HRA 05/04/2000 - 6321HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 4, 2000
MEETING 7:30 P.M.
PUBLIC COPY
(Please return to Community Development Department)
CITY OF FRIDLEY
SPECIAL CONFERENCE MEETING OF THE
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL AND THE
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MAY 4, 2000, MEETING, 7:00 P.M.
AGENDA
LOCATION: Meeting Room 1 (Lower Level)
DISCUSSION OF COUNCIL/COMMISSIONS SURVEY RESULTS (City Council & HRA)
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MAY 4, 2000, MEETING
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
April 6, 2000
CONSENT AGENDA:
Consider Resolution Designating Blighted Property in Gateway East Project... 1
Claimsand Expenses ........................................... ............................... 2
ACTION ITEMS:
Reconsider Acquisition of Central Avenue Parcels ....... ............................... 3
INFORMATION ITEMS:
Gateway East RFP/ RFQ ........................................ ............................... 4
Comprehensive Plan Update .................................. ............................... 5
OTHER BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF FRIDLEY
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING
APRIL 6, 2000
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Commers called the April 6, 2000, Housing and Redevelopment Authority
meeting to order at 7:32 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Lary Commers, Virginia Schnabel, John Meyer
Members Absent: Pat Gabel, Jim McFarland
Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Grant Femelius, Housing Coordinator
William Burns, City Manager
Jim Casserly, Development Consultant
Julie Vogel, Accountant
APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 3. 2000, HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY MEETING MINUTES:
MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to approve the February 3, 2000,
Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting minutes as written.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING MONEY PURCHASE PLAN:
Mr. Meyer stated that he would like this item pulled for discussion.
ITEM #1 REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED AFTER #3 IN ACTION
ITEMS.
2. CLAIMS AND EXPENSES:
Mr. Commers stated that Ms. Vogel had some items to be added to*the Claims and Expenses
list.
Ms. Vogel stated there is a check in Claims and Expenses for about $848,000. Fifty percent
of it is going back to Shamrock Investments, which is Onan- Murphy, and the other 50% will
go toward the revenue note.
Ms. Schnabel stated she sees the expenses but does not see the income.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 6, 2000 PAGE 2
Ms. Vogel stated that the HRA has not been getting the receipt journal for seven months. Mr.
Pribyl did not think it was necessary, but they could start including it in the agenda if the HRA
wants it.
Mr. Commers stated they could add it. There is no harm is seeing the breakdown.
MOTION by Mr. Meyer, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to approve the claims and expenses.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED_ THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ACTION ITEMS:
3. CONSIDER ACQUISITION OF PARCELS ON CENTRAL AVENUE:
Mr. Fernelius stated staff would like this to be discussed at the May 4t' meeting and
considered in terms of some of the redevelopment priorities that will be looked at over the
next few years. They would like the HRA to approve amendments to the contracts that would
extend the expiration date from April 30 to June 30. That will give them time to decide what
they want to do after the May 4t' discussion.
Mr. Commers asked if the sellers agreed with the extension of the agreements.
Mr. Fernelius stated the sellers have agreed to the extension.
Mr. Commers stated that he thinks it is appropriate; however, he has a lot of questions in
terms of priorities. Secondly, the issues relating to the soil corrections that are necessary for
these parcels need further investigation. It seems that significant corrections need to be
made.
Ms. Schnabel asked if there would be additional testing or work between now and May.
Mr. Fernelius stated there will be additional testing on the Carlson property. They need to
discuss in detail what the development cost would be for all three of the sites.
Mr. Meyer asked if the Carlson property would be the only one where more soil borings would
be needed.
Mr. Fernelius stated that additional trenching work would be done to determine the extent of
the debris on the site.
Mr. Meyer asked if they were assuming that there is no organic material at the Carlson site.
Mr. Fernelius stated that the test revealed that there was no organic material but there was
some debris.
Mr. Meyer asked who Liesch was.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 6, 2000 PAGE 3
Mr. Fernelius stated that Bruce A. Liesch and Associates have done a lot of work with them
on a number of different sites.
Mr. Burns stated they have been the City's environmental consultant for years.
Mr. Meyer asked if they do the soil borings as well.
Mr. Femelius stated that they subcontract that with a company called GME.
Mr. Commers stated that Mr. Femelius could ask Mr.. Carlson if the debris removal is
significantly different in terms of the cost for back -up material support that he might have that
would enable the HRA to make a more informed decision about the actual cost. He may
have some data or have retained some kind of consultant himself.
Mr. Burns stated that he has a bigger concern that these parcels cannot be used without a
combination of other parcels, as there is considerable expense with combining these parcels.
These parcels have a purchase price of about $240,000. The purchase of the other parcels
are well over $1,000,000 in doing that. Because of the soil conditions, he does not think
these parcels are liquid assets for them, and they should look at the whole cost and compare
it with other priorities. That is why he made the recommendation to staff and the HRA. It is
hard to use parcels one and two by themselves.
Mr. Commers stated that his advice is well taken.
MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to amend the purchase of sale
agreements with the Ericksons and the Pettys, amending an option agreement with the
Carlsons, and extending the time frame with the expiration date from April 30 to June 30,
2000.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING MONEY PURCHASE PLAN:
Mr. Meyer asked staff to investigate if this is a portable plan and how it is going to work with
regards to employees, especially if the employee wants to do something else in three years
or so.
Mr. Commers stated that Mr. Pribyl should answer the questions of the issues of the HRA
being the employer, who are the trustees of the plan, and the type of liability that may exist
with respect to that.
MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to adopt Resolution HRA 3 -2000
establishing Money Purchase Plan.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 6, 2000 PAGE 4
INFORMATION ITEMS:
5. CONSIDER APPOINTMENT TO JOINT TASK FORCE WITH COLUMBIA HEIGHTS:
Ms. Dacy stated that she wanted to give them an organizational chart to help describe the
task force. The City Councils of Columbia Heights and Fridley met on February 29 to talk
about the possibility of forming a joint citizen - appointed task force. They would look at the
area around the Medtronic Corporate Campus and identify ways to work cooperatively to
prepare a plan that identifies strategies to create redevelopment or other types of
opportunities a defined study area. Tentatively, the task force would have a
chairperson with 11 people on the task force. A Councilmember from each city, an HRA or
EDA member from each city, a Planning Commission member from each city, a business
representative from each city, a representative from ISD #14 and #16 are appointed to be on
the task force. They are going to approach the Superintendent of the ISD #13 to be the
Chairman of the task force.
Ms. Dacy stated this is not a task force that has any powers of authority as established in
State law. It is an advisory commission. On February 29, the Councils talked about what
would be the study area. A map of the study area shows it extends from 45th Avenue in
Columbia Heights and north into Fridley to Mississippi Street and then jogs up on TH 65 far
enough north to pick up the existing campus at Medtronic. The appointed task force would
be served by a joint technical advisory committee of staff. The community development
directors from each community, city planners, housing coordinators, engineers, a
representative from the Anoka County Staff, and people from the school districts would be on
the advisory committee. The City Managers from Fridley and Columbia Heights would be
involved, as well as the administrator from Hilltop. The staff committee has met once and will
meet next Thursday to try for more organization. Bob Barnette has been appointed as the
Fridley City Council representative, Diane Savage of the Planning Commission has been
appointed, and the City is advertising for a business representative. Is any one of the HRA
interested in serving? This will meet on a monthly basis beginning in May and extending
through November or December.
Ms. Schnabel asked if any consideration has been given to including someone from
Medtronic on the committee.
Ms. Dacy stated that they decided not t6 because they did not want the analysis to be
perceived as a plan that is driven as a result of Medtronic's needs. They wanted to have an
objective viewpoint -on the community standpoint. Medtronic would be part of the analysis,
and they do need to keep them involved in the process.
Mr. Meyer asked what Medtronic has brought forth that they wish for as far as transportation
facilities or restaurants or hotels.
Ms. Dacy stated they have been a supporter of the commuter rail project. Beyond that, they
have not identified anything more specific.
Mr. Bums stated they do not have a real good handle on the industrial spin -offs. That is a
key thing.
Ms. Schnabel asked where the Medtronic products were manufactured.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 6, 2000 PAGE 5
Mr. Bums stated that they are manufactured all over the Twin Cities, Europe, and the world.
Mr. Commers stated he believed Medtronic's input is critical to the real decisions, even
though that is not driving the whole thing. They all want a hotel, restaurant, and those kinds
of services, but its seems that the overall concern is what is the spin -off.
Ms. Schnabel asked if Mr. Commers would consider the appointment to the task force.
Mr. Commers stated he already has a commitment that generally meets on Thursdays so it
would be hard for him and asked Ms. Schnabel and Mr. Meyer if they would like to
participate.
Mr. Meyer stated that Ms. Schnabel would make an excellent representative.
Ms. Schnabel stated that she is not certain she would have the time.
Mr. Meyer stated that he would be glad to serve on the task force.
MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Commers, to appoint Mr. Meyer to serve on the
Joint Task Force.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Commers stated that he would like to have updates of the task force on the monthly
agenda.
Ms. Dacy stated she would be happy to do that.
6. GATEWAY EAST UPDATE:
Mr. Fernelius stated they had a neighborhood meeting on March 30. Approximately 40 -50
people attended the meeting. There was an overview of the project and a copy of the site
plan. Option A calls for the closure of the frontage road around Valvoline and JR's
Automotive and reconnecting 4t' Street There would be a connection to the frontage road
and the businesses along the service drive. Option A provides the flexibility as far as the site
is concerned. This plan and Option B requires closing off the access to Valvoline. Staff has
evaluated that and believes that will work if the traffic is rerouted internally; however, they
have not talked to Valvoline about that.
Mr. Femelius stated that Option B is similar to Option A. The only difference is that 4tt' Street
would not be completely reconnected. This would be a double reverse curve. Traffic on 4t'
Street to the north in the neighborhood would be limited to going eastbound on 57 Y2 Avenue.
Traffic coming off 57th Avenue or 57th Place would go north on the new connection on 4th
Street but would be limited to the frontage road access. It is the same land area as Option A.
Mr. Fernelius stated that Option C leaves the site the way it is in terms of existing roads, with
the exception of making a connection with 4th Street and closing off 57th Avenue and building
a cul -de -sac providing access to the project. They reviewed all three options and had the
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 6, 2000 PAGE 6
residents fill out a survey. The results were shared at the end and the preferred plan was
Option B. This is not a huge surprise. Comments seemed to focus on the roads and only a
few questions as far as why a townhome project was being built there. They are going to take
this information and provide it to the developers as they go through the solicitation process
and at some point go back to the neighborhood once the developer is. on board and present
the plan.
Mr. Commers asked if the City has a preference.
Ms. Dacy stated that staff is looking at Option A or B to maximize the area and create a lot of
open space and flexibility for the site plan. This is the same street pattern that was proposed
in 1988 for the redevelopment that included Rapid Oil.
Mr. Burns asked Mr. Fernelius if he received any density issues. _
Mr. Fernelius stated there were a few Gomments regarding why they were not doing a single
family project versus a townhome project. They tried to explain the economic impact to the
HRA, attractiveness of the site for townhomes, and the demand.
Ms. Dacy stated that the other argument is that the existing land use surrounding it has an
apartment building, a four -plex and a string of duplexes, and a mixture of more apartments.
Mr. Commers asked how many units they can put in here and how much green space is
there.
Mr. Fernelius stated that there are 24 - 32 units depending on the developer and type of unit
they build. This is envisioned to be similar to the Christianson Crossing project with units
clustered together with attached townhome product with 4,6, or 8 units. The number of
buildings on the site probably would not be more than 32 units.
Ms. Dacy stated that the project size is 2.5 acres so it is probably at 10 - 15 units per acre.
Twenty -four units are probably around 11 -12 units per acre. There is enough land area for
that range. The challenge is the necessity for parking. There is parking in the back and an
alley. There is an opportunity for improvement and maybe a shared type of arrangement.
Mr. Commers asked how close they weald be parked to the street.
Ms. Dacy stated that they would rezone the area to the S -2 redevelopment district as they did
with the Christianson Crossing and give the ability to play with the site design and place the
buildings to meet all the requirements.
7. REMODELING FAIR AND REMODELING ADVISOR UPDATE:
Mr. Fernelius stated that the North Metro Home and Garden Fair was held on Saturday,
March 18, at the Moundsview Community Center sponsored by the Cities of Blaine, Fridley,
Moundsview, and New Brighton and Priority Mortgage. Approximately 1200 - 1500 people
were in attendance. This year there were a total of 80 booths and a variety in comparison to
previous years, and he is hoping they can do it again in the future.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 6, 2000 PAGE 7
Mr. Fernelius stated they did find a replacement for the Remodeling Advisor. Ryan Jendro
will be starting Monday, April 10. He works currently for the Mille Lacs Band as a building
official and has good experience. Prior to that, he worked as a construction manager for a
contracting company in Bloomington. He also has a degree in construction management.
They are excited to have him on board. He will possibly come to the June meeting.
Mr. Commers asked if they have any pending requests for remodeling loans.
Mr. Fernelius stated hey have been making loans and grants. He neglected to include a
report at this meeting but will be happy to give them one at the next meeting.
Ms. Schnabel asked how many hours per week Mr. Jendro would be working.
Mr. Fernelius stated that he would be working 24 hours per week,
8. CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSION SURVEY RESULTS:
Mr. Commers asked if they were going to have the joint discussion at the next meeting.
Mr. Burns stated that he would like to have everybody meet at 7:00 p.m. on May 4t'. One
Councilmember cannot make it before then. There is no dinner planned.
Ms. Dacy stated that she thought that they would have the joint discussion and then the
regular meeting would start after the end of the meeting. They will probably be downstairs.
Mr. Commers asked if they were going to schedule their meeting at 9:00 p.m. or something.
Mr. Burns stated that he does not know how long the Council discussion will take.
Ms. Dacy stated one definite action item for the HRA meeting would be the Central Avenue
lots.
Mr. Commers stated that those are postponed until the end of June so they could always
address it in June.
Mr. Casserly stated there are some issues that need some time to resolve, so if they want to
proceed with the acquisitions, it may be appropriate to address that issue at the joint meeting.
Mr. Burns stated that the general plan for the meeting would be to discuss the questions from
the survey that are related to redevelopment rather than 50 questions in the survey. If there
are other questions, he would be glad to include them on the agenda. Council will also be
meeting with the Planning Commission, the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Human
Resources Commission, and the Youth Commission all on different evenings. He would like
to start out with having staff explain the question and justification for the question and have
an opportunity for both the Council and the HRA to ask questions about Staff and discuss the
issues related to the questions with each other. He does not anticipate closure to each issue,
but to discuss and try to identify which issues are the most important.
Mr. Burns stated that the survey results were very interesting, and they had 41 Council/
Commission respondents and 3 HRA respondents.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 6, 2000 PAGE 8
Mr. Commers stated he is not so sure that he agrees that they should vote on things in a
group.
Mr. Burns stated that there is nothing in the process that is directed toward eliminating the
independence of the HRA or diluting the authority of any of the other boards and
commissions. He is trying to make sure that if they have looked at a comprehensive
inventory of issues at least once a year and have thoughtful analysis of which issues are
most important.
Mr. Commers asked if the survey coordinates itself with the Comprehensive plan.
Ms. Dacy stated that the comprehensive plan identifies a lot of the issues that are in the
survey and in some cases the plan makes specific types of suggestions that the survey asks
about. The survey gets more into the City operations too, so there is some overlap. The
redevelopment priorities are a good example where the plan and the survey match. There is
a question about whether they do salvage yard redevelopment first or should they try to find a
site for hotel and restaurants. The plan goes through some of those issues. The survey is a
tool to decide on an annual basis of how to implement some ideas of the plan. There may be
some that feel that the plan says things we should not be doing.
Mr. Bums stated that some of the planning questions in the survey are very complimentary to
the comprehensive plan such as mother -in -law apartments and lot area requirements.
Mr. Commers asked what is the assumption in setting up priorities. For example, they keep
talking about salvage yards. This may be a real number one priority, but the fact is that he is
not sure he can put it there because there are so many questions about it. It makes it hard to
put priorities on things if it costs an exaggerated amount.
Ms. Dacy stated that she thinks there is a whole list of assumptions in order to make a
decision. There is cost and timing in terms of use and the market developer interests.
Availability of State funds and, in the case of the salvage yards, pollution and clean -up
monies are available now. In that area, there is an established type of a district.
Mr. Bums stated that the survey has to be user - friendly. It has to have enough information so
people feel comfortable in answering the questions. They try to put in enough information as
practical, but have to recognize that the survey is not an instrument for final decision making.
It is a great place to start discussions and a great educational tool.
Ms. Dacy stated that sometimes the priorities get picked for them. Two years ago they
shifted the priority to Gateway East, and that is why it is necessary to go through on an
annual basis because the next month something else can come up that presents an
opportunity.
Mr. Burns stated that he likes the survey because it brings in different levels of City
employees. These people are on the street doing the work and have good perspectives on
what their area is trying to do for the citizens and involved in guiding the priorities.
Ms. Schnabel asked if they were also meeting on May 15.
d .
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 6, 2000 PAGE 9
Mr. Burns stated that they are not. This meeting had been scheduled for four different
meeting dates.
Ms. Dacy stated that it was only May 4.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Meyer, to adjourn the meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS-DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE APRIL 6, 2000, MEETING OF THE HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WAS ADJOURNED AT 9:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Signe L. John on -;4d
Recording Secretary
T ; HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
Memorandum
DATE: April 28, 2000
TO: William Burns, Executive Director of HRA
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Consider Resolution Designating Blighted Property in the Gateway
East Project Area
Attached is a resolution that needs to be adopted by the HRA at their May 4, 2000
meeting. The resolution identifies the duplex at 349 -353 57th Place as a blighted
property. A similar resolution was adopted by the,HRA in April of 1999 -for the Cash 'n'
Pawn and JR's Automotive sites.
The blight determination is required in order for the HRA to include the parcel in a tax
increment financing (TIF) district. Action on the TIF district is tentatively scheduled for
sometime this summer after we have selected a developer. In the meantime, the HRA
can demolish the structure to prepare the site for redevelopment.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the HRA adopt the attached resolution designating certain
properties in the Gateway East Project Area as blighted.
gf
M -00 -72
i
Page 1 - Resolution No.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF FRIDLEY
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THAT A CERTAIN
PARCEL IS OCCUPIED BY STRUCTURALLY
SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS AND IS TO BE INCLUDED
IN A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners (the "Commissioners ") of the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley (the "Authority ") as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01 The Authority has considered the acquisition and/or redevelopment of a parcel identified
as follows (the "Parcel "):
349 -353 57th Place
PIN 23- 30 -24 -24 -0076
1.02 Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.179, inclusive, as amended and
supplemented from time to time (the "Tax Increment Act ") provides for the establishment of a
Tax Increment Financing District as a redevelopment district. The Tax Increment Act allows
for the inclusion of parcels within a redevelopment district after substandard buildings have been
removed by complying with Minnesota Statutes 469.174, Subd. 10(b).
Section 2. Findings.
2.01 The Authority hereby finds that the acquisition and/or redevelopment of the Parcel
furthers the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan.
Page 2 - Resolution No.
2.02 The Authority hereby finds that the Parcel is occupied by a structure or structures that are
vacated and structurally substandard as defined in the Tax Increment Act and that the structures
must be demolished and removed from the Parcel.
2.03 The Authority intends to demolish or cause to be demolished the substandard buildings
and to prepare the Parcel for redevelopment.
Section 3. Declaration of Intent.
3.01 The Authority hereby declares its intent to demolish or cause to be demolished the
substandard buildings and to include the Parcel within a type of tax increment financing district
known as a redevelopment district. The Parcel shall have been occupied by substandard
buildings within three years of the filing of the request for certification of the Parcel as part of
a district with the Anoka County Auditor.
Section 4. Notice to County Auditor.
4.01 If the Authority establishes a tax increment financing district and includes the Parcel, then
upon filing the request for the certification of the tax capacity of the Parcel as part of such
district, the Authority shall notify the Anoka County Auditor that the original tax capacity of the
Parcel must be adjusted as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subd. 1, Para. (h).
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN
AND FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 2000.
LAWRENCE R. COMMERS - CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
WILLIAM W. BURNS - EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
G: \WPDATA \F \FRIDLEY \30 \TIF \BLIGHT RES- DUPLEX -HRAMC
Cd C Q
O
0
U ri
"' A 7�
O
M
c F
W !r
Q. O
i.
I!
zre
N
z
0
U
U
e
7
F
m
N
W
iG
U
W
2
U
J
m
a
}
k Pat
'�fl1
F
z
O
a
w I
w
g I
O I
AOq IL 1
WfQQI— I
fG W
0 Ed
iLU31
a00..z
-
cYi �a
V OF
—
zz'
Ni
0 t_
WUI
ZUZ H
QA
LL
NO
L
WFI
(G W
zi
z
0
a
A
OZ
cc
ILI
Uz
0
>
re
z E II'
>zl
cc I
z °z1
Uzz
II
O
0 0
O a
0 0
0
0 0
C
M
4
N O
•;
.+ ri
N
w
O
0 0
Q
O
MM°MOM
M
M M
M
a O°
1�
o
I
N
a
�O
00
MOOO9M!
00
t
Ii
Nr
Pa
.m
� 9
NN00 N
co
+1 w
N
.
.
O°�b!
. . .
a +..4
N °
.
�°+'
\
V
MMO•10
0
0 0
•o
�+
N 00.
'
NN
MM
NN
N
X010
WMQN
M
OO
Nww0M0 0
OO
ONm
O. 0•
VIT
O. O.
.4 .4
w w
NN
N OwIn
NN
00
O
0 0
Q
O
MM°MOM
M
M M
M
M
0
0
I
I
00
QiMQ
00
00
MOOO9M!
00
t
Ii
Nr
Pa
.m
� 9
NN00 N
P
.
+1 w
N
.
.
O°�b!
. . .
a +..4
.
.
. .pp. . .
\
V
MMO•10
O
�
0
ww
NOOOUI
00
N 00.
w w
NN
MM
NN
O O
X010
WMQN
M
OO
Nww0M0 0
OO
ONm
O. 0•
VIT
O. O.
.4 .4
w w
NN
N OwIn
NN
00
OQNMw N
In W)
w
ww
8
ww
.0 .p
O O
S
.+
w w
M M
M .� w •0
Q iT
w w
O
00
N 4'J
?oo
0
10
8
1
0
CO
10
0
OUmYYm110 0
i
1
��
0
gg
N
,0�
N N N
.NO
N
w
-1 q, V V 0
q
Q Q
M m
O
0 0
Q
O
MM°MOM
M
M M
M
M
0
0
I
I
1
I
MMJ
1 1 1 1 1 1
1
1
1
t
M In
1 I
O
.
-AV,
00
Q
1w
NN00 N
P
.
+1 w
N
.
.
\
. . .
a +..4
.
.
. .pp. . .
\
. .
.
\
.
M
•�+
NNN
M
M
MM°JMMMOJMOJ
M
MM
M
M°J
109
N
NNN
Q
QQVQQ'V
Q
VIT
Q
V
C Q
0
g
°4
�S
0
0
8
0 S
00
0
S
0
SS
S
g
O
00
o
?oo
0
10
8
1
0
CO
10
0
OUmYYm110 0
i
1
��
0
gg
N
,0�
N N N
.NO
N
w
-1 q, V V 0
q
Q Q
N
ttJ
4i
*0 �0
N Q
0
000
O
O
O°000
0
00
O
O
0
0
O
000
O
O
O 00
0
O
Op�
O
O
N
NN N
N
N
NN00 N
w +
+1 w
N
N
N N
\
\ \\
\
\
\ \ \ \ \\
\
\\
\
\
\ \
N
NNN
N
O
m;��\W
NN
N
p
m m
00
0
0
0 0
0
000
0
0
000000
0
0. O w N V
V h
h7 .
.0 N m as O w N
N M
M Q' I
IA �
�0 N
N m
h7 .0 10 10 %
%0 �
�0 �
�O �0 �0 10 N N N
N N
N N N
N N
N N
N N
w ww.4 w
w w
w w
w w w w w w w
w w
w w w
w w
w +
+1 w
0 ° ° °
°
0000 00 0
0 0
00 0
0 °
° 0
0 0
0 00o O
O °
000 000 0
0 0
00 0
0 0
0
.*i C*-J h7 10 N m 0- O w N M
M M M I M M M M M N M
N N N N N N N N N N N
t'J Cd t`J N (4 N N N N Cd N
O
I yUy�
xU U
Z XNX
0 Z
Q
07
J
Q
rl 10 1
1
1
1
1
1
�w
a 1
a� 1
1
1
F 1
a 1
°a
W I
a 1
1
1 �1
1 az
1
1 O
1
1 �.1
i a
N
W
w
a
1
1
1
1
1
1 �
w
o
1 a
1 a
1
�1 1
Wz 1
1
1
pa 1
W m 1
M 1
a 1
�w
a 1 0
5 � F
M H
La 1 Q
a � m 1 1w� ac
N � 1
a 1
1
a
I
M 1 U
1
1
1 I
1
1
rl 1
1
1 w
ao i �H
C4 cq a 1
at o o v o i U
»> 1 w
m a
N 1
M «a « 1
.i O
H 1 1
w
0 1 F
o a 1 ,� 1
Q N 1
to
a py °z (a� pm UP
z
eq
\ M W M M W W 1
pp,; q
oi9 UW WA i FM i
Q« UMOa1 06
:3
w� °a o�d1O9 Ion
O�
O O
O
O
m
O
m
O
O
N O
O O
O
M
01
O
O1
O
O
N O
Ifl O
O
N
•
O
r-
O
O
b O
m N
0
1 00
�
N
N
O
N
N O
10
m
N
N
O
Ifl
m
m
O 1�
m
m
U£
0
a
m
O
O
a1
W
O
O
O
N
T
m
0
r�
01
4
O
N
O
r/
O
ri
O
rl
O
ri
O
N
O
N
N N
N
N
N
ri
N
N
O
a
m
N
M
M
M
M
M
W
•
e
N
M
N
•
N
•
rl
rl
N
rl
N
rl
N
�
N
r1
ri
N
gg
t7
zy
�
m
m
�..
m
m
U£
0
0
o
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
O
O O
0
r�
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
O
O
4
0
0
O
0
0
P°
0
0
w
0
0
O N
/rl 10
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
a
N
\
O O
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
•
•
•
a
0 0
O O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
b a
\
•
\
•
\
.�
\
•
\
•
\
a
\
•
\
•
\
•
\
•
\
•
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
0
0
o
O
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
O
O
1
rl
1D
o
1
O
N
O
1
O
N
O
1
O
O
O
1
N
ri
O
1
ri
M
O O
1 1
r! O
10 N
O
1
e•1
10
O
1
N
N
O
1
O
N
0
N
w
M
N
w
M
N
W
M
1�
N
N
N
10
M
10
M
M
N N
10 10
M M
N
w
M
•
M
M
N
w
M
rl
I
O
o
1
O
O
1
O
O
1
O
O
1
O
O
1
O
O
I 1
O O
O O
1
O
O
1
O
O
1
O
O
N
r/ m
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O
O
O
0
1
N
0
1
m
0
I
O
0
1
N
0
1
O
0
1
N
0 0
1 1
O O
0
1
N
0
1
O
o
1
m
IS
F
O
10
10
10
10
o
In
o
10
0 0
10
0
10
F
G1
-
m
°a
m
6
O
N
O
r/
O
ri
O
rl
O
ri
O
N
O
N
N N
N
N
N
ri
N
N
O
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
N
•
N
•
rl
rl
N
rl
N
rl
N
r4
N
r1
ri
N
gg
t7
�
m
m
m
m
m
U£
0
0
o
O
O
O
o
O
O
O
O
O O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
O
O
4
0
0
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O N
/rl 10
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
O O
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
•
•
•
a
0 0
O O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
b a
\
•
\
•
\
.�
\
•
\
•
\
a
\
•
\
•
\
•
\
•
\
•
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
0
o f
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
o
0
0
0
N
N
M
•
111
10
1.
m
01
O
rl
W
V
I
a
rt
F04
M
W�
a
H
ON
�O1 i
al
I
I
M 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
i
• rl
O
N
1
O
1
O
O
m PI
N
YI
O
O
O
YI N
N
m
O
O
o
N •
41 41
n
�
N
•
N
•
N
•
rl
N 01
PI
YI
0
o
O o
N
F3
�
gg
ti
gg
E7
gg
t7
�
m
m
m
m
m
m m
ri
ri
ri
.i
ri
e
N
rl
ri
W
r+
N
rl N
rl
ri
rl
N
IH
r•1 N
rl
r♦
PI
N
M
ri
M
N
1A
N
N 1r1
rl rl
0
as
0
0
o
�
0
0
0
0
o
O o
a�a
t7
F3
�
gg
ti
gg
E7
gg
t7
�
m
m
m
m
m
m m
ri
ri
ri
.i
ri
r1 N
O
O
o
O
O
O O
O
O
O
O
•
• O
1
O
1
O
1
YI
1
YI
1
Irl
1 1
- Irl rl
0
0
.�
ri
•
a 10
n
N
n
N
N'
N
G
PI
O N
/rl 10
rl
N
Irl
A
A
f9
•
• PI
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
0
O
0
o
o
O
O
o
o
O
0 0
O O
b
1p
1N0
10
1Np
b a
N
N
N
N
N
N N
rl
ri
rl
r+
N
rl N
rl
ri
rl
N
IH
r•1 N
rl
r♦
PI
N
M
ri
M
N
1A
N
N 1r1
rl rl
0
0
0
0
o
O o
0
0
0
0
o
O o
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
rq
m
m
m
m
m
m m
ri
ri
ri
.i
ri
r1 N
a
0
a
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
0
O O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
O
ri
N o
0
rn
0
•
0
h
o b n o
N m
m
v
a
N
x HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
Memorandum
DATE: April 28, 2000
TO: William W. Burns, Executive Director of HRA AC91
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Grant Femelius, Housing Coordinator
SUBJECT: Reconsider Acquisition of Central Avenue Parcels
Introduction
At the May 4, 2000, meeting, the HRA will need to decide on whether they want to proceed
with the closings on the three properties along Old Central Avenue. Prior to the regular
meeting on the 4th, the HRA will meet with the City Council to review the Council /Commission
Survey results. Hopefully, during the joint meeting we can get some direction on where the
HRA and Council want to go. The purpose of this memo is to:
1. Provide a brief history on the sites.
2. Provide a summary of the soil investigation and subsequent discussions with the sellers.
3. Review the potential redevelopment objectives for the Old Central Avenue corridor.
4. Outline staffs recommendation on what to do next.
History
The three sites in question are located along Old Central between Rice Creek Road and
Mississippi Street. The Carlson property (Parcel A) is approximately 1 acre in size and is on the
east side of Old Central, south of Zap -It Welding. The Erickson property (Parcel B) is slightly
more than 1.5 acres in size and is located between Advance Companies and Ziebart on the west
side of Old Central. The last site, which is owned by Doug Petty (Parcel C), is about .75 acres
in size and is located west of Ziebart.
The properties were initially purchased by the HRA last December using. the additional TIF
resources from districts #2 and #3. Those funds had to be spent by the end of 1999 or would
no longer be available. Because there was a significant amount of due diligence (i.e. soil
investigation, title work, etc.) required before we could close, the funds were placed into
3
Central Avenue Memo
April 28, 2000
Page 2
escrow. Since that time, we have worked with our environmental consultant to test the soil and
determine the suitability for future development. A summary of those findings can be found
below.
Soil Investigation
In February of this year Liesch Associates, our environmental consultant, conducted a series of
soil tests on all three sites. Their findings revealed the presence of organic soil on the Erickson
and Petty properties and a fair amount of demolition debris, probably used as fill, on all three
sites. We then asked Liesch to prepare cost estimates for what it would cost to remediate the
poor soils. The chart below provides a summary of the costs.
With regard to the Erickson and Petty sites, our consultant felt that the organic soils could not
be removed without significant expense. As an alternative they recommended that pilings be
used to support the proposed building and associated utilities. Because we did not know what
type of building would be constructed, Liesch had to make some assumptions. In this case,
they assumed a one story building (roughly 16,000 s.f.) on both sites with an anticipated cost
of $66,000 per building to drive pilings. Obviously, depending on what is built the cost to drive
pilings will vary.
Based on the existing zoning of the Petty property, a 16,000 sq. ft. building is twice as large as
what could be built and therefore, the correction cost is somewhat inflated. On the Erickson
property a slightly larger building could be built, but a 16,000 sq. ft. foot print was used for
simplicity; the cost estimate may be undervalued in this case.
In terms of the debris removal, our consultant indicated that on the Erickson and Petty sites,
the debris was more superficial and easier to clean -up. The Carlson site was a different matter.
A second set of test pits revealed a debris field covering approximately half the site and ranging
in depths from 3 feet to 10+ feet. Because the contents included such things as construction
debris, garbage, paint cans, car parts and other unknown items, Liesch was unable to estimate
the clean -up costs. In all likelihood the soil would have to be excavated and separated on site
for proper disposal.
Debris Removal
Piling
Total
Initial Acq./
Site
Cost
Cost
Revised Ac q.
Carlson
Unknown
N/A
Unknown
$104,000 (I)
$95,000 R
Erickson
$16,500 to
$66,000
$82,500 to
$166,000 (I)
$22,000
$88,000
$86100 (R).
Petty
$22,500 to
$66,000
$88,000 to
$90,800(1)
$30,000
$96,000
$57,000 R
With regard to the Erickson and Petty sites, our consultant felt that the organic soils could not
be removed without significant expense. As an alternative they recommended that pilings be
used to support the proposed building and associated utilities. Because we did not know what
type of building would be constructed, Liesch had to make some assumptions. In this case,
they assumed a one story building (roughly 16,000 s.f.) on both sites with an anticipated cost
of $66,000 per building to drive pilings. Obviously, depending on what is built the cost to drive
pilings will vary.
Based on the existing zoning of the Petty property, a 16,000 sq. ft. building is twice as large as
what could be built and therefore, the correction cost is somewhat inflated. On the Erickson
property a slightly larger building could be built, but a 16,000 sq. ft. foot print was used for
simplicity; the cost estimate may be undervalued in this case.
In terms of the debris removal, our consultant indicated that on the Erickson and Petty sites,
the debris was more superficial and easier to clean -up. The Carlson site was a different matter.
A second set of test pits revealed a debris field covering approximately half the site and ranging
in depths from 3 feet to 10+ feet. Because the contents included such things as construction
debris, garbage, paint cans, car parts and other unknown items, Liesch was unable to estimate
the clean -up costs. In all likelihood the soil would have to be excavated and separated on site
for proper disposal.
Central Avenue Memo
April 28, 2000
Pace 3
After reviewing the soil remediation costs with the sellers, we were able to gain some
concessions in the purchase price. The (I) refers to initial price that was approved by the HRA
in December and the (R) refers to the revised price staff negotiated with the sellers. It should
be emphasized that the revised figure does not correlate dollar- for - dollar with the soil correction
expenses. In the case of the Carlson and Petty sites, the sellers felt that staffs estimates were
too high and therefore agreed to less of a price reduction.
The bottom line is that we know there are soil problems with all of the sites and that the cost to
correct these problems could be expensive. We are still evaluating what options are available
to preserve part of the escrow money toward the soil correction expenses.
Redevelopment Options
At the time of our recommendation, staff emphasized that redevelopment of the Central Avenue
corridor was at least five to ten years into the future. With the Medtronic project underway, it
seems likely that some type of redevelopment will occur along Old Central because of its
proximity to the two campuses and it's location to Moore Lake retail /commercial area.
Among the reasons for redeveloping this corridor is the fact it contains a mixture vacant land
and non - compatible land uses (e.g. light industrial, commercial, and residential). Redeveloping
this area would not only create a cohesive land use pattern, but also help improve the image of
a visible corridor. From a larger perspective, this is one of the few remaining areas in the city
with vacant or underutilized land. While we have not done a detailed analysis of the corridor
there are a number of potential redevelopment scenarios to consider, including:
1) Residential use (including higher density multi- family or town homes)
2) Office use (one story type building for professionals)
3) Mixed use (including residential, office and /or retail such as a deli, bookstore, or coffee
shop).
4) Hotel use (extended -stay type facility)
Regardless of the option, additional expenditures will be required for land acquisition and other
development costs. For example, on the west side of Old Central both the Ziebart and Advance
Company sites would need to be acquired. In addition, there is a vacant parcel between
Sandy's Restaurant and Advance Companies that would need to be acquired.
Next Steps
The real issue to decide is whether the Old Central corridor is a priority for redevelopment?
After discussing all of the facts (as we know them) with our team of consultants, staff believes
that redevelopment of the Old Central corridor is worthwhile. We do, however, believe that as a
practical matter the west side of Old Central should probably be developed first. The basis for
Central Avenue Memo
April 28, 2000
Paqe 4
this recommendation is fairly straightforward: 1) the HRA will have site control on two of the
five parcels and 2) in a worst -case scenario the sites could be developed independently in the
event a larger redevelopment effort doesn't materialize. In fact, staff has already received
preliminary interest from a dental clinic for the Petty site. We should not discount the
possibility that at some point in the future the current owners (Ziebart and Advance) may want
to sell depending on their particular business needs.
The east side of Old Central is more problematic. The HRA would only have site control on one
site and the potential for very expensive clean -up. It is quite possible that the debris field on
the Carlson property extends to the adjoining sites to the north. Because of this, it is doubtful
that the east side will develop without public involvement.
Recommendation
To summarize, staff is recommending that the HRA proceed with the closings on the Erickson
and Petty sites. We are recommending that the HRA not proceed with the Carlson property
closing.
To formalize these decisions, the HRA should take-the following action:
1. Approve the modified purchase price amounts for the Petty property from $90,800 to
$57,000; and for the Erickson property from $166,000 to $86,100; with the
understanding that the balance of funds held in escrow be applied to any environmental
clean -up costs.
2. Exercise its right to terminate the Option Agreement with Richard Carlson with the
understanding that the funds held in escrow will be returned to the HRA for repayment
of the City's loan.
Should the HRA decide it does not want to proceed with the Erickson and Petty transactions,
separate motions would be required to terminate those agreements.
gf
M -00 -73
vimi.fiesch.com �
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 1340015TH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55441 612/559 -1423 FAX: 612/559 -2202
February 17, 2000
Mr. Grant Fernelius
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue N.E. --
Fridley, MN 55432
RE: Cost Estimate for Demolition Debris Removal/Disposal and Increase in Construction Costs
Due to Presence of Organic Material at the Erickson Property
Dear Mr. Fernelius:
Per your conversation with Kirk Davis, Liesch Associates, Inc. ( "Liesch ") has prepared a cost
estimate attempting to outline the additional costs associated with the future development of the
Erickson Property. Based on the presence of demolition debris materials and extensive organic
deposits, the costs to develop the property will increase.
Mr. Davis visited the property on January 6`h in an attempt to visually estimate the amount of
demolition debris present. To further evaluate the property, geotechnical borings were advanced on
January 21, 2000 by GME Consultants, Inc. During drilling activities on the Erickson Property on
January 21", the depth of organic soils present was determined and additional estimates were made
as to the amount of demolition debris present. Visual estimates of the amount of demolition debris
present were then compared with information obtained through the review of historical aerial
photographs and historical topographic maps. The GME Consultants, Inc. "Preliminary
Geotechnical Exploration — Carlson, Petty and Erickson Parcels" dated February 4, 2000 was also
consulted for the depth of organic deposits and the amount of demolition debris present on -site.
From this limited data, assumptions were made, as documented on the attached outline, in an
attempt to estimate the amount of demolition debris present on the Erickson Property. An estimate
was also made as to the increase in construction costs due to the presence of large amounts of peat
present on the Erickson Property.
Due to the lack of available data, please understand that there is potentially a great variability in the
actual amount of demolition debris present and the amount we have estimated. Additionally, the
increase in construction costs due to the presence of organic material is a gross estimation based on
the costs of installing driven piles. The decision to install piles was based on Liesch engineer's
experience. Liesch was not provided with information regarding the bearing weight of underlying
soils or information about the type, size and potential use of any structures that may be built on the
Erickson Property.
Page 2
February 17, 2000
Costs to Remove Demolition Debris
Based on the limited information collected to date and the assumptions made, Liesch anticipates the
increased development costs to range from approximately $16,500 to $22,000. The attached outline
presents the breakdown of costs and assumptions made in gathering information for these costs.
These costs represent the increase in costs related to handling and disposal of the demolition debris.
No allowances have been made for mobilization, non - suitable soil disposal, trucking or fill
materials brought on -site. Additionally, costs are not included for the disposal or handling of any
impacted soils which may be present on -site. This cost estimate does not constitute a not to exceed
value due to the limited amount of information available at this time. Also, please be aware that
this cost estimate is subject to revision should additional information become available.
Increase in Construction Costs Due to Presence of Peat
As discussed in the GME Report, extensive organic deposits were found on the Erickson Property.
Due to the presence of these organic deposits, building construction at this site will require
additional time and materials over a site where favorable soils are present. As discussed in the .
GME Report there are two options for development of this parcel. The first option would be
complete excavation of the organic soils and replacement with new compacted sand fill. The
second option would be to support buildings on driven piles.
If complete excavation of the organic soils was chosen, soils would be excavated to depths of
approximately 15 feet below the existing grade. Extensive dewatering would be required if
complete excavation of the organic soils is conducted. Based on the limited information available
at this time, Liesch is not able- to determine the costs to conduct full soil correction activities. Once
additional information regarding the development of the Erickinson Property would be available,
including the size, type and use of the building to be constructed, a cost estimate could be
completed.
The second options for development of the Erickson Property is construction of future buildings on
driven piles. As stated above, to estimate the increased costs associated with development of the
Erickson Property due to the presence of organic soils, additional information would be required.
Typically, in cases where extensive soil correction would be necessary, pile construction is the more
economical option. Therefore, in an effort to provide hypothetical costs to the City of Fridley,
Liesch has made the following assumptions:
• The building to be construction on the Erickson Property will be approximately 16,000 square
feet (125 -feet x 125- feet);
• Piles are required to be place every 10 feet throughout the buildings footprint (156 piles);
• Piles will be placed to a depth of 30 feet below grade;
• Timber piles will be used (at a cost of $14 per vertical linear foot).
Based on the above assumptions, it is estimated that the installations of piles will cost
approximately $66,000. Additional costs that cannot be estimated at this time would include the
installation of investigative borings (necessary to evaluate pile sizes, installation depths and
capacities), increased structural design costs, increased costs for installation of utilities, etc.
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 13400 15TH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55441
Page 3
February 17, 2000
Thank you for calling and giving us the opportunity to work with you on this project. Please feel
free to contact either Kirk Davis or me if you have any questions, or need further clarification.
Sincerely,
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC.
Stephanie S. Stolz
attachment
w Asa\62962Vtr2000feb l 7a.doc
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 13400 15TH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55441
s
cc
ca
w
cu
.5
c
c
0
0
O
N
i
C
R
c
0
..yr
cc
C
0
-o
N
e^C
c
C
O
h
.o
O
'o
.b
u
cu
s
c
y
U
s
v
O
a
a>
R
V
W
V
a
u
1�1
y � ,
L b
A o
O
A Q
d
co
u � C •
3 o u
Wj
L,p O a. � • C
s C d w =
a y w vui
C6 0
O A c 0 y
a y
soC s
vu
o ca o y O
V1
s
Q •r � U
V1 •y � I 'fl
> >+ °
r0 y l4
cc
CC
Q
u ai
2'v'fi
Gn
L
y R U c V7
u C3
:1 v ° 3 `o
� •� V y tr CO
O =
N
y � � � •O O
f4 •� Vi.
= tQ y = 00 O
eco 3
O
a to s U O
00su, �• � '� ai
N
N w C eca
S2 u u o c
u
L
'L y
U
y= R u
Q O c R C
a V = —
vi
O � H � •y
b
Co
°.:
Vto Iti O
V U tn d i.
o D
rA
y ^
cz Q L
y U
0 3 �
W) c � •v h
cc
fU
cn
u h p eca �
C
euo s
u � v
as io � u
o.00 co � c u . 's
.� � • � eu`a
s _ g
>
cc
r '
_
• V l0 fA m •,�'.
^r a•C = O
O co 7 =
O O
t: Ac`s v L
q u o t a
LU
O a
a y
u .t to
s cuo cv � u
Vl O 7 O
v� 'y 't7 N •� a
y
cc
.ta lQ
O O d0 y > r
+V+
u � � O .y
y O
cc s V V 4.
m a�o s o
'd
u
� U
C
C2 A ,0
C c>J
� y v
c
,O •O
y LO l0
N U C
+• U 4,
% � y
c y
v C V
� =z
00 -o c
� r d
'U
R
mo
y a
0
� u
v �
L �••.
Oyl ' y o
c
c v O
� u
b
Ca
` y
Ry fA
v
y
hrA
to
u '�C
s cl
c
X cc
l0
c cE
v c
0
ee
u a �
y 0
O M
0 H
L p L
v
au, _
� y �
A^
•c G Cc
r
Gl
O=
t0 u
O \ C
.r M y
� � H
Q u
O
.-. O
>� N
69
V�
N y
w y
�z
w
O
O
6r9
t..
c
L
V
u
LV
w
O
U)
�v
cc
y
N
O
a
a
V
O
O
0
N
V
'x
0
a
cc
0
.�u�o
e
u
C
u
c
Q
-o
E
O
W
`o
v -a
o "
a
v
.V V
N U
y b
4n �
O �
O C*
su, o
o c
ae
— aG
.V U
h C
O =
u
O
0
N L�
r
:►i y
'p O
c u
R O
..1 c
O
0
a`
69
1
G
O
000 O
cp V
bs °
� � O
a�
O � d
••• c
U C U
N 6uLJ �
C.4 0 y
u o u
C vi
W
0
O
O
N
N
69
O
0
0
J �
�C
W w
V
u
ca
.0
O
Q
s
V
u
M
LIESCH ASSOCIATES. INC. 1340015TH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55441 612/559 -1423 FAX: 612/559 -2202
February 17, 2000
Mr. Grant Fernelius
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 — -
RE: Cost Estimate for Demolition Debris Removal/Disposal at the Carlson Property
Dear Mr. Fernelius:
Per your conversation with Kirk Davis, Liesch Associates, Inc. ( "Liesch ") has prepared a cost estimate
attempting to outline the additional costs associated with the future development of the Carlson Property.
Based on the presence of demolition debris materials, the costs to develop the property will increase. Mr.
Davis visited the property on January 6`h in an attempt to visually estimate the amount of debris present.
During drilling on the Carlson Property and surrounding areas on January 20'', 21" and 20, additional
estimates were made as to the amount of debris present. These visual estimates were then compared with
information obtained through the review of historical aerial photographs and historical topographic maps.
From this limited data. assumptions were then made, as documented on the attached outline. in an attempt to
estimate the amount of demolition debris present on the Carlson Property. Due to the lack of available data,
please understand that there is potentially a great variability in the actual amount of demolition debris present
and the amount we have estimated.
Based on the limited information collected to date and the assumptions made, Liesch anticipates the
increased development costs to range from approximately $37,000 to $58,000. The attached outline presents
the breakdown of costs and assumptions made in gathering information for these costs. These costs represent
the increase in costs related to handling and disposal of the demolition debris. No allowances have been
made for mobilization, non - suitable soil disposal, trucking or filrmaterials brought on -site. Additionally,
costs are not included for the disposal or handling of any impacted soils which may be present on -site. This
cost estimate does not constitute a not to exceed value due to the limited amount of information available at
this time. Also, please be aware that this cost estimate is subject to revision should additional information
become available.
Thank you for calling and giving us the opportunity to work with you on this project. Please feel free to
contact either Kirk Davis or me if you have any questions, or need further clarification.
Sincerely,
L I E S.5 H ASSOCIATES, I N11
S. Stolz
wAsa \62963 \Itr2000jan 1 O.doc
4 .
%— y
O R
R �". i"' •r L y
s s.c ua°'a'Oi
u
_ b
= �- 0 0
R
'O u p O
N
R
c00 3 .2 e t—
O ^ Q
CD
N 7 u a A
o
to. u == E
U � y G R
R 3 V 'x R
cc lO o
O C h r O .O
_ C u e F
ca C
V
y cz R �' i1 0 •y
O a G O a 0 .O
O ZO
O y ^ v N
a
t
cz .0 U
R = L O y
_D R
u A CL 3 3
C p
°' u o0
a� •x
O U U o
R 3 0 s s 3
u �
c 00 c
cc
u u
R
O. N
to v C O
o `"
cn
a
O O 0 0
a « u
" y
W v Q ` j
w R >' p d y
Q O N G
ej '3
O O N V ¢ R 4O
w y
R �
� •Ui •N 'y
to 4.
y r A y
to
o
s
O .0 y cOe U
O b R appi, 3
rA
p O V
MO
.�•� O
O Q � •`
N it y w
C y ^ A
O —aui a�i
v •� R =
3 00.0 >,s
..0 O O R 0 R - ca
v
>u E
== 3
s° �
.O -- a U e0
p _ .a `u°
y R x
b u = v
s .m� L V R
3 m to
R
O v
in. .r
•'A r
'� .y.. •� •N R
O .O � R •— U
CL
on.±-
„
wj
R
V
� U �
R y v
ty V U
x - u
� •3 �
u � t
i x
Q N
L7 Ca
a s
�a'-• nui 'E
�'E
i R �.
U E t-
_ N
vz
•u v _
Q L y
u �
y .�
vs
C
C R y
� = u
U L >
O O
%• y
R
:fie=
U N R
� O
R _s
u �
c
tj v cr
N
0 0
y � Q
v E
.LC* ,� R
U
� c
V
u
s c
�° v •3
R
s
u -o
o c
4
u �
NO
v
= u
L
N U
tn
�z
a
O
Q W)
Cc U
u N
yr
O �
N �
v C
E v
V
N u
to
W O
H Z
R
q
0
O
N
O:
C
a�
V
u
R
Q
U
N
O
h
s.
u
e
v
u
y
R
w
0
d
N
E
y
V
a
y
0
V,
b �
00 u
O >
R
d �
.O
= e
y G
o
o
E
R 0
s �
O
V
R
h �
O R
CE
h
y. O
u
'C p
'fl y
h
0
0
v�
N
EA
O
N O
>
E , ~
0
h
.d
Q
U rR. 3
v
C u
't7
y U
O
O
0
N
E
a
e
°O ,o
N
b 'U
O
e
0 = o
4n
'' E
V y
O CO R
v _
(14 ob cc
v U
v aoi 'o
aU. C
• y V
vyi G vui
V r per
R
q
CO
h
d9
O
O
O
tt
rsi
W
V
u
a
CL
O
h
N
t7
O
0
V'f
r
10
M
N
O
U
tr £ ...
O
a+ W
C y
QG p
u x
R 5"i
u
N y
h 9
a;
sC4
y N
as �
CL
vimi.liesch.com
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 1340015TH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55441 612/559 -1423 FAX: 6121559 -2202
February 17, 2000
Mr. Grant Fernelius
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue N.E. --
Fridley, MN 55432
RE: Cost Estimate for Demolition Debris Removal/Disposal and Increase in. Construction Costs
Due to Presence of Organic Material at the Petty Property
Dear Mr. Fernelius:
Per your conversation with Kirk Davis, Liesch Associates, Inc. ( "Liesch ") has prepared a cost
estimate attempting to outline the additional costs associated with the future developntert. of the
Petty Property. Based on the presence of demolition debris materials and _xtcnsive organic
deposits, the costs to develop the property will increase.
Mr. Davis visited the property on January 6`y in an attempt to visually estimate the amount of
demolition debris present. To Further evaluate the property, gcotechnical borings were advanced on
January 23, 2000 by GME Consultants, Inc. During drilling on the Petty Property on January 23rd,
the depth of organic soils present was determined and additional estimates were made as to the
amount of demolition debris present. Visual estimates of the amount of demolition debris present
were then compared with information obtained through the review of historical aerial photographs
and historical topographic maps. The GME Consultants, Inc. "Preliminary Geotechnical
Exploration — Carlson, Petty and Erickson Parcels" dated February 4, 2000 was also consulted for
the depth of organic deposits and the amount of demolition debris present on -site. From this limited
data, assumptions were made, as documented on the attached outline, in an attempt to estimate the
amount of demolition debris present on the Petty Property. An estimate was also made as to the
increase in construction costs due to the presence of large amounts of peat present on the Petty
Property.
Due to the lack of available data, please understand that there is potentially a great variability in the
actual amount of demolition debris present and the amount we have estimated. Additionally, the
increase in construction costs due to the presence of organic material is a gross estimation based on
the costs of installing driven piles. The decision to install piles was based'on Liesch engineer's
experience. Liesch was not provided with information regarding the bearing weight of underlying
soils or information about the type, size and potential use of any structures that may be built on the
Petty Property.
Page 2
February 17, 2000
Costs to Remove Demolition Debris
Based on the limited information collected to date and the assumptions made, Liesch anticipates the
increased development costs to range from approximately $22,500 to $30,000. The attached outline
presents the breakdown of costs and assumptions made in gathering information for these costs.
These costs represent the increase in costs related to handling and disposal of the demolition debris.
No allowances have been made for mobilization, non - suitable soil disposal, trucking or fill
materials brought on -site. Additionally, costs are not included for the disposal or handling of any
impacted soils which may be present on -site. This cost estimate does not constitute a not to exceed
value due to the limited amount of information available at this time. Also, please be aware that
this cost estimate is subject to revision should additional information become available.
Increase in Construction Costs Due to Presence of Peat
As discussed in the GME Report, extensive organic deposits were found on the Petty Property. Due
to the presence of these organic deposits, building construction at this site will require additional
time and materials over a site where favorable soils are present. As discussed in the GME Report
there are two options for development of this parcel. The first option would be complete excavation
of the organic soils and replacement with new compacted sand fill. The second option would be to
support buildings on driven piles.
If complete excavation of the organic soils was chosen, soils would be excavated to depths of
approximately 15 feet below the existing grade. Extensive dewatering would be required if
complete excavation of the organic soils is conducted. Based on the limited information available
at this time, Liesch is not able to determine the costs to conduct full soil correction activities. Once
additional information regarding the development of the Petty Property would be available,
including the size, type and use of the building to be constructed, a cost estimate could be
completed.
The second options for development of the Petty Property is construction of future buildings on
driven piles. As stated above, to estimate the increased costs associated with development of the
Petty Property due to the presence of organic soils, additional information would be required.
Typically, in cases where extensive soil correction would be necessary, pile construction is the more
economical option. Therefore, in an effort to provide hypothetical costs to the City of Fridley,
Liesch has made the following assumptions:
• The building to be construction on the Erickson Property will be approximately 16,000 square
feet (125 -feet x 125- feet);
• Piles are required to be place every 10 feet throughout the buildings footprint (156 piles);
• Piles will be placed to a depth of 30 feet below grade;
• Timber piles will be used (at a cost of $14 per vertical linear foot).
Based on the above assumptions, it is estimated that the installations of piles will cost
approximately $66,000. Additional costs that cannot be estimated at this time would include the
installation of investigative borings (necessary to evaluate pile sizes, installation depths and
capacities), increased structural design costs, increased costs for installation of utilities, etc.
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 13400 15TH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55441
Page 3
February 17, 2000
Thank you for calling and giving us the opportunity to work with you on this project. Please feel
free to contact either Kirk Davis or me if you have any questions, or need further clarification.
Sincerely,
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC.
ag�--
Stephanie S. Stolz
attachment
wAsa \62962 \Itr2000feb I Tdoc
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 13400 15TH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55441
• f
6)
A •r
v
cc O , . O
>
67
6J 'C u
c eya O d O
GO O V ' �, •' c3
oN
0 t 0
Z, m ° ca v
too Q,o
C N 67
.m ° O O
a mo
o po' u C
_ O
•> c N l0 i0 4.
y U 6)
� ',:, �.• is u w
O S
C Z v
O U .y 0
a7 �.
-o O
C Ca u es 0
Gi yV°l to �-• Q
cl
3 C*
O. u
v
� •C c c ss. �
C 67 w 67 N
a
cz y R Q ..
G ��r
6) G CCc 7
0 -C Q. N N R
H
R
0
v ` o
c, c O 0 U
c`9 y TA
c
OG ° 9`a s a C m o
y N c.. m rs 40 '►�
•�, ° N ° C 3 C
cc
N-4 o. O
1! U r.
607 v O w 0
c
V
la �
u .
1
•y •O .... 'L7 ea
raw N 67
.y � U
O F. 'C .G a
u c O 'C
� >+ V •r .O+
wi p C
s s
O � � 6Ni • 0
r
u .r O
6) 6) 6) 4.
0 u A o
O R
t: y Si C 0
4. .
a •w o u s
ca t O 2 IIq
_y !� a ,%•
cc
6) ,y V = y 0.
u u
IJ
067 •= `
`.a u y u w
a s c a7 u
N > .0
o.0 c
•C .� N U
."C.. R ca
o,: •� E
> ° s 1O u
C; >
d u
U x
C A 0
r= 5 A
.p O
�. eC cc dJ p
p 0 y A
qj
c
OI. u e3
a C N cc
yU U ,O 07
ca O c
O 0 O y
UO R •N .� _N
An U ^ R C
O
U2
p
v
'C c
� v >
3 •� s
cu '3 c
y v U
� C
O �
v �
� y C
tUA ^ R
E
v
0 C
C O
Paz
•u
67
Q. H
N y
O
.•_y C 'C
1
CZ � ^^
cs
w °
u O
7 u
N >
y =
= N r
c1 a
o s c
o CO
es
be � 0
c0 N aC
c -
•x �
� b
o 1w' O
R
a7 O.
Do y O
F O R
a0 y 'r
ca u
C C G
67
C _
cc N C
V
c7
MO Qr
5 u �
U
O
� � O
M
� � N
Q � u
O
O
0
O O�
0
7 1 C
CO ° u
� � N
� U O
L•]
y
O
0.
N
Q
U
O
O
0
N
.x
O
a
V
w
m
4.
0
DD
L'
c
I�
67
0
A
67
Q
0
u �
O �
� c
• -y u
� 67
y 10
o =
C
O R�
cs
w O
O
V v
to
i
y u
V
e0
N
O 0
U ._
ca •O
Q o
t0
,O c0
w
C o u
o
c
0
0
In
1
E
c
C
p ,O
r V
N O
69
1 d
67
V1
Ev
L ^a
con
C
� C u
'C
O � _
� y �
� % h
W
O
O
O
O
t+1
O
O
0
N 1!1
UN
69
O e7
u
C -
a w
u
6yi
A
•U
H
Q
U
67
M
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 1340015TH.AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55441 612/559 -1423 FAX: 612/559 -2202
April 24, 2000
Mr. Grant Fernelius
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue Northeast
Fridley, Minnesota 55432
RE: Carlson Property Test Pits, Fridley, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Fernelius:
As per your request of April 20, 2000, I have prepared this brief description of findings noted
during the excavation of 12 test pits on the above - referenced site on April 19, 2000. The test pits
were excavated by City of Fridley personnel using city -owned equipment and documented by
Liesch Associates. The test pits were generally placed across the site except for the south side where
trees impeded access for the track hoe as did a "slope" of fill material which runs near the southern
perimeter and appears to define the limits of the dump on that side of the site. The figure attached to
this letter, adapted by Liesch from a copy originally received from the City of Fridley, shows the
approximate locations of the test pits and the irregular line approximately depicts this "slope" or
apparent dump limits. The land on the south side of this line appears to be at a native, or unfilled,
level.
The majority of the dumped material appears to be demolition debris in the form of concrete,
concrete block, asphalt and some bricks. Non - demolition debris encountered included metal,
hosing, plastic, cans, shingles, tarpaper, clothing, burned wood, car and appliance parts, wire,
bedsprings, carpetincra a 55- gallon drum remnant, bottles- glass and plastic five - gallon pail liners.
With the exception of a one -quart can of paint located in test pit (TP) -12, no hazardous materials
were encountered nor were obviously stained, odorous or suspicious soils. Floor tile remnants were
detected in TP -7 and submitted to EMSL laboratories for asbestos - content analysis. Results are
pending at the time this letter is written and will be forwarded when they are received by Liesch. If
asbestos is present in the tile sample, any excavation conducted in the future at the site will require
the services of a licensed equipment operator.
At termination, each test pit was back - filled with its original contents.
Test Pit 1
Minor amounts of rock, brick and metal were present to a depth of approximately three feet.
Between three and six feet soils appeared to be fill. Apparent buried topsoil was encountered at
approximately six feet.
Page 2
April 24, 2000
Test Pit 2
Concrete, hosing, cans, plastic, shingles, block and clothing were noted to a depth of approximately
five feet where apparent buried topsoil was encountered. This test pit (and test pits 3 and 4) were
partially excavated on the apparent unfilled native soil on the south side of the debris slope. At these
three locations the excavation was continued up onto the filled area. All debris encountered at TP -2
was in the filled portion of the excavation.
Test Pit 3
Burned wood, plastic, metal, concrete, plastic one - gallon anti- freeze bottle, tarpaper, car antennae
and possible other car parts, cans and a stove top were encountered at depths to approximately three
feet. Some of this material was noted on the south side of the debris slope on the assumed native
soil level. Clay was encountered approximately three feet below the assumed native level.
Test Pit 4
A plastic bag and ? miner amount of concrete were noted to depths of three feet only on the filled
portion of this test pit.
Test Pit 5
This test pit was excavated primarily on the assumed native ground level. Apparent native sand was
encountered at approximately one foot. The excavation was trenched back up into the debris slope
which at this location contains a lar,,e amount of surficial asphalt. Buried debris was not
encountered.
Test Pit 6
This test pit revealed large pieces of four -inch thick concrete with reinforcing bar. An
approximately 6'x4' piece was encountered at a depth of approximately one foot and a second piece
of the same size was noted just below it at about two feet. A piece approximately TxT was noted at
a depth of about three feet. Asphalt and smaller pieces of concrete were co- mingled with this
material. The pit was extended to the east several feet where asphalt was noted to a depth of
approximately four feet. The pit perimeter was then moved slightly to the south and another large
slab of concrete was located at a depth of two feet with another directly beneath it. These pieces
were too large to remove from the pit and excavation at this location was terminated.
Test Pit a
A large amount of concrete, block and a small amount of brick were encountered to a depth of eight
feet. A coil of wire was noted at approximately five feet and bedsprings were observed at
approximately six feet. A small amount of metal was noted as was an apparent radiator hose. The
excavation was difficult to keep open due to sidewall collapse and so was extended slightly in
lateral size and in depth to approximately ten feet where concrete debris was still present. At this
point the excavation was impossible to keep open without further lateral extension, hence, this test
pit was terminated at a total depth of ten feet.
Test Pit 9
Concrete was noted uniformly to a depth of approximately five feet. Bottles, sheet metal, carpeting,
pieces of floor tile and a remnant of a 55- gallon drum were noted at approximately three feet. There
was no evidence of residual material or former contents of the drum. Stained or odorous soils were
not noted. A layer of brick, wood and asphalt were noted at a depth of approximately six feet. A
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 13400 15TH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55441
Page 3
April 24, 2000
minor amount of similar debris was encountered to a total depth of approximately eight feet where
TP -9 was terminated.
Test Pit 10
Concrete and brick were noted to a depth of approximately two feet. From that point to termination
at approximately ten feet, debris was not encountered.
Test Pit 11
Concrete, bricks, bottles, cans and metal were noted to a depth of approximately three feet where a
large (approximately 4'x3'x2') rock was encountered. From that point to approximately six feet
debris was not noted. At that point more concrete and two plastic five - gallon pail liners were noted.
Several larger (approximately 3'x3') concrete chunks were noted at approximately eight feet and
from that point to approximately ten feet smaller pieces o£ concrete were observed. The excavation
was terminated at that point in a layer of apparent buried topsoil.
Test Pit 12
Asphalt, concrete and cans were present to a depth of approximately two feet. A piece of braided
wire cable was noted at approximately three feet. Debris was not noted from that point to a depth of
approximately seven feet where a piece of metal was noted and a one -quart can of paint. The can
was punctured by the track hoe bucket and a small amount of paint escaped. The can, contents and
the small amount of paint - impacted soil were collected into a plastic bag by L.iesch and removed
from the site. Based on smell, the paint was oil -based. From that point to termination at
approximately ten feet, debris was not encountered.
If you have questions or need additional information. please contact me at (612) 559 -1423.
Sincerely,
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC.
�Gt.Gt�
Kirk Davis
Project Manager
Attachment
cc Mr. Bob Corey
W:\sa\62963\testpitItr.doc
LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 13400 15TH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55441
..
f JAN -05 -2000 10:42 FROM CITY OF FRIDLEY TO 5592202 P.0220
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
-FOR-
. BRIAR HOMES
• Denotes iron monument found
c Denotes iron monument set
50
V
�O
N
W
Q
Q
v � chi
TP4
u TP -2
0
V - 7/
Y 9.6
�a
r •D
I
50 ti
I-
i
334.83
TP -„
TP_12 ❑ TP-s
❑ ❑.
TP -10 TP -9
❑ 13
TP-4
TP-3
Debris Slope
334.98
1 � �
DESSCRIPTION
LOT 18 BLOCK 1
SPRING VALLEY
Anoka County, Minnesota
PETERS, PRICE & SAMSON
LAND SURVEYORS, LTD .
890 -9201
TP -7
j -
0
TP-$
TP-5
Apparent Native Gr nd level
Q
Wye hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a
;;.:-:survey of the boundaries of the above described land, and of the
-location of all buildings thereon, and all visible encroachments
any , fromD or on said land. Dated this 9th day of tray 1983.
°�•��_��__! Robert L. Peters, L.S. . Minn. Ron run iastcn
0
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
Memorandum
DATE: April 28, 2000
TO: William W. Burns, Executive Director of HRA
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Grant Fernelius, Housing Coordinator
SUB7ECT: Update on Gateway East Redevelopment RFP
Attached is a draft of the Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Gateway East Redevelopment
Project. The RFP is the document we will use to solicit proposals from private developers for
the project. Our tentative plan is to mail out the RFP in mid -May with the formal proposals due
in mid -June. Also attached is a list of the developers who will be sent RFP packets.
The RFP packet identifies the goals of the project and provides three site plan /street -
configuration options. The developers will be asked to provide sample building and site plans, a
summary of their experience, city references and basic financial information that will be kept
confidential with the HRA attorney.
We believe a traditional RFP, as opposed to the less formal "Request for Qualifications" is
appropriate in this case. First, much of the ground work for this project has already been done
(i.e. land assembly, site surveys, site plan preparation, etc.). We have completed many of the
initial tasks a developer would do in preparing a proposal. Second, due to the small size of this
project the cost to prepare a proposal will be relatively inexpensive. A traditonal RFP will help
to "weed out" those developers are clearly not interested or unqualified to do the work.
In terms of how we identified the developer list, staff culled the names of developers who are
affiliated with the Sensible Land Use Coalition. We also contacted the Twin Cities Builders
Association on two occasions to seek assistance, but did not receive any names. We have also
included the names of developers who have contacted us over the past year.
Once the proposals are received, we could review them with the HRA at their July meeting. We
could also schedule interviews with the developers that same evening.
We will be happy to discuss the RFP in greater detail at the May a meeting, however no action
is needed by the HRA at this time.
gf
M -00 -74
E
m
�O
IL
C
E
Q.
O
d
d
V
d
N
W
d
(Q
m
N
d
Q.
O
d
d
D
l0 N P t0 f� CCpp f� O O P
Off c� CD O C7 A N O M Ch
l� � CNO W r�
W N N W^ - N C1 N
CD CO O m CD CD W f0 CO CO Co Co CO
2 O
to M CO GD
�o CO I� O
O
, 6N C? (D
C7
�N CO t- mC4
N A C�
r to l0 CD to r r
t0 CO D1 1� CO O CO
MAN CM en — CMM cm 0000 OOf �Mm
r. -NM�NM N�O)Of0e0{0N O�oM
In
Los I$ll G oS Mo s 3WHOWin
CO to O Co to �o Lo Lo CO CO to Co to Co l0 l0 CO to to �o LO
z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z
222222222222222222222
L Y
m m y
CA fA m ql V1 _ N
a x
5 O O 0 m O O O co O
>c.��ma�mm mam�`'4mm��m =c-6i
c c o c m m c c d Ep c a -148
8 _. O C C c c O l0 G7 C C o xx
m 0 2 2 2 m 2 w J 2 5 ?i ?i 2 2 in m 2 m x W
0
O N O O co 0 CD CD CD
M M N M
m O a m m m m m 2 LO Cl)
O_
C0 * U) In to to co U) N
O) �
E m 3> m m m m > w> m 0
z¢ c
>
ALL
o xE
Y c�; `- o � 2 m
b no m W �0
z_oxuiuio vuiuiui `
M Co Co O �7 O 10 � O M O O P— O O N O
NNE OI�ON1W CO MMW MONOMO
to co M � Ln 'Q — co M to O 0) — O M CD CD M
GO Go I-M I- �N — M — N e-
C
U � c
m c o o 0
0
cc C7 m�
_ co =dyn �E
CL
mm mmo�o ammm
C� E y > > E
Im`a m 0 u i p E m p O Gf m Qm. tll p d C
0 W1 m m W 2 o y U, 0 C m U' y� N
> o. —d m� m e mm E 0 c c >
m� mvcLd:t 0 m o E mQ E rx 8aoo
N N C.1 7 m c m co 3 C w 3 C 6i m Ss E m
mY 8° c m o $a o 2> 0x om >• m o
L)=ZU' �mU -kma.mm�Un LLxF-2x '
CO
y L CL y y CD
c 01
w
oYx�z
m mp�� z q 2
mLL w
Z�+ a
C m
m
Y LL 0
c
co n
O CO O Co I,- M W
't
00 Co
0 0
1MO 000 C07
O
00 CD Ln 0 CD � N N_
00 CQ O O M Co M I.-
r.
�O
C�M � A N6AA
a�
CD to V CC� pr
m n CMO 4 N er 17
pr N
N N_
T � N_ G 04 N
N
CD CO CO
CD co co f0 CD CD Co CO CO
_
CD CD
N
l0 N P t0 f� CCpp f� O O P
Off c� CD O C7 A N O M Ch
l� � CNO W r�
W N N W^ - N C1 N
CD CO O m CD CD W f0 CO CO Co Co CO
2 O
to M CO GD
�o CO I� O
O
, 6N C? (D
C7
�N CO t- mC4
N A C�
r to l0 CD to r r
t0 CO D1 1� CO O CO
MAN CM en — CMM cm 0000 OOf �Mm
r. -NM�NM N�O)Of0e0{0N O�oM
In
Los I$ll G oS Mo s 3WHOWin
CO to O Co to �o Lo Lo CO CO to Co to Co l0 l0 CO to to �o LO
z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z
222222222222222222222
L Y
m m y
CA fA m ql V1 _ N
a x
5 O O 0 m O O O co O
>c.��ma�mm mam�`'4mm��m =c-6i
c c o c m m c c d Ep c a -148
8 _. O C C c c O l0 G7 C C o xx
m 0 2 2 2 m 2 w J 2 5 ?i ?i 2 2 in m 2 m x W
0
O N O O co 0 CD CD CD
M M N M
m O a m m m m m 2 LO Cl)
O_
C0 * U) In to to co U) N
O) �
E m 3> m m m m > w> m 0
z¢ c
>
ALL
o xE
Y c�; `- o � 2 m
b no m W �0
z_oxuiuio vuiuiui `
M Co Co O �7 O 10 � O M O O P— O O N O
NNE OI�ON1W CO MMW MONOMO
to co M � Ln 'Q — co M to O 0) — O M CD CD M
GO Go I-M I- �N — M — N e-
C
U � c
m c o o 0
0
cc C7 m�
_ co =dyn �E
CL
mm mmo�o ammm
C� E y > > E
Im`a m 0 u i p E m p O Gf m Qm. tll p d C
0 W1 m m W 2 o y U, 0 C m U' y� N
> o. —d m� m e mm E 0 c c >
m� mvcLd:t 0 m o E mQ E rx 8aoo
N N C.1 7 m c m co 3 C w 3 C 6i m Ss E m
mY 8° c m o $a o 2> 0x om >• m o
L)=ZU' �mU -kma.mm�Un LLxF-2x '
Gateway East
Redevelopment Project
57-h and UniversityAvenue
Request for Proposals
Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, Minnesota 55432
Summary of Redevelopment Opportunity
Introduction
The City of Fridley and Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) would like
to thank you for requesting this Request for Proposals (RFP) information packet.
The RFP is the primary tool that the City and HRA will use in selecting a developer for
the project. This packet contains basic information about the project, the goals of the
project and an outline for preparing a proposal.
Site Description
The redevelopment site is located near the
corner of 57th Avenue NE and University
Avenue NE in Fridley. The project area
consists of five separate parcels com-
prising approximately 2.5 acres. Please
refer to the attached map for more infor-
mation. As of March 1, 2000 the Fridley
HRA had completed all of the land
acquisition activities.
Redevelopment Vision
The goal of this project is to convert a
former commercial area (automotive repair
shop, pawn shop and a small duplex) into a viable residential development.
HRA envisions an owner - occupied town home development which takes
advantage of the close proximity to I -694 and mass transit, convenient shopping
opportunities, nearby schools and an excellent system of parks and trails.
The Fridley
The ideal development must be sensitive to the surrounding neighborhood, allow
continued access to the commercial businesses along the University Avenue Service
Road and attempt to maximize the density of the site. Special attention should be
given to the architectural design of the units, use of exterior materials, site plan, and
other critical components such as landscaping, lighting and off - street parking.
Street Alignment and Site Plan Configurations
To assist the developer in preparing responses to the RFP, three site plans have been
developed. The site plans show the developable area based on the configuration of
the streets in the project area. The City has reviewed these site plans with the
neighborhood adjoining the project and has identified a desired site plan which is
described in Attachment A. The City strongly encourages the developer to incorporate
the desired site plan into their proposal.
Town Home Product
The desired product is an attached town home, two or three stories in height, with a
tuck -under garage (maximum of 2 stalls), private entry and a minimum of two
bedrooms per unit. Single or double - loaded unit designs are acceptable. The site
should be able to accommodate between 24 and 32 units.
The successful development proposal must include a mixture of exterior materials, such
as brick and wood (e.g. columns) and neutral exterior colors, with the exception of
entry doors. - Special consideration should be given to such - .issues -as window and doors
(e.g. style and placement) and any architectural features (e.g. lowers, roof details,
etc.) that will make the units aesthetically pleasing. The plans must be- prepared an
architect licensed by the State of Minnesota.
Other issues that should be addressed include the use of landscaping materials, exterior
lighting, decorative fencing along University Avenue, guest parking and the provision of
open space. Developers are encouraged to be creative in their approach to the site
plan and unit designs.
Public Improvements
The HRA will pay for the public improvements related to the project. At this time, the
HRA anticipates that the public improvements will be limited to public street
construction, sewer, and water mains (construction or modification) and public street
lighting. To expedite the development process, the HRA will ask the developer to take
responsibility for the design and construction of the public improvements. The HRA will
reimburse the developer for these costs which will be negotiated as part of the
development contract.
Private Improvements
The developer will be responsible for all costs to design and install private streets,
lighting, and /or decorative fencing. The developer is also responsible for all land use
approvals and associated fees (i.e. replatting, rezoning, park dedication, etc.) in
addition to the customary building permit fees.
Site Assembly and Control
The HRA has completed all of the land assembly for this project and intends to
demolish the structures in the summer of 2000. The HRA will convey fee simple title to
the developer for all of the sites in the project area. The developer will be responsible
for all site grading and tree removal. The HRA will reimburse the developer for these
costs which will be negotiated as part of the development contract.
Environmental Conditions
A number of environmental studies have been done on the redevelopment site,
including:
1. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, dated February 23, 1998, by STS
Consultants for the JR's Automotive Building (5755 University Avenue).
2. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Pre - Demolition Survey, dated
September 2, 1999, by Uesch _Companies for the Cash 'n' Pawn Building (5807
University Avenue).
3. Remedial Action Work Plan, dated October 25, 1999, by Liesch Companies for
the Cash 'n' Pawn Building (5807 University Avenue) and JR's Automotive
Building (5755 University Avenue). Approved by the MPCA on January 28, 2000.
4. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, dated March 8, 2000, by Liesch
Companies for the two vacant lots (see Attachment A).
All of the above items are available for reviewing in the HRA's office. Contact Grant
Fernelius at 763 - 572 -3591 for more information.
Developer Selection
Developer selection will be based on qualifications and experience, adherence to the
development objectives and requirements outlined on the following pages. It is hereby
understood that submission of a proposal imposes no obligation upon the HRA to
proceed with the sale of the subject property. The Fridley HRA reserves the right to
reject any or all proposals. A final decision on a developer is expected to occur
sometime in early summer 2000.
Project Time Line
Jun. - Jul. 2000 City /HRA to review development proposals
Aug. - Sep. 2000 Developer selection
Oct. - Nov. 2000 Developer to finalize site plans and unit designs.
Dec. 2000 HRA to review /approve Development Contract
Jan. - Feb. 2001 Developer to meet with neighborhood to discuss project.
Mar. - Apr. 2001 City land use approvals
May - Jun. 2001 Site work (e.g. grading, street construction)
Jul. - Aug. 2001 Developer to start construction
Proposal Deadline
Proposals must be received by 5:00 p.m., Friday, June 16, 2000 and should be
submitted to Grant Fernelius, Housing Coordinator, Fridley HRA, 6431 University Avenue
NE, Fridley, MN 55432. One or more developers may be asked to interview before a
panel consisting of the HRA and /or City Council.
Submission Requirements
Proposal Format
I, Developer Information
a. Developer's name, address, contact person, phone and fax numbers.
b. Proposed name of project manager and resume of experience.
c. Names, addresses and phone and fax numbers of architects, contractors,
subcontractors, planners, marketing consultants, and other professionals who
will be a part of the development team. Include the resumes of key
individuals.
II, Pro jectinformation
a. Provide a written discussion of the developer's perception of the market
potential for owner - occupied town homes on the project site. The discussion
should include potential unit prices, values, and other pertinent information.
b. Description of Gateway East project and development plans. Include copy of
proposed site plan and architectural drawings and a general discussion of the
unit design /s.
c. Identification of purchase price for land (development site).
d. Projected cost analysis (including land costs, site preparation, interest, taxes,
architect, engineer, legal closing, marketing /sales, loan fees, contingencies,
overhead and profit).
e. Description of proposed method of financing, including interim lender.
III, Experience and References
a. Description of developer's experience in working with the public sector
especially in regard to redevelopment areas. Also discuss experience working
with prescribed design criteria.
b. Provide two (2) bank references, including the name of the financial
institution, address, phone and fax numbers and a contact person.
c. Provide a current financial statement of the developer and partners (this
information should be in a separate envelope labeled HRA Attorney and will
be kept confidential.
IV, Eirperience and References (cont)
d. Provide three (3) references from city officials in communities of completed
development projects.
Contact Person
Each developer should prepare ten copies and submit them to:
Grant Fernelius
Housing Coordinator
Fridley HRA
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, Minnesota 55432
Questions can be directed to either Grant Fernelius, Housing Coordinator at #763 -572-
3591 or Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director #763 - 572 -3590.
City Fax #763 - 571 -1287
City TDD #763 - 572 -3534
Attachment A
Gateway East Redevelopment Project
Site Plans and Street Configurations
Overview
Several site plans and street configuration designs have been identified to assist
developers in preparing their proposals. All three of these designs were reviewed with
the adjacent neighborhood at a meeting on March 30, 2000. The overwhelming
majority of those in attendance chose Option 1 which is shown on the next page.
Although, the City and HRA have not selected a specific plan, the developers are
encouraged to incorporate Option 1 into their proposals. Developers who deviate from
the desired site plan must be able to demonstrate compelling rationale for doing so.
Existing Site Plan
Option 1(Desired Site Plan) Description
This plan encompasses the following elements:
1. The University Avenue Service Drive
would be re- routed via a new 4t' Street
segment from 57th Place to 57 -1/2
Avenue.
2. A double "reverse curve" would be
built to eliminate through- traffic on
4th Street to access the neighborhood to
the north; residents in the neighborhood
would have to use alternate routes to
access 57th Avenue or University
Avenue.
3. The plan would also require modification
to the Valvoline Rapid Oil site to provide
internal circulation for their traffic.
Option 2 Description
This plan is identical to Option 1, except that
4th Street would have an uninterrupted con-
nection from 57"' Place to 57 -1/2 Avenue.
The neighborhood had serious concerns about
the through - traffic connection on 4th Street.
QLAIgn 3 Description
This plan has the following elements:
1. Utilizes the existing University Avenue
Service Drive.
2. Construction of a cul- de-sac on 57 -1/2
Avenue.
3. Construction of 4"' Street between 57"'
Place and 57 -1/2 Avenue.
The neighborhood also had concerns about this
plan, particularly the reconnection of 4"' Street.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
Memorandum
DATE: April 28, 2000
TO: William W. Bums, Executive Director of HRA
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Update
In preparation for the discussion on Thursday, May 4, 1 have attached a few pages from
the current draft of the land use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, which is now under
consideration by the City. Chairperson Commers requested some additional
information, as to how the Central Avenue vacant parcel acquisition would relate to
what is stated in the comprehensive plan. Additional text has been added to the plan
and is underlined. Staff has been making some changes to clarify the intent and the
meaning of the language to address concerns which have been heard at public
hearings, or to respond to the concerns of the City Attorney or City Manager.
No action is needed on this item and is for background information to discuss
redevelopment priorities next Thursday evening.
BD \jt
Enclosure
M -00 -75
�
Fridley Comprehensive Plan Draft April 28, 2000
Future Land Use
The overall land use pattern in the short term will remain largely unchanged. In the longer term,
however (5 to 10 or more years from now), there are three forces that will greatly affect the land
use patterns in Fridley. These include:
• A planned commuter rail service (Northstar) with a station area in the City will have an
immediate effect within the next five years. Longer term, increased bus service and possibly
light rail transit along University Avenue will also provide another means of mobility for
Employees coming to Fridley and residents of Fridley who want to reach other locations in
the region.
The Medtronic World Headquarters development, because of its prestige and employment
base, will create the opportunity to attract new commercial and ind SbW cl ell uses with
new housing construction, both owner occupied and rental. Customary
corporate office developments such as a quality hotel and restaurant uses could compliment
and bolster the Fridley commercial base. The Medtronic development is also likely to
generate a need for move -up housing in Fridley. Since land for residential development is
scarce, this need will create a stimulus for redevelopment of potential move up housing areas.
The prestigious image created by a second Medtronic facility is also advantageous to the
City's goal of improving its image in the region and sets the tone for fimue development and
redevelopment in the I-694 corridor.
• The extent to which the Fridley HRA assumes a proactive role in promoting redevelopment
of more blighted areas in Fridley will also greatly affect the Fridley land use pattern.
The intent of the future land use plan is to guide future growth in a way that best achieves the
community's collective vision and provides a balanced land use pattern. The following figure
illustrates the various components of Fridley's future land use plan in a very general sense. These
components contain issues unique to Fridley that were identified through the community vision
sessions held in 1998.
Land Use Page 4 -13
Fridley Comprehensive Plan
Figure 3 Land Use Components of the Fridley Vision
Wrastru We
• ctuainy,
a ..Adequacy
.R:CostEffective
Park and Recreation
Comecdocaz es
ActivaWmIyegecreadon
Pabl OWeni- public Fadliftet
• AdaltEiveReuse
Quality PuM. 309014es
• .CoonectioPeliu�C
Draft April 28, 2000
wp*g
Iedmtry
Commercial
Trpnsporfatku
•;Dwjetai
•..Ret"Om
'MsbbodmW- RaWcea
'PublioT it-
''.A�i'da¢ility
•:.Fxpa�siori
� Caaumiep BSoppii�
� Mo1�i'lily'AUnseffvei
ConnecKionaV.iutcages.
• Tax Base
• .Gatberog Plane
• Caaietfim�V:ita3la
40:- Ql"[Y
' -Ibbs
• Fatetia3iimeaC
• Traffic ;Caigesfim.RAd
As planning is done for various land use components, it is important to recognize the connections
among components. What is proposed for the transportation component will impact land use.
Proposed land uses can be counted on to impact transportation. Attention to housing
redevelopment will have an impact on the ability to attract and retain industry. The quality of
public services, including educational services, will also be reflected in the willingness of
industry and commerce to locate in Fridley. There is virtually nothing that currently exists or that
is proposed for any component of the comprehensive planning process that will not have
ramifications for other planning components.
Land Use Page 4 -14
Fridley Comprehensive Plan Draft April 28, 2000
Future Residential Land Use
While Fridley is an attractive location for housing, there is little space available for new
housing, and much of the housing that is available is thirty to fifty years old. Fridley 's
response to this situation has been to focus on housing rehabilitation and acquisition of
blighted properties. Since 1993, when Fridley initiated its current housing rehabilitation
loan program and its scattered - site acquisition program, it has become one of the most -
aggressive housing redevelopment communities in the metropolitan area. Nearly all of
this effort, however, has focused on single - family housing rather than on apartment
redevelopment. In the future, Fridley has much more to do to complete its housing
redevelopment objectives. It also faces considerable challenges in meeting the housing
needs of different age groups and socio - economic circumstances.
Given Fridley's circumstances, new single - family housing is expected to be limited to
small infin projects on vacant land that is scattered throughout the City. Due to the huge
cost of housing redevelopment, the Fridley HRA is likely to focus its housing
redevelopment efforts on townhome development and other higher density housing where
there are greater possibilities for recovery of some of its financial investment through
property taxes.
One exception to this scenario may exist in the Girl Scout Camp property that is located
between East River Road and the Mississippi River. While their are no indications that
the property is currently for sale, the market for move- up housing may dictate a .future
move in that direction. In that event, approximately 20 acres of very attractive Fridley
property would support approximately 25 units of new move -up housing.
The only other option for creation of move -up housing is through encouragement of
existing property owners to add space through room additions or through the addition of
second stories. As the need for move -up housing increases, Fridley may want to increase
its financial incentives and reduce its zoning disincentives.
Multi family housing on the other hand is more likely to occur through redevelopment.
Other than the existing supply of developed multiple family zoned land, there simply is
no substantial vacant acreage to develop. Multiple family projects of all styles, owner
occupied and rental, townhome and apartment, should be investigated. It is also
worthwhile to provide higher density housing in conjunction with other job intensive or
commercial redevelopment projects. Multi-story buildings with retail on the first floor
and residential units on upper floors should be investigated.
Where possible, future redevelopment projects should look to incorporate a mix of
housing styles at a mix of income levels. This avoids creating concentrations of poverty
and provides for opportunities to create visual relief from one constant form of
development (i.e. row upon row of ramblers or split - levels). In addition to a mix of
housing, redevelopment sites should plan for connections to surrounding neighborhoods
through trail and open space elements. Close proximity to neighborhood commercial
services, transit stops, and recreational services are also key features of future
redevelopment sites involving residential development.
Land Use Page 4 -15
Fridley Comprehensive Plan Draft April 28. 2000
Future redevelopment should plan for densities that match surrounding development
patterns. For example, redevelopment near the Medtronic corporate campus should be of
a higher density, ranging from 12 units per acre upwards to 30 units per acre for larger
scale, high -end apartments. Developments of this nature should be focused around a
central element such as open space or a gathering space that gives the development
character and identity. Surface parking should be minimized and structured parking
should be used when possible to provide for shared parking arrangements. This form of
development is compatible with higher density office uses such as the Medtronic campus
and takes advantage of being close to the regional roadway system and transit services.
Creating a higher density development pattern within close proximity to employment
centers promotes the livable community theme, creating opportunities to live within
walking distance of places to work and shop and transit opportunities.
Redevelopment near potential rail or bus station stops should also be of a higher density.
These developments must be sensitive to and compatible with adjacent neighborhood
developments and should be well planned with a process that involves the public in order
to educate the opponents of higher density, multi- family housing and affordable housing.
Future Commercial Land Use
Many of the existing commercial shopping centers in the City were also developed
during the 1960s and 1970s to take advantage of prime highway frontage. As such, these
centers were designed for automobiles first. They turn their backs on pedestrians,
neighborhoods and to an extent, on the whole. City.. Many of these centers are aging and
are in need of significant improvements. Existing commercial strip malls should - be
targeted for aesthetic improvements, land use efficiency improvements (determining if
the site contains an efficient building mass or if there is too much parking) and
circulation improvements (primarily pedestrian but also vehicular movements). By
rethinking the pedestrian orientation of some commercial strip centers, the City and
neighborhoods, may be able to connect these shopping centers with residential
neighborhoods.
Reorientation of the commercial strip centers in this manner may serve to improve their
economic viability as well as create stronger neighborhoods through easier access to
retail products and services. In other cases, it may be desirable to evaluate whether all or
part of existing commercial strip centers should be converted to higher density residential
uses or to some mixed use project where complementary residential and retail uses exist
on the same property.
While market demand dictates both the existence and mix of retail uses, there is some
indication from the visioning meetings that the need is not always being met by existing
retail stores in Fridley. Participants cited the desire for more retail opportunities,
specialty stores and more entertainment uses than currently exist. It may well be that
these additional retail uses don't exist in Fridley due to their presence in nearby regional
shopping malls. As Medtmwe develWne influence from the Medtronic Headquarters,
however, there may be ignite new opportunities for retail growth in Fridley that do not
exist currently.
Future Industrial Land Use
Land Use Page 4 -16
Fridley Comprehensive Plan Draft April 28, 2000
Industrial land use in the community will continue to comprise a significant portion of
land area and contribute heavily to the City's strong tax base. Future industrial
development will consist of mostly infill development within existing industrial parks
and business parks. However, the land area to the north and south of the United Defense
facility (which is now owned by the U.S. Navy) poses a unique redevelopment
opportunity for industrial land uses, or a mixed -use development depending on the
location. The area has excellent accessibility to I-694 and is located just south of a
variety of existing industries.
In addition, redevelopment of the automobile recycling facilities in the nordnvestcast part
of the City can create additional opportunities for mid -size industries. Further, there are
scattered locations in the City where industrial uses are within a neighborhood as
opposed to on "the edge" or across a public right of way from residential uses.
Appropriate land use and zoning analyses should be conducted to determine if fesWeMal
propertgies should be rezoned or redeveloped to improve compatibility. The area west of
the railroad tracks in the northwest part of the City is an example of where additional
analysis should occur.
As new industries locate in Fridley, attention should be given to ensuring quality
architectural controls and compatibility with adjacent developments. In addition,
consideration should also be given to ensuring adequate expansion opportunities of
industrial uses without encroaching into non - industrial uses. Storage of outside
materials, if permitted at all, should be carefully screened to minimize visibility from
major transportation corridors, the Mississippi River and residential land uses, to
maintain .a good image of the City. The City should also encourage redevelopment of
older, outdated industrial facilities that are not only more efficient, but also
environmentally friendly and aesthetically pleasing. Additionally. efforts should be made
to maintain Fridley's strong industrial base and to assist industrial expansion and new
dal development effects where economic development tools permit.
Redevelopment
Redevelopment is a form of community revitalization that transforms undesirable
elements into desirable elements that reflect the community's collective vision.
Land Use Page 4 -17
pfejea a !' asdefiH�
niar,� •ter a Wardwith m(3 `Wdeyele
of e pame�ls urc
Statute. These iffliffit—ified based
and nVeft
amas me-Ev en Pmvieus
pkmmiag studies
Land Use Page 4 -17
Fridley Comprehensive Plan Draft April 28, 2000
Redevelopment serves many purposes:
• Removes older blighted structures.
• Provides the oypor unity f rQ more gfficient land uses and eliminates ineffidi land
uses and under utilized 12arcels, -
• Provides an gppggMAfty to correct environmental uroblems.
• Provides an oppQrt ty to build new facilities. commercial, industrial or residential.
that meet current market demands and desires of the City.
• Creates additional job opportunities
• Creates new tax base
• Eliminates incompatible land uses
• Creates opportunities for new streetscape improvements such as decorative light
fixtures or decorative fencine
• Replaces old utilities with new sewer, water, and storm sewer facilities
Throuah redevelo m pl anning- the City has the opportunity to shape the future and
accomplish the needs of the grmekr communes Because the Cit�has limited resources;
it must focus its efforts on projects that best meet the City's needs.
Figure four, identifies three potential "redevelopment areas ". The areas identified in
Figure four should not be constreed_as exact boundaries for redevelopment projects. It is
not intended that all of the properties that are located within the boundaries in Figure four
are to be acquirerather, the intent of this plan is to identify these areas as focus areas for
the City to prioritize its resources. If for example, a land use application (rezomM plat
etc) is filed. the discussion below for each of the redevelopment areas should be used as
a guide for the City prior to rendering _a final decision. In addition, the intent of the
discussion below is to identify potential land uses in these areas that will meet the needs
that have been identified in other chapters of the plan.
In the future there may be redevelopment projects that are initiated either by the private
sector or by the Housing and Redevelo �p ment Authority If a project should require
rezoning for a redevelopment project. the City's zoning code has an overlay zoning
district entitled "S -2. Redevelopment District", which would be the appropriate Zoning
District to implement for the redeveloapment project. The intent of the district is to
provide the City with site Dian review auth to determine if the r ro'
meets the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive and Redevelopment Plans.
Redevelopment Area 1
Land Use Page 4 -18
own..
Redevelopment serves many purposes:
• Removes older blighted structures.
• Provides the oypor unity f rQ more gfficient land uses and eliminates ineffidi land
uses and under utilized 12arcels, -
• Provides an gppggMAfty to correct environmental uroblems.
• Provides an oppQrt ty to build new facilities. commercial, industrial or residential.
that meet current market demands and desires of the City.
• Creates additional job opportunities
• Creates new tax base
• Eliminates incompatible land uses
• Creates opportunities for new streetscape improvements such as decorative light
fixtures or decorative fencine
• Replaces old utilities with new sewer, water, and storm sewer facilities
Throuah redevelo m pl anning- the City has the opportunity to shape the future and
accomplish the needs of the grmekr communes Because the Cit�has limited resources;
it must focus its efforts on projects that best meet the City's needs.
Figure four, identifies three potential "redevelopment areas ". The areas identified in
Figure four should not be constreed_as exact boundaries for redevelopment projects. It is
not intended that all of the properties that are located within the boundaries in Figure four
are to be acquirerather, the intent of this plan is to identify these areas as focus areas for
the City to prioritize its resources. If for example, a land use application (rezomM plat
etc) is filed. the discussion below for each of the redevelopment areas should be used as
a guide for the City prior to rendering _a final decision. In addition, the intent of the
discussion below is to identify potential land uses in these areas that will meet the needs
that have been identified in other chapters of the plan.
In the future there may be redevelopment projects that are initiated either by the private
sector or by the Housing and Redevelo �p ment Authority If a project should require
rezoning for a redevelopment project. the City's zoning code has an overlay zoning
district entitled "S -2. Redevelopment District", which would be the appropriate Zoning
District to implement for the redeveloapment project. The intent of the district is to
provide the City with site Dian review auth to determine if the r ro'
meets the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive and Redevelopment Plans.
Redevelopment Area 1
Land Use Page 4 -18
Fridley Comprehensive Plan
Draft April 28, 2000
This area represents a gateway into the community from the north and provides a
first impression to people arriving from that direction.
development. Further, the area would be more land efficient if replatted into
usable industrial parcels The salvage yards because of their reliance on outdoor
storage, are nQt efficient land uses The land area could be better utilized for
change the image in this particular area Further because of the shortage of
vacant industrial land in the City redevelopment of this area would provide 8 to
12 acres of viahle indpstrial land which could be occu ,pied by a variety of office
warehouse uses high technoloev uses or other vendor uses that could serve
Cummins Power Generation. Medtronic or the many other growing industries
within the City.
The Mobile Home Park provides a source for affordable housing and should be
maintained and enhanced where possible Tam's Restaurant is located in the
middle of the mobile home park and divides the park It would be appropriate to
consider a residential multiple family land use instead of the restaurant facility at
this particular location, should the property become available
The multiple family _properties located along Norton Avenue may be eligible for
rental rehabilitation nmo. Ms The City should also pursue aggressive code
enforcement to assist in eLim�natin� any negative iMaes resulting from illegal
outdoor storage or other code enforcement problems
Redevelopment Area 2
Redevelopment Area 2 includes the intersection of Mississippi Street and Old
Central Avenue and extends south along Old Central Avenue to Rice Creek
Road. It also includes the commercial areas that are located at the intersection of
East Moore Lake Drive and TH 65 and on the west side of TH 65. This area was
identified through previous redevelopment studies and field surveys.
Land Use
Page 4 -19
Fridley Comprehensive Plan
Draft April 28, 2000
The City should develop a well- integrated plan for this area that capitalizes on its
location between the two Medtronic campuses as well as on the presence of the
Northwest Athletic Club. As the plan is developed, consideration should be
made to replacing the current mix of single- family residential and commercial
land uses with higher density residential development that together with the
health club may serve as an attractive residential location move -up housing. €eF
M .- empleyees also
wastffig uses on the south side ef West Meefe Lake Dow at Highway 65 to
wAtended stay V - fit site. This ehaor is alse likely to
arise to redevelop underutilized commercial areas for an extended stay/business
suite hotel or other uses in the general vicinity of TH 65 and East and West
Moore Lake Drive.
Redevelopment Area 3
Redevelopment Area 3 includes the area surrounding the intersection of I-694
and TH 65 and extends west to the river to include the potential commuter rail
station site and then south encompassing the University Avenue Corridor. This
area presents a major gateway to the community and is currently changing due to
the development of Medtronic's corporate campus. There are a number of
separate but potentially interrelated issues that are now occurring and may
continue to occur in this area.
• The Medtronic corporate campus will provide 1,000,000 or more square feet
of office space and will create a minimum of 3,000 new higher paying jobs.
• Private market interest seeking hotel and restaurant space is occurring
already.
• The Northstar Corridor Development Authority is conducting station area
planning activities for a station area.
• The Fridley HRA has planned an owner occupied townhome development at
the northeast comer of 57`h Avenue and University Avenue.
• The Hyde Park area has been a "focus" area by the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority for specialized rehab and scattered site acquisition
programs.
• 57s' Avenue west of University Avenue has recently been reconstructed to
accomadate additional commercial development in the area.
• There is a potential reuse of the land owned by the U.S. Navy along East
River Road.
• Underused parking lots exist in major commercial areas.
Redevelopment Area 3 will be key in addressing a number of the issues
important to the community's vision. It deserves a more detailed analysis to
Land Use Page 4 - 20
Frtdley.Comprehensive Plan Draft April 28, 2000
determine how these forces are interrelated, and how the City can maximize
opportunities that grow out of these changes. Collaboration with the City of
Columbia Heights is also warranted. It is appropriate to consider more detailed
pl nning in this area as soon as Possible�in order to be My prepared to respond
to the development interests which may arise.
Redevelopment Area Growth Projections
Estimates have been prepared of potential new developments for each of Fridley's three
redevelopment areas. These estimates have -been prepared in order to assist in developing
population and traffic projections. They should be viewed as estimates, not the City's
final plan. The table below indicates that while there will be some growth in the number
of residential units, overall growth in the three redevelopment areas can be expected to be
small . Impacts on population growth and traffic will be similarly small. As the effects of
the Medtronic project unfold, however, the City should continue to evaluate the growth
implications of these effects.
Table 5: Area Impacts from Redevelopment
Redevelopment
Time
Net Growth
Net Growth
Net Growth
Area
Frame
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Units
Space
Space
Redevelopment Site 1
2000 -2005
0
0 acres
5 acres
Redevelopment Site 2
2000 -2010
70
0 acres
0 acres
Redevelopment Site 3
1 2000 -2010 1
75
1 3 acres
0 acres
Land Use Page 4 - 21
Fridley HRA
Monthly Housing Program Summary
May 4, 2000
1. Loan Origination Report
Covers the loans and grants issued through 4 -28 -2000.
2. Loan Servicing Report
Covers HRA funded loans only. Report summarizes all of the loans being
serviced (including prior years) by the Community Reinvestment Fund
(CRF) for the most recent reporting period, 3 -31 -2000.
3. Delinquent Loan Report (see attached memo)
Report shows the number of loans that are considered delinquent. There
are four categories (1 month, 1 -2 months, 2 -3 months, over 3 months).
The report also shows the total amount of delinquent payments along with
the total loan principal outstanding. Report covers activity through
3 -31 -2000.
Monthly Housing Report Cover (5 -4-00 HRA)
Loan Servicing
Report,
March
2000
Installment Loans
Pool 1
Pool 2
Total
Number of Loans in Portfolio
65
116
181
Principal Payments
$
11,888.52
$
9,942.31
$
21,830.83
Interest Payments
$
3,171.32
$
5,458.52
$
8,629.84
Ending Principal Balance
$
816,863.06
$1,310,106.13
$ 2,126,969.19
Deferred Loans
Number of Loans in Portfolio
19
4
23
Principal Payments
$
37.32
$
-
$
37.32
Interest Payments
$
0.88
$
-
$
0.88
Ending Principal Balance
$
97,845.88
$
31,390.66
$
129,236.54
Totals
Total Loans in Portfolio
84
120
204
Principal Paid
$
11,925.84
$
9,942.31
$
21,868.15
Interest Paid
$
3,172.20
$
5,458.52
$
8,630.72
$
30,498.87
CRF Monthly Servicing Fee
$
840.00
Notes: Pool 1 loans were issued prior to February 1, 1997.
Pool 2 loans were issued after February 1, 1997; loans made from the City's $1.5
million loan.
1999 (FEB00- MAR00) LOAN ACTIVITY REPORT
L.S.R. - MAR 2000
4/27/00
2000 LOAN ORIGINATION REPORT
Name
#
Street
Loan
Type
I HRA
I MHFA
CDBG
HOME
Total
Type of
Property
Green
849
Hugo St
5% Loan
$ 1,447.00
$
$
$ 1,447.00
1
SF
Calabrese
840
Rice Creek Terr.
5% Loan
$ 19,300.00
$
$
$ 19,300.00
1
SF
Dutcher
7550
Lakeside Rd.
50/6 Loan
$ 4,585.00
$
$
$ 4,585.00
1
SF
Golen
4514
3rd St
5% Loan
$ 2,495.00
$
$
$ 2,495.00
1
SF
Kadic
7510
4th St
5% Loan
$ 18,090.00
$
$
$ 18,090.00
1
SF
Fannon
5280
Lincoln St
5% Loan
$ 13,000.00
$
$
$ 13,000.00
1
SF
Gerard
5973
8th St
5% Loan
$ 4,308.00
$
$
$ 4,308.00
1
SF
Schwint
1535
Mississippi St
5% Loan
$ 9,855.00
$
$
$ 9,855.00
1
SF
Morin
5783
Central Ave.
5% Loan
$ 11,873.00
$
$
$ 11,873.00
1
SF
Diedrich
48
88th Way
5% Loan
$ 28,574.00
$
$
$ 28,574.00
1
SF
Gallagher
379
79th Way
50% Loan
$ 2,420.00
$
$
$ 2,420.00
1
SF
Mancuso
7581
Central Ave.
50/6 Loan
$ 3,500.00
$
$
$ 3,500.00
1
SF
Moses
5180
Hughes Ave.
5% Loan
$ 11,500.00
$
$
$ 11,500.00
1
SF
Kostuch
8027
Falrmant Circle
5% Loan
$ 9,099.00
$
$
$ 9,099.00
1
SF
Doege
858
Ironton St
5% Loan
$ 11,108.00
$
$
$ 11,108.00
1
SF
Zelenak
7528
4th St
5% Loan
$ 9,941.00
$
$
$ 9,941.00
1
SF
Hebelsen
901
W. Moore Lake Dr.
5% Loan
$ 35,000.00
$
$
$ 35,000.00
1
SF
Ferdelman
8007
3rd St
8% Loan
$
$ 7,950.00
$
$ 7,950.00
1
SF
Towberman
4832
2 -1/2 St
0% Grant
$ -
$
$ 8,411 00
$ 8,411.00
1
SF
TOTALS 1 $ 193,873 171$ 7,950 1 1 $ 8,411 1 $ 208,234 19
1899 WM WAARM LOAN ACTMTY REPORT
4W=
Loan Delinquency Report
March 2000
1 to 2 2 to 3 Over 3
Loan Data 1 Month Months Months Months
Number of Loans (203) 13 1 0 2
Payments Due $1,822 $230 $0 $2,586
Percentage of Total 5.48% 0.14% 0.00% 0.21%