONSIDER RESOLUTION MODIFYING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CREATING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 14 Ms. Dacy stated the property is south of 73rd Avenue. The tract is two lots consisting of approximately 6 acres. The frontage road to the west is the University Avenue service road and 73rd is to the north. Mr. John Allen of Industrial Equities is proposing a 87,600 square foot, one -story building which would span from west to east across the property with loading docks to HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9. 1995 PAGE _11 the south. The visitor and employee parking would be to the north side of the building. Ms. Dacy stated this project has been discussed previously. Mr. Casserly met with Mr. Dennis Zylla, who manages Northco Business Partnership. Soil tests have found soil problems throughout the site. Because of these soil problems, they will have to excavate a significant amount of soil from the site and replace it. The most recent figures indicate that up to 27,000 yards of fill would be imported into the site. Mr. Casserly had worked on a soil correction assistance package for 8% to 10% of the project costs which would be approximately $280,000 to $350,000. The assistance would be split with 50% a grant and 50% a loan. In order to provide the assistance, an economic development district is proposed. The site is in a project area. If the BRA extends the life of the district, it would go to the year 2006. The City and the HRA could choose to terminate the district early or 2001 when the grant is recouped. Ms. Dacy stated staff recommends the HRA approve the proposed resolution authorizing modification to the project area and to create a tax increment financing district. Mr. Commers asked what the allocation was between the funds. Is the movement of the storm sewer included in this? Ms. Dacy stated yes, that is included. A storm sewer bisects the site. Northco installed the storm sewer when the property was originally platted anticipating two buildings..-The storm sewers would be rerouted so the water goes into a pond toward the south of the site, through a pipe to another pond to the north, and then into the storm sewer system. Rice Creek Watershed District prefers the proposed plan because it takes water through ponds for treatment. The soil correction costs are approximately $350,000 and the storm sewer costs are approximately $40,000. Mr. Prairie asked if there was another TIP district close to this site. Ms. Dacy stated yes. The BRA created a TIP district in 1989 on the site proposed for the liquor store. Northco was looking at an office development but did not proceed. That is TIP district #10. Mr. Commers stated the HRA does not at this time have to make a decision as to the life of the district. Can the EI A make it full term and then reduce the amount of time in the future? Mr. Casserly stated yes. TIP districts are usually set up for the maximum duration. . HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 12 Mr. Commers asked for a cash flow analysis. Mr. Casserly stated page 11M of the agenda packet shows the cash flow analysis. On the estimated tax increment, there is $0.5 million on this project. He would recommend the HRA keep about 20% of the increment for program expenses which leaves available increment of $420,000 for project expenses. They need to work out the details of the development agreement which would come back to the HRA in December. After working out the details of the development agreement, he thought the level of assistance would be approximately $300,000. One -half would be a loan and one -half a grant. The loan would be repaid over a period of time. Generally, the first two years accrue interest but defer it, add it to the principal, and amortize the principal over eight years. The project would be fully constructed in'1996 and fully assessed in 1997. They would pay full taxes in 1998. Mr. Casserly stated they would have nine tax increment years. Because of the nature of the district, the last year or two generates hardly any tax increment. This is very much like the project the HRA was doing eight to ten years ago. MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to approve a Resolution Modifying the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Tax Increment Financing Nos.. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 to Reflect Increased Project Costs Within Redevelopment Project No. 1, and Creating Tax Increment Financing District No. 14 and Adopting a Tax Increment Financing Plan Relating Thereto. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 12. CONSIDER RESOLUTION TO APPROVE CONTRACT FOR EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATIONS WITH MEPC Mr. Commers stated the HRA reviewed a draft of this contract earlier. He asked Ms. Casserly to review the changes that had been made. Mr. Casserly stated there are only a few changes. They have tried to establish some market values. They have been talking about an office tract and a smaller commercial tract. This agreement tries to lay the groundwork for MEPC to promote and develop the site and to try to continue with the HRA's original concept that it would help with parking treatments if they got the right kind of density. This agreement recognizes that the first building that goes in, particularly on the office tract, is probably going to have surface parking. The next building that goes in must have some type of structured parking and will probably have to share the .structured parking with the first HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 13 building. In order to get the first building going in the office tract, they want to encourage MEPC to be as aggressive as they can. We set the parameters that it must be a minimum of three stories. We have had a lot of discussion about this. They are looking to move as quickly as they can but not to build structured parking until the first building goes in. They would sell the site for the first building and then put that purchase price in reserve to put those funds back into the property to help with the structured parking. Mr. Casserly stated the rest of the agreement talks about setting the time frame for such things as developing focus groups, marketing plans, reports back, etc. Mr. Casserly stated one other issue that came up which they stressed is that, on the commercial tract, MEPC feels strongly they need to develop a substantial portion of the commercial tract to provide the amenities to get the kinds of office development they want for the office tract. If the commercial tract is developed first, it is with the office tract in mind and in support of a high quality office development. Mr. Prairie asked for an example of the type of amenities that would be provided. Mr. Casserly stated MEPC had mentioned a banking facility, restaurant, the potential of have a day care facility, and /or the potential of a hotel and lodging facility. Mr. Prairie thought this would be a short, select list. Mr. Casserly stated the amenities would'not be retail, but rather service oriented activities. They want to develop focus groups where they invite people in, talk about the development they would like to see, and what kind of amenities are needed to maximize the development. MEPC then would develop a master plan for the site. This will be back before the HRA numerous times. Mr. Casserly stated, at this point, it is important to get MEPC going. They have a willingness to provide support. We do have them on a pretty good time frame. It takes some time to put these things together. From what he has seen, we appear to be in a good development mode these days. There does seem to an increasing need for space and, hopefully, we will be able to take advantage of the low interest rates and the increased need. The goal is to get a first office building under construction by July 1, 1997. If they cannot start by that date, we can get time added on to that. The idea is to have the plans and programs put together next year. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 14 Mr. Prairie stated the HRA's original time frame and MEPC's time frame were different. Does this agreement reflect a time frame that is somewhere in between these? Mr. Casserly stated yes. MEPC was looking for two full years. We were looking for a maximum of 1.5 years. We ended up with 1.5 years with an ability to extend it for 90 days if they have signed agreements, etc. Ms. Schnabel stated page 12I stated the agreement shall terminate if a redevelopment contract is not executed by July 1, 1997. Is that this contract? Mr. Casserly stated no. This is a preliminary agreement. We need to enter into a more formal, extensive agreement with them. This agreement protects them and lays out some of the broad terms on how we want the site developed and what they need to do. We will need an extensive redevelopment contract but it is premature to do that at this point. Ms. Schnabel stated this agreement says the construction needs to start on the same day as the termination of the contract. That seems tight. Mr. Casserly stated the construction date could be moved forward. He left that in there because this will be negotiated as we go along. He sees a contract in place by the end of next year. If things are not going well, he would not want to take the time to work through a contract if they are not making progress. Mr. Commers stated he understands there is a write down of the land with them assuming responsibility for structured parking. We have to define the amount of structured parking. Mr. Casserly stated this was correct. Parking will be a part of the redevelopment agreement. Mr. Casserly stated he is concerned that there is an open ended commitment by the HRA for the infrastructure. Mr. Casserly stated the HRA has the ultimate approval over that. We have to agree to the master plan. If the master plan that we agree to has some reconfiguration of load or utilities, we have to take that into account. The only reason we would want to change is for a better plan. It is open ended, but we have control over that. .Mr. Meyer asked Mr. Casserly to define Class A office space. Mr. Casserly stated this is difficult to define. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9. 1995 PAGE 15 Mr. Meyer stated the agreement has something defined as Class A office space but no definition of what Class A is. The building can be up to three stories or 50,000 square feet. That is a small building. This is also saying they can forget the office space for some indefinite time and put up commercial. These things worry him. Once the first office building is constructed and there may be some commercial, the commercial that is put in is dependent on a viable office space already in. The statement that they need the commercial in first does not ring true to him. You do not put in a bank or day care center or restaurant, etc., on empty land. You wait until there are people there. If they were to do this, what is our risk? Mr. Prairie stated the commercial would bother him more than the Class A part because we are going to have a chance to look at what goes in there. However, having commercial before the office seems backward. Mr. Commers stated they could end up with something on the commercial tract that is marginal and nothing on the office tract. Mr. Meyer stated the commercial could also attract something less than Class A. Mr. Casserly stated in the original design we could not develop commercial until a certain percentage of the office tract had been developed or under contract. Of the items negotiated, that was the one MEPC felt the strongest about. It seemed to him you would not want to do the commercial tract until you saw the type of office development. MEPC said it was probably just the opposite. The way they can attract high quality tenants is if they are developing simultaneously parts of the commercial tract so the facilities will be available. MEPC is saying that has been their experience. Mr. Casserly stated they need to sort through the process. There is a master plan in process. The HRA has a tremendous amount of control over what goes in there. Ms. Dacy stated, in the S -2 district, the HRA and City Council must approve any use. If MEPC wanted a day care center first, they would have to do a plat and other issues, and come back here to get HRA approval. The HRA determines if the use is consistent with the goals of the redevelopment plan. The issue of what comes first will be discussed. Mr. Meyer asked, if the HRA has a veto, what is the sense of this document. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995_ PAGE 16 Mr. Casserly stated this document protects them. They will be spending money out -of- pocket plus their time. This document is a loose agreement. We could spend more time defining and working through issues. We are still not exactly sure we can accomplish what we want to see on the site. The process being suggested in this document is what has to evolve over the next six months and how we are going to accomplish these things. There is a process where the HRA is to do a complete review on or about July 1, 1996. Mr. Prairie stated this is fine as long as this does not mislead MEPC as to what our intentions are. Mr. Commers asked if a statement could be added to Section 2.2.(E) to the effect that this is subject to discussion and mutual agreement of the HRA. Mr. Casserly stated a statement could be more specific and state this is "subject to individual approval by the HRA." Mr. Meyer expressed concerns that this would still give the developer the right to first develop the commercial amenities before having the office use. Mr. Commers stated that is why he recommended modifying the paragraph giving MEPC the authority to develop the commercial tract but making it clear to let them know that we retain very specific project -by- project veto power without having to base it on some kind of reasonable standards. If we do not like it, we should be able to say no even though in other respects it may be appropriate. Ms. Schnabel asked if they wanted to say the commercial could not be developed until they have provided some number of tenants for an office building. Mr. Commers stated that is the issue. MEPC states they need some commercial to get the office. Ms. Schnabel stated she understood they wanted to do the commercial and office simultaneously. Mr. Commers suggested that, once MEPC gets a certain number of square feet released such as 50,000 square feet, the HRA would then release a specified amount of commercial. Is that too complicated? Mr. Casserly stated he did not know how many uses could be made on the site. He thought MEPC was saying they want the best commercial amenities to attract the best kind of office user. If that is left to the HRA's discretion, then I think the HRA would HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 17 be reasonably secure. There will be a consensus between MEPC and the HRA about the amenities promoted. He could put in language to be sure this is at your discretion and control. Mr. Burns suggested the language, "While the office tract is a priority, the HRA will consider commercial development that the developer feels is essential for attracting users of office space." Mr. Prairie stated he did not think having a first class hotel on the site would be a problem. A hotel could function on its own. He was not sure about a restaurant. After that, the issue gets more unclear. MEPC might want to market what they have up front. He could not see a day care center going in first. Mr. Burns stated he was also concerned. He was not sure of the City Council and public's reaction to developing a restaurant before an office development. Mr. Meyer thought Mr. Burns suggestion was good. If we are going to go to a restaurant, are we going to do something by itself on 40 acres where there may be an office? That is not the sort of thing that would attract an office. Mr. Commers asked Mr. Casserly to discuss this with MEPC and see where it leads and then come back. Mr. Casserly asked, because of time, would it be possible for representatives of the HRA to review the language with the understanding that there will be subsequent language that addresses this concern. He would like to revise the document and have it signed in the next few days. Mr. Burns stated he would like to get started. He suggested staff amend the document or the HRA give staff some flexibility where the HRA can agree to everything else but this particular section and give Mr. Casserly, Mr. Commers, and him permission to work out the specific language prior to signing the document. Mr. Meyer asked if anyone is concerned about a 50,000 square foot, three -story building that is defined as loosely as Class A. Mr. Burns stated we went into the process in the very beginning and established these criteria. That is what we told MEPC we wanted as a minimum. If we start changing that now, he thought they would be guilty of reneging on their terms. Mr. Commers agreed that 50,000 square feet is not a large building. Usually these buildings have a 25,000 or 40,000 square foot footprint. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 18 Ms. Schnabel asked if Mr. Meyer was not comfortable with the controls the HRA has. Mr. Meyer stated he was not comfortable in the sense that the commercial can go first. There should be no allowance that the commercial go first. The office should come first and then the commercial. Mr. Burns made the point which gives the HRA authority to negotiate. He thought they should take a stand that the commercial cannot go first. Mr. Burns stated they can try that and he thought that was reasonable. Mr. Meyer stated, regarding the 50,000 square feet, the HRA did have a commitment to MEPC last March so that is acceptable. Mr. Commers suggested that Mr. Casserly or Mr. Burns talk to MEPC and see what-the best is that they can do. At that point, call each HRA member and take a vote over the .phone as to whether the HRA can support it. If the HRA does support, he will sign the contract before the next meeting. While everyone is well intentioned about what will happen, we also want to be careful. _Mr. Burns asked the HRA to approve the agreement as it stands with the exception of Section 2.2.(E) which would'be amended and ,a poll of the members be taken. MOTION by Mr. Meyer, seconded by Mr. McFarland, to approve a Resolution Authorizing Execution and Delivery of a Contract for Executive Negotiations By and Between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority In and For the City of Fridley and MEPC American Properties, Inc., subject to renegotiation of Section 2.2.(E) and approval of the language by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Dacy provided an example of a brochure and advertisement for the Lake Pointe site. INFORMATION ITEMS: 13. SOUTHWEST OUADRANT UPDATE Ms. Dacy stated the City Council has attempted to talk about the senior condominium component on several occasions but were unable to'reach a consensus. Since that meeting, the City Council has been unable to discuss this item for a variety of reasons. Staff will try to discuss this issue with the City Council within the next ten days. She will provide an update at the next meeting. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 19 Ms. Schnabel stated she had attended the Council meeting where the senior housing component was discussed. Initially, four Councilmembers wanted to keep the condominiums and one was in favor of doing something else. When the meeting was over, this had changed to two Councilmembers who still wanted to keep the condominiums as proposed and three who were willing to consider something else. Mr. Burns stated part of what makes this difficult is that the Councilmembers are waiting for the property condemnation process to end and to be more certain of the numbers. Staff also needs to develop other alternatives to the senior housing issue. Ms. Schnabel stated two Councilmembers had been approached by a number of senior citizens who wanted to have housing, so the Council feels they have made a commitment despite the fact that the dollar amount has changed. They talked about other senior housing in the City but the Council felt this was a good location. Mr. Commers stated he had read the article included in the agenda packet and asked what it was they were saying. Ms. Dacy stated-they are . trying to say that Rottlund - is working with a senior housing developer on a project in Minnetonka.- What the author does not understand is the Minnetonka project is for rental apartments for seniors. In Fridley, we are talking about owner occupied. Ms. Dacy was also not sure if the author was referring to the empty nest housing when talking about costs. Mr. Commers stated he interpreted the article as saying Rottlund can build 115 senior housing units in Minnetonka but they cannot do so in Fridley unless we subsidize the project. Ms. Dacy stated the development they are talking about is rental. The $115,000 mentioned in the article might be applying to the proposed townhomes. Mr. Commers asked staff to call the development representative and see what they are talking about for this project. Mr. Commers stated he understands that, if they get the Cherrywood Apartments for the same per unit costs as the Keefe award, we will have to add another $250,000 to our.budget rather than what we have been concerned about. Ms. Dacy stated this is correct. The Keefe award was not as high as originally thought. They are appealing on the Suh condemnation. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 20 OTHER BUSINESS: 14. FRANK'S USED CAR SITE Mr. Burns stated the HRA authorized at the June meeting the purchase of the Frank's Used Car site. At that time, staff did not anticipate purchasing the two lots south of the estate. If we would acquire those two lots to the south of Frank's and the additional two adjacent residential lots, perhaps they could create a residential development in this area. This would total 2.4 acres for possible development. He would like to see a townhouse development. Ms. Dacy would like to see single family homes and /or senior housing. He made some preliminary contacts with the owners of these properties. He talked with the representatives of the Gabrelcik estate and negotiated a price for the two additional properties. Mr. Burns stated an addendum was added to the purchase agreement that would require the heirs to take care of the environmental issues including capping a well, removing fuel tanks, cleaning up the ground around the tanks, removing fluorescent lights and ballasts, and removing asbestos, if any. They have capped the well, removed fluorescent lighting.and ballasts, removed the tanks and cleaned the soil.. Mr. Burns understands the heirs are about to get a closure letter. The only thing holding this up is the MPCA has concerns.about whether the soil has been disposed of properly. Mr. Burns stated, in negotiating with the Gabrelcik's for the two additional lots, he agreed the City could take responsibility for asbestos removal.out of the purchase agreement. The attorney for the family came back with a second addendum in response. There is no disagreement in principle, but there is some disagreement over the language in the second addendum. Mr. Burns asked the HRA to approve the purchase of the Frank's Used Car site and the two additional vacant lots for $165,000 with the understanding that,-.before closing on the property, we will have a closure statement and assuming they can work out the language included in the second addendum. Mr. Commers asked if the dispute was over the economics. Mr. Burns stated no. The dispute is in the interpretation of the language. If they get a closure statement from the MPCA, it should be all right. Mr. McFarland asked if they would be assuming liability for any lingering pollution. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9. 1995 PAGE 21 Mr. Burns stated that is something the attorney would have to clarify. Mr. McFarland stated, in his experience, they had been given a closure statement from the MPCA but it said that, if ground were ever broken, it would have to be re- examined and any pollution found, if any, would have to be cleaned up before construction could begin. He also did not know if the petrol fund transfers from owner to owner. Mr. Commers stated, if we get a contingent closure letter, that opens it up again when starting construction. Mr. Prairie stated this would be at the top of the list of the things for the attorney to consider. Mr. Burns stated the document stated the seller is responsible for capping the existing well, removal of any tanks -on the property, removal of all contaminated soil, removal of all fluorescent light bulbs and ballast, removal of all groundwater contamination, and asbestos if any. The seller is to.obtain the appropriate documentation as to the completion of these items. Our attorney felt this covers it, but we did waive the asbestos portion. It is possible that, in the future, someone could open the ground and find more pollution after we had acquired the property. We would then be responsible. He thought they were eligible to apply for petrol funds in that instance. . Mr. Casserly stated this was correct. As long as it is eligible to be reimbursed by the petrol fund, it does not matter who is the owner. A governmental agency may get a larger reimbursement than the private section. Mr. Meyer stated, if we find pollution at a later time, we are still liable. Mr. McFarland stated, if the petrol fund transfers, the liability is only lot. He was told the petrol fund does not go along with it. It is possible it will transfer after it has been determined. Mr. Burns stated, in either case, we are not trying to protect ourselves from this type of event. We are saying the family needs to clean up what is there and demonstrate this has been done through a closure statement. We are not trying to claim indemnification from future contamination. If the HRA wants that, this will need to be negotiated. Mr. Casserly stated, under the current law, the prior owners and everyone who had contributed to the problem are all liable. If the HRA purchases a site that has pollution on it and the HRA HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9. 1995 PAGE 22 does not worsen it, the HRA is not liable. The problem is that you have a site you cannot do anything with. An HRA does not take on the same liability as other purchasers would take on, but you would have a site you could not use. Mr. Casserly stated, regarding the petrol fund, if there is contamination and it is cleaned up to the degree required in the work plan, there is nothing more one can do. If you find contamination subsequent to closure, that is no different than any purchaser trying to develop a site. Mr. McFarland stated, if you have access to the petrol fund, this fund will make the cost manageable. If the fund will follow to the new owner, it will protect to 90% of the costs. Mr. Casserly stated the only issue becomes whether the contamination is eligible. If it is, it would be reimbursed. Mr. Burns stated the Gabrelcik's have done the clean up. The clean up has been approved. The only issue is the approval of the disposal of the soil removed from the site. The family . expects to receive the letter in a few days. The family would like to close on or before December 1. Mr. Commers asked Mr. Burns. to ask the.attorney to tell us that, . if something happens when ground is broken, we have the petrol fund. Mr. Burns stated he had discussed this with Liesch and Associates, and he thought Mr. Davis had said we were protected by the petrol fund as long as it was a petroleum contamination. Mr. Commers stated, if the MPCA letter is contingent, it creates other issues. Mr. Burns stated he will not sign if anything other than a non- contingent letter is received. NOTION by Mr. Meyer, seconded by Mr. Prairie, to authorize the Executive Director to enter into a purchase agreement for $165,000 for the Frank's Used Car site and two adjacent vacant lots, contingent upon receipt of a satisfactory closure letter from the MPCA. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON CONNERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 15. J. R. AUTO SITE Ms. Dacy stated the owner of JR's Auto on University Avenue contacted her regarding the sale of this property. Mr. Schuur, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 23 the owner, contacted her to determine if the HRA was interested in evaluating the purchase of the property. Mr. Schuur was aware that the HRA had looked at the property earlier as part of a redevelopment plan. Ms. Dacy asked the HRA for permission to further investigate the possible acquisition and to discuss other items such as a Phase I audit. Ms. Dacy stated there are four parcels available. The building is in poor condition. The property may be eligible for tax increment financing. Perhaps staff should investigate this if the HRA would like to use this property in conjunction with the Frank's Used Car site. Perhaps staff could check into this further and come back at the next meetings. Mr. Commers asked what issue would arise if, for example, the HRA would take out a duplex or a residential home. Ms. Dacy stated staff would need to update the housing plan. The City Council recently elected to participate in the Livable Communities Act, which means we are adopting principles that support a balanced housing supply. We have to submit an action plan by June 30,- 1996, and initiate and adopt a fair housing ordinance. Mr. Commers' asked, if a duplex was taken out, -would they have to replace that housing. Ms. Dacy stated there is no state law requirement, but-the attorney is saying to adopt a plan as to how you do provide affordable housing. Mr. Hoeft stated the City of Columbia Heights is looking to establish criteria for a certain percentage of affordable housing so that there is not necessarily replacement housing as long as you do not fall below a certain percentage of affordable housing. Ms. Schnabel asked what was located next to the duplex going east. Ms. Dacy stated there is an apartment building, vacant land, and then single family homes. Mr. Commers asked staff to continue to talking with Mr. Schuur. Mr. Commers stated the HRA has many thing going on requiring up front cash. He would like to see a periodic cash flow statement and asked Mr. Pribyl to provide that information. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MTG., NOVEMBER 9, 1995 PAGE 24 MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to adjourn the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON CONNERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE NOVEMBER 90 19950 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:05 P.M. Respectfully submitted, -&071111 dqX4 l Lavonn Cooper ld u' Recording Secretary • P S I G N— I N S H E E T HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, . November 9, 1995 Name Address /Business lam- �ZZ ioL 0" /AL�f-z beer , ocx4 f�►v (.v o,•v��r� Hyde Park Housing Programs Through 11/30/95 Single Family Programs /Services Applications Received Building Analysis HRA Matching Deferred Loans CEE Home Improvement Loans CEE Home Energy Loans Owner's Equity Rental Property Programs /Services Applications Received Building Analysis HRA Matching Deferred Loans CEE Rental Rehab & Energy Loans Owner's Equity YTD YTD No. Amount 15 N/A 14 N/A Sub —Total 1 3 $9,331 12 11 Sub —Total (- 4 $36,000 Grand Totals 7 $45,331 1 -- TO: FRIDLEY H.R.A FROM: CITY OF FRIDLEY RE: BILLING FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATING EXPENSES NOVEMBER 1995 NOVEMB,Fi.... ADMINISTRATIVE BILLING: ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD COMPUTER OVERHEAD (For Micro & Mini computers) TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE BILLING: OPERATING EXPENSES: US WEST —TELEPHONE SERVICE STAR TRIBUNE — AD REMODEL COUNSELOR BENEFITS EXPENSES: CITY OF FRIDLEY — HEALTH INS CITY OF FRIDLEY — DENTAL INS CITY OF FRIDLEY — LIFE INS Account #'s for HRA's Use Account #'s for City's Use 14,967.25 101 - 0000 - 341 -1200 267.83 101 - 0000 - 336 -3000 194.42 101 - 0000 - 336 -3000 460-0000-430-4107 15.429.50 •••• • •cry. TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES: 262 -0000 -219 -1001 262 -0000- 219 -1100 262 -0000 -219 -1200 TOTAL BENEFITS EXPENSES 13.48 236 -0000- 336 -3000 540.00 236- 0000 - 336 -3000 553.48 0.00 236 -0000- 219 -1001 0.00 236 -0000- 219 -1100 0.00 236 -0000- 219 -1200 0.00 TOTAL EXPENDITURES — NOVEMBER 1995 jjjj&& File : 1123DATAWRAITIF195BILL.wk1 Details 5 � N . W K C7 W am . z . , r , , a O , a , , W ne r , M O O a M 1� O O O O O O O O O O O M O O END M N O M �O O O O O O O O_ O a N C N O� P {f01 Y01 i0A If01 IlO �? �pTp N O ' r ' Ln It N M P O O Ln EO W O O M co Im M . U , W . �1 �t , � r . U , . W . O , z . a , 2 i i i N Y N 4. N O M E/ �+ N p 0 M id + M E (A c i C C OCD 0 0 C y U. L L L J r N W ' , C N m Y uuO C 7 7 7 L 7 W J i O d M m d D _ O U V V V W W C , , 41i J N 4+ o OC P a+ J J C f� ON. 1 � Q €.. �i C C C Qr C �p in J C 4 :3 i i P 'g 's O O O O O C O r w W , ' r d O O 0 0 m L 0 N M d N d Y d ) W W L > > = d' O CC N N h O O O O O p O of z 2 z 2 z W N . 9z . W O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O DU Co O . O O O O Ifl O O O O O O O � 0 z •o u► - o . ,.NOn . ,n . ,n . �.np , . r , .o . °0 0 0 0 0 _c m r M M M MM M M M Q •NO �} P `- , . M ie1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U , O O O O O O O O O O Cl O O O O O O O O Q . O O O O O O O O O O O O M M U N N N It It N N N N N N ED M %0 N O I� O N 1O N 1O N N > . Y , z ma. O •- \ . W � Eppp . W . p n 0E O O N C ' y 0 O O O O Q �0 1p O O O � SW = L a-- 1�1 LU W J . W , {ppfl,, .W Ifl 0 0 Ifs O� .A O� P V P <i P Ln & 9 Ln U, O N a- C O O O O. O W ECi Cf 0 ` `EE �' MO` N� in 2 P _ a- O me U O . O U . N m N N N i!i Q , z N . O r O O O N O N g O` N E O` N E O` N E O` E O O d O O O O O_ O O `ai W , NC OLL a- O O 4 O O� W L M a� to z o O O OLL O OLL GLL pLL O 0 O 0 Om 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O ne � 0 0 nn r , 5A N N W d' C7 W Q m d� z cc ae R W OC a Lu E O J F� ul�9Y N W J O R le CL Q = as-- z_d_ N W �U S � tuS W N J Q D CS Im N d a m d OC L V M P O a er . N P p N � O _\ O O p N ••O ca O_ W J OC J 1�1 dW W a� C7 r OC 1- co of U N O •• 2U0 LU 19 � � M Ge IL d F 2 H d W U W OC F U W 0 O K d O F d U N W GC W m z r- Z U Q Y Q W I Y d i W U W OC W i O N N Z . O i i OC i O U 2 H Lu N O 2 � H i 1. �O N P O In O 1 N Ln %0 S .n •O P s v v ti N �t 'S v M rD N N N 9 V M M Y C C C GI d 0/ Q1 L L L e i� a- L L L \ \ \ \ 7 7 7 MO O O v a v v r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I - - - 1 M Y V Y V V M 41 41 0 d 41 y 4. N 4J s 41 Gl 41 E1 CO) N co N N H N O O O O O O O z z z a z z z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N M M M M M M M O O O O O O O N O P M N M I� . oo. OO. . . . 10 � N N N N 10 N 10 N N N N 9 9 N 9 9 O r O O O O O O EEEEELEE r \ \ \ \ \ \ \ O MMO O MO O O MO r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r C2 O O O O O O O T J N N Q o {: f- O 8 N CC t7 P F• F U Y U W S U a a 1- Z ul Z O W C W OC Ol < r Y i7 S O LU �37J J W O 2 ddb OOO�OO�CmmMO MlrO OIt U1 i-OO OI-It molt OrO OW00000 Z MONOOMOOr1��ONOON�t �pO01f1W 1A 1f1NN M1AO �t p.000�A0 rONOOP.00 M1A O40 co C, Go lA 00NONN000W0 NOOOUIWOO�t �tP O.C"3 0 Ol�r N M �Q Md'P UINWOUI O-f�W OOr-N r'tr NrOf-NOr MrU\N X000. NMO�N Nr CO �t IO a- ION rM .- 1\ Mr�O In --LA r.- C t� W Ica- gm y H i y U F Of.- WX C. E 1- N ~ CL ca W Wy 6 < Nr y O W < K1-2 O U 2t07 ~ O >Z 2 M U 2 Ca Z xx O O CA y V►a.. LLOGOC S F 1--LLW .Z.. 10i C4 LL. IX F QNPF UI _ XWJHW O W U WCtL W �Z FaF OFWy CI -eCNO _2 f/l fQ7W O�� ZC=7 D C7 �t y O O a C: •+ ZF -JZOC ZIA Q J LOU, Z.yi F-V1 aQJdJIWa. 43 2 WCC p «QO <� ' CJ OM yC. W UFZ«+U J JOQ>- w U NFCWC J.i•.JUW W2 WZW EWES. W Wm F ��4- ►+,y01 -- W_JU W .-. ). it J -+WJOJ U I.-J U 3.- In d ce J-J JyLLNS i c ce OCZW LL Z w m W pp C: p -.1 e qq O'L -J Z y w W< OC W Cj V ; C-JJy- JyOGWZ JaOQJ I.- JMW/AW I-- mOOCCWOCU= CZ Z��Z/WLyuZ"�OWC IZIIOSySZ UCYWOW�.Zi C�Q,1I4W.O�WppSy 0 ZpppT.., CO -j W i WO «0000CS�G2UMIN us OJ aOWNCm3dLLOd�S <Q�m081-2-.- O O m m d a y d IX y < / i ' �p qp ` 0�. ppO��^�ppgq�pppppOppp�pp.,pNp,�pMy^^y���O ^^W�ppO��Ipp�,�pWp..pppp....oOoa- NM�tW.op01,�f�f of Wm i � � PEti2Fi�A�fNlp'- f l�.(�I�I��f�f�f�f�1�00WWW0SaWA _ U1U1U1 U\U1U1 &n LM U1 U1111 U1 U► U1U1 Ul&n U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1M U1 C.7 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 1 i Z J W W S .Q-. 1.- N y U y m � . W .. y 1O- U O ?' OC F- U K J N U W W W d O I- U' O F- i y �a y Cm: 22ZyF<- C[ U« zc .i.ON F LLZQ y Q W UI ►. LLy y W ?y W W y12 Q W W~ ZH�W00MW WLLLLLL $�-. WO JLLZ LLI -y2<J LL. U. a2 HC. UA �Z I --J HO2000 tZ7JJ W Z OC ! -C21 -0 w0 w AN! S a ►- OO _W Y a— 2 U Ild 1--W ! S ZQ0 OC'1N<90-7 u C~H1 -S 1-U< H FJ� !-Y tQi FHZW >- Z ZJUZ=Z C.W C, yF- .- .WZ) -WOU I-- i m�miOCH�i< --C:Q U Z��m gwoum NQ=pyys(A UU ZOZ 2 QSS t Jif 2t-Y<Z UO O ZF- JZSWYW> -F-J aa=ii S 0:UyF -J Z�' WWy CCC��i O W0C I- ZppZFZC ;YHW W y�y ZgQSWyF IALU (70 W .Z.�00028Zyrr O ac IUy WySp�3CK _ OOC:2UC. UlW OC .+Ci000yyJpC S � GLLLL►+ i <OC W W 2-+OC Z <S!J'r OOC OC C: <y2 � � ZZ$�+yLL�<�i-«r0 iJE LLLL r Q m (i W LL LLLLLLmZZ < CW O�PAPO�PPPO. O�PPO�PPPPO�O�O .O�O�O�PPPPPO�O�C►.�`.K)�O� ra- r�- rr�- re -re-- - r- rrrr— rrr -r-r r r— e- r- - - r -r—a- WCSWOWOOOWO��CJ�O �—�- e- r'—� -r-� --rte'- r N N N N N N N N N N �- N N N N N N N N NNE rrr rr rrrrrr rr rr r�- rr� -r�.� 5Cr - N O N 3 P zi 0 O 1- W C7 OC MEWORANDUM ® Municipal Center 6431 University Avenue Northeast William C. Hunt Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Assistant to the City Manager CmrOF (612) 572 -3507 FMDLEY FAX: (612) 571 -1287 Memo to: Barbara Dacy, Director of Community Development From: William C. Hunt, Assistant to the City Manager f Subject: Resolution Authorizing Pay Increase for HRA Employees Dater December 5, 1995 Since the HRA is a distinct entity it will be necessary for its board to authorize salary increases for employees. I have adapted the resolution we used for the Fridley City Council to apply to the needs of the HRA. In order to provide salary increases effective January 1, 1996 it will be necessary for the HRA to take action on this matter at its meeting of December 14, 1995. I recommend that you present this matter for action at the above mentioned meeting. If I can be of any further assistance let me know.. WCHIjb RESOLUTION NO. HRA -1995 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN COMPENSATION FOR FRIDLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EMPLOYEES FOR THE 1996 CALENDAR YEAR WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) to provide fair and equitable compensation to Employees within budgetary constraints; and WHEREAS, the Fridley HRA intends to comply with the Minnesota Local Government Pay Equity Act; and WHEREAS, Staff of the City of Fridley have reviewed the HRA's financial position as well as economic indicators and compensation adjustments by comparable employers; and WHEREAS, an adjustment of employee salaries and benefits is warranted; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority that the following adjustments be authorized for employees of the Fridley HRA, with the exception of employees who are members of a bargaining unit, effective January 1, 1996: I. A general increase of 2.0 percent in employee salaries. 2. Mileage reimbursement at the rate of $0.30 per mile. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1995. WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR WILLIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK j.10 r _ Community Development Department HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY City of Fridley DATE: December 8, 1995 TO: William Burns, Executive Director of HRA FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Grant Fernelius, Housing Coordinator SUBJECT: Establish Public Hearing for Sale of 5981 - 3rd Street N.E. and 683 Glencoe Street N.E. 5981 - 3rd Street N.E. At the November HRA meeting, two bids were received for this lot. Both bidders submitted identical $4,000 offers and in response the HRA rejected both bids and requested new bids. Bids were due on December 1, 1995 and the same parties submitted offers which are shown below. Bidder Offer security Tams, Inc. $5,100 $500 Cashier's Check Whitney Homes $5,050 $500 Bank Money Order Although the bids are less than the lot at 5973 - 3rd Street N.E., staff feels that the bid is acceptable given the location, surrounding market values, and the risk involved. The HRA can't award the bid until this time staff is requesting that hearing for January 11, 1996. 683 Glencoe Street N.E. a public hearing is held. At the HRA establish a public As you may recall, the HRA acquired this property in the Fall of 1994 and subsequently tore down the existing dwelling and a garage. The lot is 50' x 110' in dimension which is too small under City Code for building a new home. The parcel is adjacent to several homes which are in fairly good condition and not suitable for acquisition. Over the course of the last several months, staff has been evaluating options on what to do with this property since it is i Vacant Lots; 5981 - 3rd Street and 683 Glencoe Street December 8, 1995 Page 2 nonbuildable. Because of its location and the configuration of adjacent parcels, the only feasible option would be to sell the entire lot to the neighbor at 681 Glencoe Street N.E. A map of the site is attached for your reference. Staff contacted a relative of the owner, Joe Paulzine, and received a positive response about buying the property. Mr. Paulzine is disabled and has limited financial resources to purchase the property, however, his mother has agreed to give him the funds to buy the lot. After several conversations with Berma Paulzine, she has agreed to pay $3,000 for the property. This price represents about $.54 per square foot, which is about average for what the HRA has received in the past for its nonbuildable residential lots. Recommendation Award of these properties cannot be made until a public hearing has been conducted. At this time, staff recommends that the HRA establish a public hearing for January 11, 1996. GF/ M -95 -607 7A e 4 655 635 `f��� 141 MI 11[W 533 �y� t f V�f (m) (m 600 ) (m) SIJ II 595 142 , 510 M 5m t= f 5 51 $5¢ (N) � am 532 t) lbl 590 584 gip 1 11 t) 561 A 63 581 (mil 616 (a) (9 91 I (p01 t f I' S� 1 I s) 510 ol 670 665 �l IN+ 1 l as l 601 570 � a' I awl 11 A I �) 580 (a l l 1 a 1 t 03 t I (a) 576 I 1 65 N1 � I�1 m) I 1 5Z1 a (p, 60 l l I , , 2, (f) I 663 M 6!1 ( ( a7) 5W (ail Ml mo ) so (w) 6+a1 all 565 1 I *) I b'µ11 77) (n) (wo) I a<1 oll 1 V) n 5� W, s47 a ) 1 (05 1 ) cNJ c 7B t gOD►4, (m! ( m Y l p 1 SZI Community Development Department HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY City of Fridley DATE: December 8, 1995 TO: William Burns, Executive Director of HRA FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director ,Grant Fernelius, Housing Coordinator SUBJECT: Consider Approval of Sale and Development Agreements and House Plans with Buyers of Vacant Lots In order to proceed with the development of the five lots sold this Fall, the HRA must approve separate development agreements with each buyer. In addition, the HRA has the ability to review and approve the buyer's house plans before they start construction. This provision insures the BRA that the homes meet the minimum design guidelines of the program. A list of these guidelines is attached. Development Agreements Each buyer is required to execute a Sale and Development Agreement with the HRA. Copies of the agreements are attached. The contracts are identical to what has been used in the past. The major provisions of the agreement will be as follows: 1. Buyer will construct a single - family home with a minimum sales price of $80,000 on or before June 30, 1996. 2. Buyer must submit house plans for HRA approval on or before February 26, 1996. 3. Buyer shall pay $500 down at time of bid for the lot and pay the balance owing at the time the house is completed. To ensure repayment Buyer shall sign a loan note and mortgage running in favor of the HRA. The loan will accrue interest at 5% until it is paid in full. 4. Buyer shall provide a letter of credit in the amount of $50,000 per house to be constructed. Buyer must provide letter of credit on or before December 24, 1995. Development Contract December 8, 1995 Page 2 5. In the event of default the HRA has the ability to call the loan due and payable; foreclose the mortgage; and /or draw upon the letter of credit to complete the house. House Plans Of the three buyers, Oliver Tam and Diane Schommer have prepared house plans which are ready for HRA review. Copies of their house plans are attached. Below is a brief description of the homes. House #1: 533 Janesville Street N.E. Buyer: Diane Schommer House Price: $94,800 (Lot - $19,500) House design: Modified 2 story design, 2 bedrooms, full bath, and living room on upper level; entry foyer, kitchen and eating area on main level; unfinished lower level (suitable for family room, future bedroom, den and utility room). Total square footage = 1539. Two car attached garage. Exterior Vinyl siding with brick veneer on lower half Materials: of front. Contractor: Four Diamond Builders Houses #2 -#4: 5924 - 2nd Street N.E. 5973 - 3rd Street N.E. 623 Lafayette Street NE Buyer: Oliver Tam d /b /a Tams, Inc. Proposed House Price: 5924 - 2nd Street NE (est. $95,000) 5973.- 3rd Street NE (est. $85,000) 623 Lafayette St. NE (est. 100,000) Home Design: Split entry design, 2 bedrooms, 1 bath, kitchen /dining room, and living room on upper level; utility room and unfinished space on lower level. Total square footage = 1,951. Two car attached garage. Exterior Vinyl siding with brick. Materials: Contractor: Tams, Inc. Development Contract December 8, 1995 Page 3 Whitney Homes anticipates that it will have house plans ready by the January 1996 HRA meeting. Recommendation Staff recommends that the HRA approve Sale and Development Agreements for Diane Schommer, Tams, Inc., and Whitney Homes. In addition, staff also recommends that the HRA approve the house plan designs as submitted by Diane Schommer. and Tams, Inc. GF/ M -95 -608 DRAFT 12 -4 -95 SALE & DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATING TO 533 Janesville Street BY AND BETWEEN THE FRIDLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DIANE SCHOMMER f T SALE & DEVELOPMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 199_, by and between the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority, (hereinafter called the "HRA"), and Diane Schoomer (hereinafter called the "Developer "); WITNESSETH THAT, in the joint and mutual exercise of their powers and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties recite and agree as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The property. The HRA now owns the property described in the attached Exhibit "A ", (the "Property "), located in the City of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota. 1.02. Facilities and Project. The Developer, in accordance with HRA approval, plans to construct or cause to be constructed on the Property a single family home. The Developer shall provide the HRA with a copy of its plans and specifications showing details on the style, exterior architectural features, materials, color selections, etc. of the home to be constructed, which plans and specifications shall be submitted to the HRA for review and approval prior to the issuance of any building permits on the Property.. Section 2. Sale /Purchase of ProReerty. 2.01. Sale. The HRA agrees to sell the Property to Developer and the Developer agrees to purchase the Property from the HRA for the purchase price of $19,500.00. Developer will purchase the Property by Quit Claim Deed with a minimum down payment of $ Soo. O0 . The balance of $ 19.000. 00 will be carried on a purchase money mortgage (Exhibit B) at 5 %, which mortgage and interest will be due and payable no later than -Tw1Q- 30, 199 1p, at which time, if Developer is in full compliance with this agreement, Developer will be provided with a Warranty Deed and Satisfaction of Mortgage. Section 3. Developer's Representations. The Developer hereby represents, warrants and covenants to the HRA that as of the date of this agreement the statements set forth in this section are true and correct. 3.01. Litigation. There are no pending or, to the knowledge of the Developer, threatened actions or proceedings before any court or administrative agency which will materially adversely affect the financial condition of the Developer or the ability of the Developer to perform its obligations under this Agreement. 3.02. Compliance. The Developer will comply with and duly and promptly perform all of its obligations under this Agreement and all related documents and instruments. Developer will also comply with all State and local codes /ordinances. Section 4. Developer's Undertakings. 4.01. Site Grading. Developer will be responsible for establishing and adhering to site grading plans, which plans shall be submitted to the HRA on or before Vebvva 4lv 11%. The grading plans shall at a minimum specify house t pe, finish grades and drainage pattern. 4.02 New Construction. Developer shall be solely responsible for the construction of the single family home on the Property by TVhe.30, 14tRo The minimum value of said home shall be $80,000.00. 4.03. Floor Plan. Developer will be responsible for submitting to the HRA, and obtaining pre - approval of the floor plans -and front elevations of the home proposed to be constructed on the Property. Said pre - approval must be obtained before the HRA will issue any building permits to Developer. 4.04. Landscaping. Developer will provide a $500.00 yard /landscaping package included in the price of the home. Said package will specify, at a minimum, tree sizes /type /number, sodded yards, foundation plantings /beds, and any necessary retaining walls. 4.05. Fees and Charges. The Developer will pay, when due, all permit fees, connection charges, user charges or other charges lawfully imposed by the City with respect to the Property. section 5. City's Undertakings. 5.01. Existing Improvements. The City will be responsible for removing any existing structure, foundation and debris from the Property and will assure that all water and sewer services are stubbed to the boulevard at no cost to Developer. Section 6. Security. 6.01. Letter of Credit. The Developer will provide the HRA with a Letter of Credit in an amount equal to the anticipated cost of the improvements to be made on the Property. The form of the Letter of Credit shall be as set forth in Exhibit C (or substantially similar as determined in the sole discretion of the HRA). The Developer will be responsible for submitting the Letter of Credit to the HRA for approval as to form and amount, which approval must be obtained before any building permits will issue. As improvements are made to the property, the HRA agrees to negotiate with Developer certain incremental reductions in and to said Letter of Credit based upon the value of the improvements made. Section 7. Default. The failure to meet any condition of this Agreement shall be an event of default. 7.01. Remedies. If an event of default occurs and is not cured within 30 days of receiving written notice of said default, the HRA may take one or more of the following actions: a. suspend performance under this Agreement; b. terminate the Agreement, thereby rendering void any promises or approvals contained in this Agreement; c. draw upon the Letter of Credit as referenced in paragraph 6 herein; d. foreclose upon the mortgage referenced herein as provided by Minnesota law. Section S. Notices. All notices hereunder shall be in writing and either delivered personally or mailed by certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the parties at the following addresses: PM Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority 6431 University Ave. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Attention: Grant Fernelius Developer Diane Schoomer IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the HRA has caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officers; and the Developer has executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. 91 FRIDLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By: William W. Burns Its: Executive Director By: Lawrence R. Commers Its: Chairperson DEVELOPER Diane Schoomer STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ANOKA ) On this ' day of , 199_, before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, appeared to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that he is William W. Burns named in the foregoing instrument, the Executive Director of the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and that this instrument was signed as his free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss . COUNTY OF ANOKA ) On this day of , 199_, before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, appeared to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that he is Lawrence R. Commers named in the foregoing instrument, the Chairperson of the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and that this instrument was signed as his free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA SS. COUNTY OF ANOKA On this day of within and for said County, being by me duly sworn, did in the foregoing instrument, as her free act and deed. f: \mimic \jdh \schoomer.hra 199_, before me, a Notary Public appeared to me personally known, who, say that she is Diane Schoomer named and that this instrument was signed Notary Public lu EXHIBIT "A" Lots 15, 16 and 17, Block E, RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS, Anoka County, Minnesota. . . . . . . . . . . . . L 1M !!t�l!!�III: Jill NO HIII jl HIM _At i $�a 0\ Ira, It J T% lit ja • IL ti Z41-� ii 2� ::7, 4- -A 0 1 IV- P-1 Cs J $�a 0\ Ira, It J T% lit ja • IL ti Z41-� ii 2� ::7, 4- -A 0 IM 1-a4 4 ------ - - - - -- \gX Lr L4- MN 12 L7 L4— 4L 11 4;) IS' sw lit, v —. kc. :I 9 TV I -K �4 Uj 7— 1 Le o y � � �' 42 � °� tit: 8L I , IJN� ` � lll�tllllllll �, Immiumul A T. DRAFT 12 -4 -95 SALE & DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATING TO 5720 Polk Street BY AND BETWEEN THE FRIDLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND WHITNEY HOMES, INC. SALE & DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 199_, by and between the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority, (hereinafter called the "HRA"), and Whitney Homes, Inc. (hereinafter called the "Developer "); WITNESSETH THAT, in the joint and mutual exercise of their powers and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties recite and agree as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The property. The HRA now owns the property described in the attached Exhibit "A ", (the "Property "), located in the City of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota. 1.02. Facilities and Project. The Developer, in accordance with HRA approval, plans to construct or cause to be constructed on the Property a single family home. The Developer shall provide the HRA with a copy of its plans and specifications showing details on the style, exterior architectural features, materials, color selections, etc. of the home to be constructed,. which plans and specifications shall be submitted to the HRA for review and approval prior to the issuance of any building permits on the Property. Section 2. Sale /Purchase of Property. 2.01. Sale. The HRA agrees to sell the Property to Developer and the Developer agrees to purchase the Property from the HRA for the purchase price of $20,000.00. Developer will purchase the Property by Quit Claim Deed with a minimum down payment of $ 00.00 . The balance of $19.500.00 will be carried on a purchase money mortgage (Exhibit B) at S which mortgage and interest will be due and payable no later than Tvl-C 3Oi 1°19(0, at which time, if Developer is in full compliance with this agreement, Developer will be provided with a Warranty Deed and Satisfaction of Mortgage. Section 3. Developer's Representations. The Developer hereby represents, warrants and covenants to the HRA that as of the date of this agreement the statements set forth in this section are true and correct. 3.01. No Disability. The Developer is a corporation, authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota. 1*611I 3. 02. Litl knowledge of the before any court adversely affect of the Developer obligations under ation. There are no pending or, to the Developer, threatened actions or proceedings or administrative agency which will materially the financial condition, business or operation or the ability of the Developer to perform its r this Agreement. 3.03. Compliance. The Developer will comply with and duly and promptly perform all of its obligations under this Agreement and all related documents and instruments. Developer will also comply with all State and local codes /ordinances. Section 4. Developer's Undertakings. 4.01. Site Grading. Developer will be responsible for establishing and adhering to site grading plans, which plans shall be submitted to the HRA on or before rebvua lgR(o . The grading plans shall at a minimum specify house t )(Pe, finish grades and drainage pattern. 4.02 New Construction. Developer shall be solely responsible for the construction, marketing and sale of the single family home on the Property by lbk -,C3o� MIR(p . The minimum selling price of said home shall be $80,000.00. 4.03. Floor Plan. Developer will be responsible for submitting to the HRA, and obtaining pre - approval. of the floor plans and front elevations of the home proposed to be constructed on the Property. Said pre- approval must be obtained before the HRA will issue any building permits to Developer. 4.04. Landscaping. Developer will provide a $500.00 yard /landscaping package included in the sale price of the home. Said package will specify, at a minimum, tree sizes /type /number, sodded yards, foundation plantings /beds, and any necessary retaining walls. 4.05. Fees and Charges. The Developer will pay, when due, all permit fees, connection charges, user charges or other charges lawfully imposed by the City with respect to the Property. Section S. City's Undertakings. 5.01. Existing Improvements. The City will be responsible for removing any existing structure, foundation and debris from the Property and will assure that all water and sewer services are stubbed to the boulevard at no cost to Developer. �i section 6. security. 6.01. Letter of Credit. The Developer will provide the HRA with a Letter of Credit in an amount equal to the anticipated cost of the improvements to be made on the Property. The form of the Letter of Credit shall be as set forth in Exhibit C (or substantially similar as determined in the sole discretion of the HRA). The Developer will be responsible for submitting the Letter of Credit to the HRA for approval as to form and amount, which approval must be obtained before any building permits will issue. As improvements are made to the property, the HRA agrees to negotiate with Developer certain incremental reductions in and to said Letter of Credit based upon the value of the improvements made. Section 7. Default. The failure to meet any condition of this Agreement shall be an event of default. 7.01. Remedies. If an event of default occurs and is not cured within 30 days of receiving written notice of said default, the HRA may take one or more of the following actions: a. suspend performance under this Agreement; b. terminate the Agreement, thereby rendering void any promises or approvals contained in this Agreement; c. draw upon the Letter of Credit as referenced in paragraph 6 herein; d. foreclose upon the mortgage referenced herein as provided by Minnesota law. Section 8. Notices. All notices hereunder shall be in writing and either delivered personally or mailed by certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the parties at the following addresses: MW Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority 6431 University Ave. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Attention: Grant Fernelius Developer Whitney Homes, Inc. 311 Sunrise Lane Champlin, MN 55316 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the HRA has caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officers; and the Developer has executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. FRIDLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By: William W.'Burns Its: Executive Director By: Lawrence R. Commers Its: Chairperson WHITNEY HOMES, INC. By: Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ANOKA ) On this day of , 199_, before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, appeared to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that he is William W. Burns named in the foregoing instrument, the Executive Director of the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and that this instrument was signed as his free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ANOKA ) On this day of 199_, before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, appeared to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that he is Lawrence R. Commers named in the foregoing instrument, the Chairperson of the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and that this instrument was signed as his free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY-OF ANOKA ) On this day of , 199_, before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, appeared to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that he is named in the foregoing instrument, the of Whitney Homes, Inc., a corporation under the laws of the of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation, and that this instrument was signed as his free act and deed. f: \municUdh\polkdevk.hra E90 M Notary Public State EXHIBIT '•A" Lot 3, Block 2, Sexter Addition, except the South 35 feet thereof. DRAFT 12 -4 -95 SALE & DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATING TO 5924 - 2nd Street 5973 - 3rd Street 623 Lafayette Street BY AND BETWEEN THE FRIDLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY D TAM'S, INC. U& SALE & DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 199_, by and between the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority, (hereinafter called the "HRA"), and Tam's, Inc. (hereinafter called the "Developer "); WITNESSETH THAT, in the joint and mutual exercise of their powers and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties recite and agree as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The property. The HRA now owns the property described in the attached Exhibit "A ", (the "Property "), located in the City of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota. 1.02. Facilities and Project. The Developer, in accordance with HRA approval, plans to construct or cause to be constructed on the Property single family homes. The Developer shall provide the HRA with a copy of its plans and specifications showing details on the style, exterior architectural features, materials, color selections, etc. of each home to be.constructed, which plans and specifications shall be submitted to-the HRA for review and approval prior to the issuance of any building permits on the Property. Section 2. Sale /Purchase of Property. 2.01. Sale. The HRA agrees to sell the Property to Developer and the Developer agrees to purchase the Property from the HRA for the purchase price of $36,500.00. Developer will purchase the Property by Quit Claim Deed with a minimum down payment of $ 4500. 00 . The balance of $35,000. 00 will be carried on a purchase money mortgage (Exhibit B) at S %,-which mortgage and interest will be due and payable no later than Tuvw- 30, Ick"I(p, at which time, if Developer is in full compliance with this agreement, Developer will be provided with Warranty Deeds and Partial Releases /Satisfaction of Mortgage. Section 3. Developer's Representations. The Developer hereby represents, warrants and covenants to the HRA that as of the date of this agreement the statements set forth in this section are true and correct. 3.01. No Disability. The Developer is a corporation, authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota. ja 3.02. Litj knowledge of the before any court adversely affect of the Developer obligations under ration. There are no pending or, to the Developer, threatened actions or proceedings or administrative agency which will materially the financial condition, business or operation or the ability of the Developer to perform its r this Agreement. 3.03. Compliance. The Developer will comply with and duly and promptly perform all of its obligations under this Agreement and all related documents and instruments. Developer will also comply with all State and local codes /ordinances. Section 4. Develover's Undertakinas. 4.01. Site Grading. Developer will be responsible for establishing and adhering to site grading plans, which plans shall be submitted to the HRA on or before Qbrg4 ?l0 LO . The grading plans shall at a minimum specify house type, finish grades and drainage pattern. 4.02 New Construction. Developer shall be solely responsible for the construction, marketing and sale of the single family homes on the Property by ?vKc 30. 101%o . The minimum selling price of each home shall be $80;000.00. 4.03. Floor Plan. Developer will be responsible for submitting to the HRA, and obtaining pre - approval of the floor plans and front elevations of the homes proposed to be constructed on the Property. Said pre - approval must be obtained before the HRA will issue any building permits to Developer. 4.04. Landscaping. Developer will provide a $500.00 yard /landscaping package included in the sale price of each home. Said package will specify, at a minimum, tree sizes /type /number, sodded yards, foundation plantings /beds, and any necessary retaining walls. 4.05. Fees and Charges. The Developer will pay, when due, all permit fees, connection charges, user charges or other charges lawfully imposed by the City with respect to the Property. Section S. City's Undertakings. 5.01. Existing Improvements. The City will be responsible for removing any existing structure, foundation and debris from the Property and will assure that all water and sewer services are stubbed to the boulevard at no cost to Developer. • lA Section 6. security. 6.01. Letter of Credit. The Developer will provide the HRA with a Letter of Credit in an amount equal to the anticipated cost of the improvements to be made on the Property. The form of the Letter of Credit shall be as set forth in Exhibit C (or substantially similar as determined in the sole discretion of the HRA). The Developer will be responsible for submitting the Letter of Credit to the HRA for approval as to form and amount, which approval must be obtained before any building permits will issue. As improvements are made to the property, the HRA agrees to negotiate with Developer certain incremental reductions in and to said Letter of Credit based upon the value of the improvements made. section 7. Default. The failure to meet any condition of this Agreement shall be an event of default. 7.01. Remedies. If an event of default occurs and is not cured within 30 days of receiving written notice of said default, the HRA may take one or more of the following actions: a. suspend performance under this Agreement; b. terminate the Agreement, thereby rendering void any promises or approvals contained in this Agreement; c. draw upon the Letter of Credit as referenced in paragraph 6 herein; d. foreclose upon the mortgage referenced herein as provided by Minnesota law. section 8. Notices. All notices hereunder shall be in writing and either delivered personally or mailed by certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the parties at the following addresses: HRA Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority 6431 University Ave. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Attention: Grant Fernelius Developer Tam's, Inc. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the HRA has caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officers; and the Developer has executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. FRIDLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By: William W. Burns Its: Executive Director By: Lawrence R. Commers Its: Chairperson TAM'S, INC. By: Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ANOKA ) On this day of , 199_, before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, appeared to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that he is William W. Burns named in the foregoing instrument, the Executive Director of the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and that this instrument was signed as his free act and deed. Notary Public am STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF ANOKA ) On this day of , 199_, before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, appeared to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that he is Lawrence R. Commers named in the foregoing instrument, the Chairperson of the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and that this instrument was signed as his free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF ANOKA ) On this day of ' 199, before me,.a Notary Public within and for said County, appeared to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that he is named in the foregoing instrument, the of Tam's, Inc., a corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation, and that this instrument was signed as his free act and deed. f: \mimic \1dh \tamdevk.hra M�� Notary Public EXHIBIT "A" gfto 9 Lots., Block A", Hyde Park, Anoka County, Minnesota. Lots 27 and 28, Block 12, Hyde Park, Anoka County, Minnesota. Lot 26, Block C, RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS, Anoka County, Minnesota, and that part of all of the vacated Broad Avenue N.E., lying southerly of the westerly extension of the northerly line and northerly of the westerly extension of the southerly line of said Lot 26. Reserving and subject to easements for bikeway and walkway purposes in favor of the City of Fridley, over the westerly 15 feet and that part of the northerly 10 feet lying within vacated Broad Avenue thereof, and northwesterly of a line drawn from points distant 12.0 feet southerly and northeasterly of the intersection point of the interior easements lines. Also reserving and subject to an easement for access purposes in favor of the property adjacent westerly, lying southerly of a line drawn from the most southerly corner of Lot 26, Block C to a point distant 11.30 feet northerly of the intersection of the westerly extension of the southerly line of said Lot 26 with the westerly line of vacated Broad Avenue. ' I ll LT J1 IT I �, i�ii!lii i4 Ll N 11�JI II 11 Lj it I • � tv7 i i ' ^ 3 � I , 1 \� 1 +1• 1 t � ' �IiJ ,'t-'�'1•� • J. 1j 1 !I lit 1 1 r 1• t� i RAI, r 1 r IL Ol fl i I BI jli " I ! O'l if 8EE I i rj y� .j i Oi 14 l 4 a I I' . . j, rl r�i 8FF I E I e. till f J, i Is 11, Z ---------- - 4v 5"!c -- - -- ------ 8GG : a Casserly Molzahn & Associates, Inc. Suite 1100 Southpoint Office Center • 1650 West 82nd Street • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 -1447 Office (612) 885 -1298 • Fax (612) 885 -1299 M E M O R A N D U M TO: City of Fridley Attn: William Burns, City Manager arbara Dacy, Community Development Director FROM: James R. Casserly Mary E. Molzahn RE: Contract for Private Redevelopment By and Between the Fridley HRA and Industrial Equities, LLP DATE: December 6, 1995 Enclosed is the December 4, 1995 draft of the Contract for Private Redevelopment between the above parties. In consideration for the Redeveloper's construction of an 88,000 square foot office /manufacturing /warehouse facility, the Authority will assist the Redeveloper with utility relocation and site preparation costs in an amount not to exceed $280,000. This represents less than 10 percent of the total project cost. The Contract provides in Article 3 that $140,000 will be paid as a grant and $140,000 will be provided as a loan. Schedule D attached to the Contract is a copy of the Note. Interest will commence August 1, 1996 at five percent per annum. The Note will be paid in semi - annual installments of $10,994.93 commencing August 1, 1998 and continuing until August 1, 2006. Interest is calculated at a rate of five percent per annum. The amount of the assistance and the allocation between a loan and a grant are identical to the Redevelopment Contract the Authority just recently approved for AGRO -K. As with the AGRO -K Contract, the Note will be secured by a second mortgage recorded against the property and will be personally guaranteed by John Allen, the principal owner of the Redeveloper, Industrial Equities, LLP. There is one change from the AGRO -K Contract. With AGRO -K, the Authority provided the loan and grant prior to the construction of the new facility (this was principally the result of S.B.A. financing). In this contract, loan and grant will not be provided until the building is completed, a certificate of occupancy has been issued and the Authority has provided its �J Certificate of Completion. The Contract is very similar to other contracts the Authority has approved over the last ten years. However, there is one new provision which is a result of recent state law changes. That is found in Section 2.2(i) on page 7 of the Contract. The Redeveloper represents in that section that a certain number of new jobs will be created at certain wage levels. We will be discussing the number of jobs and the wage levels further with the Redeveloper and will insert the appropriate numbers. The Contract helps the Authority achieve its goals and provides as much security as seems reasonable for the Authority's loan. We recommend its approval. If there are any questions or problems, please give a call. JRC /MEM /kh CC: John Allen Encl MO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY FRIDLEY AND INDUSTRIAL EQUITIES, LLP. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners (the "Commissioners ") of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley, Minnesota (the "Authority ") as follows: Section 1. Rec =tals. 1.01. It has been proposed that the Authority enter into a Contract For Private Redevelopment (the "Contract ") with Industrial Equities, LLP (the "Redeveloper "). Section 2. Findinas. 2.01. The Authority hereby finds that it has approved and adopted a development program known as the Modified Redevelopment Plan for its Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Redevelopment Program ")pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.001 et sect. 2.02. The Authority hereby finds that the Contract promotes the objectives as outlined in its Redevelopment Program. Section 3. Authorization for Execution and Delivery. 3.01. The Chairman and the Executive Director of the Authority are hereby authorized to execute and deliver the Contract when the following condition is met: Substantial conformanc.e.of a Contract to the Contract presented to the Authority as of this date. Adopted by the Board of Commissioners of the Authority this day of , 199_. ATTEST: Executive Director Chairman • INDUSTRIAL EQUITIES L.L.P. Development and Investments TEL 612 591 0892 1660 South Highway 100, Suite 536W, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 FAX 612 591 1383 October 19, 1995 Ms. Barb Dacy Community Development Director City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432 1017-M:7A As you know, Industrial Equities has a preliminary interest.in developing the 6.8 acre Northco Business Center. site that.is located at 73rd. and University:. with a Speculative multi tenant `88,000 square .foot business center. Because site has.significant.soil correction and utility relocation issues our current and future interests must be contingent upon establishing a reasonable tax increment and financing distdct .that is consistent with . the plans that have been discussed between Northco, James Casserly and the City. Without soil correction and utility relocation assistance this project, like others considered before it, cannot proceed, and the future development is quite unlikely. Based on our discussions and your previous discussions with Northco, it appears that the HRA and the City Council will favorably consider establishing a tax increment finance district for this site. Accordingly, I have developed preliminary project designs and made the required ..applications_to.the-City and .Rice Street Watershed;Distdot.toallow for the sites preparation and correction. As I understand it, the District cannot be formally established prior to December 12, 1995. However, assuming the City would support this proposal, Industrial Equities would like to do preliminary site preparation prior to that date so as to allow for construction through the winter. This site preparation would include.anly tree removal and general site grading that would allow for specific soil correction and preparation for the importing of the required select material to correct and raise the elevation of the site after the approval is granted. Unfortunately, if this early access is not possible, site grading must be delayed until late April of 1996, and construction completion will be delayed by over five months. Barb, if T.I.F. is not going to be available on this project we clearly do not want to get out in front. of the headlights and invest any more time or money. However, if the City supports this Project, we would like to take the allowable steps which would bring this project on line in the Spring of 1996. 9C Ms. Barb Dacy October 19, 1995 Page 2 Industrial Equities is enthusiastic about the possibility of developing this project in Fridley because businesses like doing business in Fridley. The City works for both the employees and the employers. You have virtually no vacancy but you have no expansion space to expand your existing companies much less attract desirable new employers. Industrial Equities believes a high quality energy efficient business center could fill this void for both Fridley and businesses in the City. I look forward to discussing in greater detail with you the HRA and City Council's response to this request. If.you ;'e any queens; dl da not hesitaWAG 2dvise. Yours very truly, John N. Allen JNA/gw :B CIVY. OF FRIDLEY TEL: 61,2 -571, -1287 Oct-- 23 , 95 16 =1-3�-No . — . Principal Business or Product of the Company? Is the Proposed Project a Now Facility' or Rehabilitation and /or Expansion of Existing Facility? VW , it L Industrial/Commercial/Residential: What is the Present Employment of Your Firm: What is Your Estimate of Employment One Year After Completion of Project: What is Your Estimate of Employment Five Years After Completion of Project: Total Estimated Project Cost: Total Estimated Construction Costs: 0A vev Potential Other Use(s) of Proposed Development: Will this Development Attract Other Related Industries: Yes No How? ' IZ.p Vlt as What Types? � ova What is. the Current Zoning Status of the Project Bite? T' —k In Rezoning, will Zoning Variances or Conditional Use Permits be Required in Connection with the Project? t�o -2- 9F CITY OF FRIDLEY TEL: 612 -571 -1287 —0c—" = 3 .006 7Q Is the Property Properly Subdivided for the proposed tlse? 4; 2 Has Site Approval been Obtained for this Project? If So, When? By Planning Commission? By City Council? Have You Applied for Conventional Financing for the Project? Yes No If Yes, Provide Details on Separate Sheet, ON. Information to Attach" If No, Why Not? Please include: State Public Purpose T--- Description of Project Schematic Drawing of Project -j Breakdown of Project Costs Amount of Subsidy Request Construction Schedule Legal Description - (Include PIN's) Other Pertinent Information Deposit -3- 9G * ® i z V �y 0« co O O O 1 r M d' N O M r r co r O O r M d' N O cl r r *'N anuaAy SI!MAWfi i 9H �= r H U — LL D W o a -- O *'N anuaAy SI!MAWfi i 9H a° 0 Community Development Department HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY City of Fridley DATE: December 8, 1995 TO: William Burns, Executive Director of HRA FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Southwest Quadrant CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION The City Council discussed the Southwest Quadrant at its workshop session on November 20, 1995. In preparation for that meeting, the two Councilmembers who wanted to retain the condominiums were asked to identify their concerns if the senior condominiums were eliminated from the development plan. Abandoning the senior condominium element seemed to equate to not providing affordable owner - occupied housing for seniors in the community. Therefore, Rottlund was asked to develop another housing style which would appeal to seniors in an affordable price range ($90,000 - $120,000). Rottlund developed what ended up being three additional site plans. Todd Stutz from Rottlund Homes attended the meeting, and a lengthy discussion occurred. The third alternative (which has become known as Option #6) was agreed -upon by the City Council and is recommended to the HRA. A copy of the proposed site plan is included in your packets. The plan can best be described in two parts. The first part is the area east of 3rd Street and immediately adjacent to University Avenue; this area would contain 62 units of a three - story product. Four eight -unit buildings-are proposed in the southeast part of the site, and then 30 units of three -story townhomes are proposed around the proposed plaza area in the northeast part of the site. The second part, or the west side of 3rd Street, would be three groupings of townhomes: A) No more than 20 homes selling between $90,000 - $110,000, B) 20 homes selling between $110,000 - $120,000, and C) 20 homes selling between $120,000 - $130,000. 1n 11.1 r Southwest Quadrant December 8, 1995 Page 2 It is the City Council's intent that the 20 homes in the $90,000 - $110,000 price range would be one -story townhomes, and that the homes in the other two price categories would be a mixture of one- and two -story homes depending on what the market dictates. Stutz was amenable to the proposed plan, but wanted to meet with myself and Jim Casserly to start identifying the key aspects of the development contract. Of particular concern to Stutz is the prevailing wage requirement in the development contract. Casserly and I will be meeting with Stutz on Friday, December 8, 1995 to outline the financial issues to be addressed in the development contract. In addition, Casserly's office is working on a revised cash flow analysis based on a revised tax increment projection,.land sale negotiation, and revised phasing plan beginning in 1996. This will be distributed at the HRA meeting. OTHER RELATED ISSUES In the meantime, staff has initiated the process with Anoka County to request them to pay for 1/4 of the Mississippi Street improvement cost. The owners of Holly Center have agreed to pay for up to 1/4 of the intersection cost via a special assessment procedure. The developer's share will be negotiated through the land sale price. Therefore, the cost to the HRA instead of $160,000 as originally anticipated would be reduced by 3/4. Anoka County hopes to respond to our request by the.second meeting in January. Before final plans and drawings are prepared, however, Stutz wants to begin resolving some of the details on the development contract. After our meeting on Friday, December 8, 1995, staff will have an updated report for the HRA at Thursday's meeting. The Remedial Investigation plan for the former Fast Lube site has been completed and submitted to MPCA. The plan recommends two more quarterly sampling events be conducted at the four monitoring well sites. If contaminant levels continue to be at low levels, the consultant may request the MPCA issue a closure letter. The plan found no contamination risk to other wells in the City. Typical remediation procedures such as soil venting and groundwater pumping may not be necessary, according to the consultant. RECOMMENDATION Staff would like the HRA to review the revised plan, the revised cash flow, and provide direction to staff and the developer if ino Southwest Quadrant December 8, 1995 Page 3 the plan should be pursued. As of this time, there is a unanimous conclusion from the City Council that this plan is acceptable to them and addresses their concerns. BD /dw M -95 -609 J Community Development Department HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTmRITy City of Fridley DATE: December 8, 1995 TO: William Burns, Executive Director of HRA FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Review Development Options for Sites on University Avenue On Thursday evening, options will be presented to the HRA reviewing potential development scenarios on the Frank's Used Car site, the JR's Automotive site on the east side of University, and Block 22, Hyde Park. We are developing these options for HRA review and ultimately City Council review in order to determine a preferred land use. We will also be working with Jim Casserly's office to make some general projections for potential expenses and revenues for each of these options. In addition, a neighborhood review process will also need to occur early on prior to initiation of RFP's. BD /dw M -95 -610 11 I a r Community Development Department D HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY City of Fridley DATE: December 8, 1995 TO: William Burns, Executive Director of HRA FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Draft 1996 Budget The draft 1996 budget is now being prepared in anticipation of HRA review at its January meeting. We are now completing research on the costs associated with redeveloping the Frank's Used Cars site and other sites; those will then be incorporated into the 1996 budget. BD /dw M -95 -612 12 r � Community Development Department HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY City of Fridley DATE: December 8, 1995 TO: William Burns, Executive Director of HRA FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Lake Pointe Update The Contract for Exclusive Negotiations with MEPC has been modified according to the HRA direction at the November meeting. Section 2.2(D) was amended to accommodate the HRA's concern. Casserly worked in close contact with the City Manager and the Chairperson to finalize the language. An important fact to remember is that the contract requires the redeveloper to present the master plan of the site to the City and HRA for review and approval. Therefore, the HRA will have direct input on the types of uses that should occur in the commercial tract. A copy of the final contract is attached. BD /dw M -95 -611 13' 4 DRAFT: December 1, 1995 CONTRACT FOR EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATIONS THIS AGREEMENT, effective as of this 1st day of December, 1995 is between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley, having its principal offices at 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432, and MEPC American Properties, Inc., a Delaware corporation with its Minnesota office at 1550 Utica Avenue South, Suite 120, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416. WHEREAS, the Redeveloper is proposing to develop the area identified on the map attached as Schedule A and is requesting that the Authority negotiate exclusively with the Redeveloper while the area is being studied, designed and marketed. WHEREAS, the Authority is willing to negotiate exclusively with the Redeveloper provided certain conditions described below are met. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree-with tht other as follows: Section 1.1. Definitions. In this Agreement unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context: "Agreement" means this Agreement, as the same may be from time to time modified, amended, or supplemented. "Authority" means the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley, Minnesota. "City" means the City of Fridley, Minnesota. "Council" means the Council of the City. "Marketing Plan" means the program to market the Redevelopment Project. The Marketing Plan is further described on Schedule B attached to this Agreement. "Master Plan" means the plan detailing the overall development of the Redevelopment Project as a corporate office park with a commercial component on the Commercial Tract. The Master Plan shall be prepared by the Redeveloper and approved by the Authority and the City. "Minimum Improvements" means as follows: A. For the Office Tract it is the construction of Class A office buildings of not less than 50,000 square feet 13A E t � F and containing not less than three stories for each building. The office buildings may contain some ancillary space for service retail that is needed to promote and develop a Class A corporate office park. B. For the Commercial Tract it includes any use described for the Office Tract and further includes commercial uses such as restaurants, banks, day care centers, hotels, medical clinic, convention center and service retail but not general retail. "Party" means a party to this Agreement. "Purchase Price" means the amount to be paid by the Redeveloper for the Redevelopment Property. The Purchase Price for the Office Tract shall be an amount equal to fifty percent (500) of the market value established by an independent appraiser selected by mutual agreement of the Authority and the Redeveloper, provided that the appraiser shall have determined the value within nine (9) months of the date of closing. Only the first building in the Office Tract will be eligible, provided that the building does not exceed 80,000 square feet, for the Purchase Price described above. Since sub8equent buildings in the Office Tract will have structured parking, the Purchase'Price shall be ten dollars ($10.00) for each parcel. The Purchase Price for parcels in the Commercial Tract.shall be an amount equal to seventy -five percent (75%) of the market value established by an independent appraiser selected by mutual agreement of the Authority and the Redeveloper, provided that the appraiser shall have determined the value within nine (9) months of the date of closing. "Purchase Price Payments" means payments received by the Authority for the Purchase Price. "Redeveloper" means MEPC American Properties, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware. "Redevelopment Contract" means the Contract for Private Redevelopment described in Section 4 of this Agreement. "Redevelopment Project" means the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum Improvements. "Redevelopment Property" means the real property described in Schedule A of this Agreement. That portion to the west compromising approximately 24.56 acres shall be referred to as the Office Tract. That portion to the East comprising approximately 8.21 acres shall be referred to as the Commercial Tract. 2 13B A "State" means the State of Minnesota. "Tax Increment" means only that portion of the real estate taxes paid solely with respect to the Redevelopment Property (which is part of the property in the Tax Increment District) and which is remitted to the City as tax increment pursuant to the Tax Increment Act. "Tax Increment Act" means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 - 469.179. "Tax Increment District" means Tax Increment Financing District No. 6 created by the Council in connection with the Redevelopment Program. "Tax Increment Plan" means the tax increment financing plan adopted by the Authority in connection with the creation of the Tax Increment District. "Unavoidable Delays" means delays which are the direct result of strikes, other labor troubles, unusually severe or prolonged bad weather, Acts of God, fire or other casualty to the Minimum Improvements, litigation commenced by third parties which, by injunction or other similar judicial action, directly results in delays, or acts of any federal, state or local governmental unit which directly result in dela3is. Section. 2.1. Representations by the Authority. The Authority represents as follows: (A) The Authority is a public body duly organized and existing under the laws of the State. Under the provisions of the Act, the Authority has the power to enter into this Agreement and carry out its obligations hereunder. (B) The Authority is the fee owner of the Redevelopment Property (C) The Authority shall use all Purchase Price Payments to reimburse the Redeveloper for the costs of structured parking in the Office Tract. Section 2.2. Representations by the Redeveloper. The Redeveloper represents as follows: (A) The Redeveloper is a Delaware corporation, organized and existing in good standing under the laws of. Minnesota, is authorized to transact business in the State, has duly authorized the execution of this Agreement and the performance of its obligations hereunder, and neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and 3 13C . T conditions of this Agreement will constitute a breach of any obligations of the Redeveloper under the terms and conditions of any indebtedness, agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which Redeveloper is now a party or by which it is bound, which breach will materially adversely affect the ability of Redeveloper to perform its obligations under this Agreement. (B) The Redeveloper's mission for this Redevelopment Property is to develop multi - tenant, multi -story office buildings with support services commensurate with successful office parks. (C) The Redeveloper will pursue all prospective users including those interested in build -to -suit or land purchases which fulfill the economic and aesthetic vision described in B above and conform to the Master Plan. - (D) While the Office Tract has priority for development, the Authority will not unreasonably withhold its approval of those projects in the Commercial Tract that are identified in teh Master Plan and are essential in attracting u sers to the Office Tract. (E) The first office building may have temporary surface parking but will be designed to accommodate structured parking of two or-more levels. With the development of a second building, the two buildings will be served by a combination of structured and surface parking. Subsequent buildings will be constructed with structured parking but may also have surface parking. Section 3.1. Redeveloper Responsibilities. The Redeveloper shall be responsible for all costs associated with the marketing and development of the Redevelopment Project. The Redeveloper shall implement the Marketing Plan generally as follows: A. Establish office market data on this location and determine the corporate users and amenities for space in the Redevelopment Project. B. Review any previous plans and design a Master Plan as necessary to maximize the site and meet the requirements of-the corporate users (in building size, floor plate, quality, timing and market rate) for this location. The Master Plan will be presented to the City and Authority for their review and approval, and the Redeveloper shall reasonably adjust the Master Plan consistent with market needs as requested by the City and Authority. C. Develop marketing materials such as fliers and brochures to assist in marketing efforts for mailings, advertising, proposals to corporate users, broker parties, press releases, etc. Scheduled timing of 4 13D a , I It these marketing events and materials are set forth in Exhibit B. D. The official announcement to the public of the Redevelopment Property would be achieved by the activities shown on Exhibit B including: Broker special event on site News releases Corporate user presentations Mailings to prospects E. Investigate the adequacy of soils, utilities, and street systems for the Master Plan. F. Review and comment upon the adequacy of the existing indirect source permit and environmental assessment worksheet for the Master Plan implementation. G. Review and comment upon the adequacy of existing ordinances to facilitate development of the Master Plan. H. Investigate the status of title, and review existing environmental reports furnished by the Authority regarding any hazardous substances on the Redevelopment Property. I. Every 90 days provide a written activities report to the Authority which describes the Redeveloper's activities pursuant to this Agreement. J. Cooperate with the City and Authority in reasonable and appropriate ways. Section 3.2. Authoritv Responsibilities. The Authority shall be responsible for the following: A. Indirect source permit and associated traffic analyses (amended and /or reactivated original) for the Redevelopment Property. B. Prepare any necessary environmental assessment worksheet, environmental impact statement or modification thereof. C. Conduct any additional required environmental investigation. D. Provide any necessary infrastructure changes, including street and intersection improvements, due to the Master Plan. 5 13E P • y L s E. Refer all third party inquiries regarding use, availability, and development potential of the Redevelopment Property to the Redeveloper. F. Recommend changes to City ordinances to facilitate development consistent with the Master Plan. G. Cooperate with the Redeveloper in reasonable and appropriate ways. H. Conduct a comprehensive review of Redeveloper's performance under this Agreement on at least September 1, 1996 and March 1, 1997. Section 4.1. Contract for Private Redevelopment. Provided that this Agreement is not in default and any time after Authority approval of the Redeveloper's Master Plan, at either Party's request, the Parties shall negotiate in good faith and execute the Redevelopment Contract within forty -five (45) days after the request. The Redevelopment Contract shall address the issues involving the development of the Redevelopment Property including the following: A. The Purchase Price B. Timing of the Minimum Improvements C. Composition of the-Minimum Improvements D. Timing of any site improvements or public improvements E. Redeveloper guarantees F. Duration G. Application of Purchase Price Payments to structured parking Section 5.1. Termination. This Agreement shall terminate as follows: A. If by August 1, 1996 the Redeveloper has not completed the program elements as outlined in the Marketing Plan or this Agreement. B. If the Redeveloper, has not commenced construction of an office building in the Office Tract by August 1, 1997, said time to be extended by Unavoidable Delays. The August 1, 1997 date shall be extended to November 1, 1997 if the Redeveloper has provided a letter of intent, lease or commitment to lease for an office building. P 13F' C. If the Parties have not executed a Redevelopment Contract by August 1, 1997. Section 5.2. Effect. The Parties agree that upon termination of this Agreement they shall have no further obligation to each other except as provided for in this Agreement and the Parties further agree to execute any document reasonably necessary to give effect to a termination. Section 6.1. Additional Provisions: A. The Redeveloper shall not assign this Agreement. B. The Redeveloper shall hold the Authority and the City, their agents, officers and employees harmless from any of the Redeveloper's acts or the acts of those operating under its direction with regard to marketing, development, construction, sale and all other activities contemplated by this Agreement. C. The Parties are not partners in the development of the Minimum Improvements or in any activities contemplated by the Agreement. D. If requested.by the Authority,. the Redeveloper shall Provide evidence of a general liability insurance Policy in an amount of one million ($1,000,000) per person and two million ($2,000,000) per occurrence naming the City and the Authority as insured parties and which requires a 30 -day written notice of cancellation to the City and the Authority. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf and the Redeveloper has caused this Agreement to be duly executed on or as of the date first above written. 7 13G I Dated: THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA By Its Chairman And by Its Executive-Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss COUNTY OF ANOKA ) On this day of 199 before me, a notary public within and for Anoka County, personally appeared and.* to me personally -known who by me duly sworn; did say that they are the Chairman and Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley, Minnesota, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, and acknowledged the foregoing instrument on behalf of said Authority. Notary Public Authority Signature Page — Contract for Exclusive Negotiations 8 13H! 4 , . Dated: MEPC American Properties, Inc. By STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss COUNTY OF ) Its On this day of , 199 before me, a notary public within and for County, personally appeared the of MEPC Properties, Inc., a corporation, and acknowledged the foregoing instrument on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public Redeveloper Signature Page — Redevelopment Contract 0 131 e 4 q I 7 K 24.66 ACRES INTERSTATE HWY 169 13J 1 ..00..E LAKE \ I / w S tOq � Q r h �O } Q ' 8.21 ACRES W a N�011 1 N .5 SCHEDULE B FRIDLEY MARKETING PROGRAM Press Release: Signage: Flyer Created and Mailed Users & Brokers: Focus Group for Office Users: Master Plan Review: Up Press Release: Direct Mail Piece to Brokers: Broker Event on Site: Quarterly Updates: Upon execution of the Agreement Revise signage showing Redeveloper as contact January 1996 January 1996 January 1996 Planning review would commence after information is provided by the first focus group. Redeveloper will then present the preliminary Master Plan to the City and Authority for Authority response and review by March 15, 1996, the Authority shall review and or approve or modify the preliminary Master Plan by April 15, 1996. Upon review and approval of preliminary Master Plan May 1996 June 1996 Redeveloper will provide updates to the Brokerage community on a quarterly basis. This development project will be in the annual Redeveloper vacancy update Redeveloper would meet with the Authority quarterly to provide project updates Continuing marketing efforts would be evaluated and put in place as needed after July 1, 1996. 43K'!