HRA 05/01/2005 - 6196CITY OF FRIDLEY
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
APRIL 7, 2005
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Commers called the Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting to
order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Pesent: John Meyer
Virginia Schnabel
Larry Commers
Pat Gabel
William Holm
Others Present: Paul Bolin, Assistant HRA Director
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
David Harvet
Gary Harvet
Kathleen Harvet
Chairperson Commers announced that the Harvet purchase agreement has been
added under Action Items on tonight's agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Claims and Expenses
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED -THE
CONSENT AGENDA APPROVED.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 3, 2005 meeting
MOTION by Commissioner Meyer, seconded by Commissioner Schnabel, to approve
the minutes.
The following corrections were requested:
Page 6 — midway through the first paragraph — change the sentence that reads
"The public is currently public.." to "The property is currently public"
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING —April 7, 2005 Page 2 of 5
Page 9 — the last paragraph. Change the sentence that starts with "However" to
read as follows: "However, to the extent that not all of the existing properties are
in terrible condition that keeps the assessed value base deducted from your
taxes to keep your tax increment. That ends up being pretty high which can eat
into the tax increment and reduce revenues."
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED
THE MINUTES APPROVED AS CORRECTED.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Consider claims and expense.
MOTION by Commissioner Meyer, seconded by Commissioner Gabel, to approve the
minutes as amended.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ACTION ITEMS:
Purchase agreement for Kathleen Harvet
Mr. Bolin explained that Kathleen Harvet signed the purchase agreement just yesterday.
The agreement was based on the HRA's original offer plus the agreement to pay
closing costs on the seller's new home. Closing date has been set for April 27. This
was the final parcel necessary to move forward with the Gateway West project and staff
recommends approval of the agreement as presented and asked that Chairperson
Commers sign the agreement immediately after its approval. The Harvets are present
and would like a signed copy for their records.
Chairperson Commers asked if there is anything unusual about the purchase
agreement of which the HRA should be aware.
Mr. Bolin stated this is a standard purchase agreement used for other acquisitions.
There is a provision to cover the closing costs for the seller's new home and for moving
expenses.
Commissioner Schnabel asked if Ms. Harvet was able to purchase a home in Fridley.
Mr. Bolin explained she found a new town home in Coon Rapids.
MOTION by Commissioner Schnabel, seconded by Commissioner Holm, to approve the
purchase agreement as presented and authorize signature execution.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING April 7, 2005 Page 3 of 5
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
INFORMATION ITEMS:
• Southeast Quadrant Parking Study Update.
Mr. Bolin reported that a contract has been awarded to the engineering firm of
Bonestroo, Rosene & Andrelik (BRA) to conduct a future parking needs analysis for the
SE quadrant of Mississippi and University Avenue. BRA has been conducting parking
counts over a number of days to identify peak demand times and locations.
Additionally, BRA has engaged in a number of conversations with the representatives of
all four properties to further analyze their potential parking needs. He commented that
staff has found the City parking lot half full even when City offices are closed which
shows how the parking problem has creeped into the City Hall lot.
BRA expects to finish the parking counts early next week and expects to provide staff
with a draft report of the study by the middle of April. Staff will bring the study results
and recommendations forward at the HRA's May 5th meeting. It is hoped that this study
will aid the HRA in determining if an early sale of the Target NOC parking lot is
desirable.
• Gateway West Update
Mr. Bolin reported that a closing was held for the Hogenson property at 5955 3rd Street
on March 31St. The final price with closing costs and title work was $277,422.50. The
property owner did agree to the HRH's original price offer as well as the agreement that
the HRA would pay his outstanding water bill. The final water bill came to $383. He
added that over the next couple of months until the buildings are demolished, the
Fridley Police will be doing some training exercises in the buildings, such as room -to-
room sweeps.
Chairperson Commers asked if the Police will indemnify the HRA and /or reimburse for
any damages incurred during the training.
Mr. Bolin stated they will.
• Home and Garden Fair Update
Mr. Bolin stated the Home & Garden Fair was held March 5 of this year at the newly
constructed Schwan Center in Blaine. There were 1,300 attendees which set a new
record and was nearly double the amount that attended in 2004. Based on door prize
information and surveys completed by attendees, staff believes that approximately 130
Fridley residents attended this year's event. The new location at the Schwan Center
allowed for a total of 75 vendors and 3 seminars and there was actually a waiting list of
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING —April 7, 2005 Page 4 of 5
15 vendors who wanted to participate. The seminars were well attended, well received
and very informative. Most of the comments received were positive with rave reviews
for the venue and the vendors. The most frequent suggestion or request was for more
flowers and landscaping vendors in the future. Though the 2005 show has just passed,
planning for the 2006 show has already begun.
Commissioner Gabel asked how much it costs the City to put on the Home and Garden
Show.
Mr. Bolin stated it runs between $7,500 and $9,000 but all those costs are covered with
the vendor fees charged. Also the costs are split four -ways with all the cities involved.
Commissioner Meyer commented that the Schwan Center was very nice but he thought
it would be better to have the show all on the same level.
Monthly Housing Report
Mr. Bolin stated the year is starting out very slow for the loan program with only 2 loans
issued in March totaling $15,543.
Chairperson Commers questioned if there were very many inquiries at the Home and
Garden Show regarding the City's loan program.
Mr. Hickok explained that the City's booth was very well attended with our remodeling
expert and finance people available. He stated he is optimistic that their presence will
bring more applicants to the City.
Mr. Bolin stated the 77 loans currently in the program brought in $8,532.35 and there is
a total of $3,111.15 currently delinquent. For March, Mr. Bolin stated he was
disappointed that no one contacted the Operation Insulation and only one family
contacted the Remodeling Advisor. In an effort to improve the participation in these
programs, an article promoting the City's loan program was in the most recent City
newsletter. He also met with two representatives Center for Energy and the
Environment trying to come up with some new marketing ideas to promote the City's
programs. One suggestion is to do a direct mailing to Fridley residents to host an open
house in May in the Council Chambers. CEE will put on the open house and will have
representatives present to answer questions. Mr. Bolin stated he's also working with
the City Manager to get information in the City newsletter on a regular basis. He
addressed questions regarding using these funds to improve apartment buildings in
Fridley but the loan program is restricted to housing units of four or less. In his meeting
with CEE, he discovered that they do offer programs for apartment owners so they will
be doing a direct mailing to the larger apartment buildings.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING —April 7, 2005 Page 5 of 5
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Commissioner Schnabel, seconded by Commissioner Gabel, to adjourn.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:05
PM.
Respectfully submitted by,
Rebecca Brazys
Recording Secretary
TO: PAUL BOLIN, ASSISTANT HRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
FROM. • RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
PAUL EISENMINGER, HRA ACCOUNTANT
SUBJECT. RESOL UTIONA UTHORIZING EXECUTION OF TAX INCREMENT
PLEDGEAGREEMENTT,
Date: May 26, 2005
On Monday May 23, 2005 the City Council approved the sale of two General Obligation
Bonds. One of those bonds was for the City's current year's street improvement project
and the other was for the refunding of the 1997A Tax Increment Bonds that were used on
various tax increment projects over the years, the most recent of which was Medtronic.
Since the City was going to market with a new bond issue, staff had Ehlers and
Associates review the outstanding bonds to determine whether the market was right for
any refunding issues. Since the City was incurring issuance costs with the sale of its
improvement bonds, we felt that we could save money by issuing multiple bonds should a
tax increment issue be favorable for a refunding.
Ehlers determined that we would be able to save approximately $110,000 over the
remaining 3 %z year period by issuing a new refunding bond. What we found was that the
market was so favorable that we received 14 bids on the tax increment bond. The bids
were so favorable that we were able to lower the principle of the new issue and we will
save approximately $158,000 over the next 3 lh years (its final maturity).
Since this tax increment debt pledges tax increment from District #6 (Lake Pointe) it is
necessary to again approve a new pledge agreement for this debt issuance. Each time a
new tax increment bond is sold we need to approve a corresponding pledge agreement to
support the annual principle and interest payments for the debt.
Staff recommends the approval of the attached pledge agreement.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANOKA
COUNTY AUDITOR'S CERTIFICATE
AS TO REGISTRATION AND FILING OF
A TAX INCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT
I, the undersigned, representative of the Office of Anoka County Property Records
and Taxation, Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that on the date hereof, there was
filed in my office a certified copy of a resolution adopted on May 23, 2005 by the City
Council of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, authorizing the issuance of $4,680,000
General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2005A (the 'Bonds "),
together with full information regarding the Bonds and the Bonds have been entered
in my Bond Register; and that the Tax Increment Pledge Agreement, dated
, 2005, between said City and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, has been filed in my office.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of the Office of Anoka County Property Records and Taxation on
2005.
(SEAL)
Office of Anoka County Property
Records and Taxation
MEMORANDUM
FINANCE DEPARTMENT RICHARD D. PRIBYL
CITY OF FRIDLEY FINANCE DIRECTOR
TO: PAUL BOLIN, ASSISTANT HRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
PAUL EISENMINGER, HRA ACCOUNTANT
SUBJECT: LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING.
Date: May 26, 2005
Attached you will find a brief letter of understanding related to some work that Medtronic
would like to see Ehlers perform and have agreed they would reimburse the HRA for its
cost. Recently the City and Medtronic reached an agreement regarding the market value
that was placed on the World Headquarters for the years 1993, 1994 and 1995. In
accordance with the development agreement with Medtronic, the HRA has provided tax
increment in accordance with the agreement. Medtronic responded that they felt that the
amount that they were receiving was incorrect and would like to see a complete
reconstruction of the tax increment derived from the Lake Pointe tax increment district.
We felt it would be a worthwhile exercise, but felt that a 3rd party (Ehlers and Associates)
should perform the reconstruction and Medtronic has agreed to reimburse the HRA for
the expense of this exercise.
Medtronic put a cap on the expense associated with this project at 15 hours, and Ehlers
felt they could deliver it within that limit.
Donn Hagmann
Medtronic, Inc.
3850 Victoria Street N
Shoreview, MN 55126 -2978
Dear Donn,
This letter is intended as a letter of understanding and an agreement between the Fridley Housing and
Redevelopment Authority and Medtronic regarding the reimbursement of expenses. The expense
considered under this agreement is only in regards to the expenses incurred by the Fridley Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in having Ehlers and Associates reconcile tax increment calculations for the 2004
Court Petition finalized in 2004. The tax increment calculations subject to this arrangement are those that
are part of the settlement agreement related to the property taxes paid in 2003 and 2004. The Fridley
Housing Redevelopment Authority will engage Ehlers and Associates to reconcile the amount paid by
Medtronic in property taxes to Anoka County on the following Property Identification Numbers:
PIN #R23 -30 -24-41 -0030
#R23 -30 -2441 -0031
#R23 -30 -2441 -0034
#R23 -30 -2441 -0041
#R23 -30 -2441 -0043
Ehlers shall review and verify the calculations from Anoka County in regards to the property taxes due and
payable for the subject parcels and then determine the correct tax increment from the subject parcels.
Ehlers and Associates shall then review the development agreement between the Fridley Housing and
Redevelopment Authority and Medtronic dated May 20, 1999 and verify the amount of tax increment paid
to the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority and subsequently the amount due to Medtronic
subject to the terms of the development agreement. Ehlers and Associates will also determine using the
same development agreement, the amount that Medtronic would then be required to pay to the Fridley
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in regard to the purchase of land as identified in the same
development agreement.
Medtronic agrees to reimburse the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority for all of its expenses, up
to 15 hours, subject to the activities outlined above paid to Ehlers and Associates.
Donn Hagmann
Director, Real Estate & Construction
Shared Business Services
Medtronic, Inc.
Rick Pribyl
Finance Director
Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority
AW AGENDA ITEM
rJ HRA MEETING OF JUNE 2, 2005
MY of
FRDLEr
Date: May 26, 2005
To: William Bums, HRA Executive Director
From: Paul Bolin, Asst. Executive HRA Director
Subject: Gateway West RFP — Design Elements
M -05 -38
As staff prepares to develop the Request For Proposals (RFP) to select a
developer for the Gateway West redevelopment project, we would like to spend
some time with you next Thursday night discussing possible design element to
include in the RFP.
In preparation for the discussion, staff has visited and photographed a number of
the new infill redevelopments that have taken place in the metro area over the
past few years. We will present a slide show of the best & worst of what is out
there. The purpose of this exercise will be to identify those design elements of
the area and the homes themselves that you as a collective group would like to
see in the finished redevelopment. The more we know up front, the more we can
incorporate those ideas into the crafting of the request for proposals. This may
also help to identify those areas in which the City /HRA wants and desires may
require subsidies to the developer.
Staff is planning to bring a finalized copy of the RFP to your July meeting for final
approval before sending out the RFP.
H:1— Paul's Documents\HRAVHRA Agenda Items\2005Vune 2, 2005U une2HRA(GatewayWestRFPMemo).doc
L INTRODUCTION
The City of Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority has authorized a study
of the parking situation that exists in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of
University Avenue (TH 47) and Mississippi Street. Within this area there are four
facilities that generate a need for parking that is to be included in the parking
study. These facilities are as follows:
• City of Fridley Municipal Center
• Fridley Professional Building
• Columbia Park Medical Clinic
• Former Target Operations Center (now vacant)
The parking issues have been stated to be one of inadequate supply during various
time periods and the potential parking shortfall that could exist when the now
vacant building that formerly housed the Target Northern Operations Center
becomes occupied once again.
The study that has been conducted in order to examine whether the reported
parking shortfall is in fact occurring involved the collection of parking occupancy
data over a four - day time period. This data, in conjunction with parking rates for
buildings of this type, is used to help draw conclusions with regard to existing and
future parking for this area.
The conclusions drawn from this study are intended to provide assistance to the
decision - makers at the HRA with regard to parking decisions they may be
considering for this study area.
II. PARKING AREA DATA
This report chapter provides a discussion of the available number of parking
spaces in the study area plus information regarding building sizes.
Parking Study Area
The area that is being studied, called the study area, is graphically represented on
Figure 1. The area includes the parking areas associated with the following
buildings:
• City of Fridley Municipal Center
• Fridley Professional Building
• Columbia Park Medical Clinic
• Former Target Northern Operations Center
The study area does not include the bank located south of the medical clinic. The
study area was subdivided into subareas for collection of parking occupancy data
and parking analysis purposes. The study subareas are shown on Figure 2.
Included on that figure are the total available parking spaces for each sub area.
Table 1 provides the parking supply (number of parking spaces) including a
breakdown of signed special use spaces.
Table 1- Parking Supply
Parking
Sub Area
Total
Parking
S aces
Reserved Spaces 1
1
58
2
154
26
3
48
6
4
72
6
5
89
6
6
16
1
7
293
6
Totals
730
1 Handicapped, Rehab Patients, Doctor Parking, 15 minute parking
The size of the buildings in the parking subareas was obtained from
representatives at each building. The data that was requested included the gross
square feet of each facility. This data is used to establish a parking rate for each
building. The square feet of each building is as follows:
• Vacant Building - 78,192 gross square feet
• City Hall - 41,692 gross square feet
• Professional Building - 31,827 gross square feet
• Medical Clinic - 34,500 gross square feet
The following Table 2 provides the number of parking stalls that would be
required, per city code, if these properties were located in a typical commercial
district. Because these properties are zoned S -2, Redevelopment District and
shared parking was an acceptable parking solution to avoid over - parking the area,
typical parking ratios were not required.
Table 2 - Parking- Shared Use
Lot User
Parking
Comm.
Building
Required
Parking
Spaces
District
Size
Parking
Shortage/ .
Parking
(SF)
Excess
Ratio
Vacant (Formerly
Target)
293
1/250 SF
78,192
313
-20
City Hall
177
1/250 SF
41,692
167
+10
Professional
Building
48
1/250 SF
31,827
127
-79
Medical Center
212
1 /150 SF
134,500
230
-18
The table above indicates an overall parking shortage of 107 spaces when
compared to the city commercial district code. It is reported that the medical
clinic leases approximately two- thirds of the Fridley Professional Building space.
This would, in theory, increase the parking required as medical facilities generate
a higher parking requirement than office buildings.
III. PARKING OCCUPANCY SURVEYS
In order to determine the number of parked vehicles in the parking subareas
parking occupancy counts were conducted on four weekdays. These counts were
conducted on the following days:
• Wednesday, March 30 (7:30 A.M. - 4:30 P.M.)
• Thursday, March 31 (7:30 A.M. - 4:30 P.M.)
• Monday, April 4 (8:00 A.M. - 4:00 P.M.)
• Tuesday, April 5 (7:30 A.M. - 4:00 P.M.)
The number of vehicles parked in each subarea were counted every one -half hour.
The tabulated results of the parking occupancy surveys are contained at the end of
this report.
The number of vehicles parked divided by the number of spaces available has
been calculated for each parking subarea. The calculated values allow a review of
the percent occupancy of each subarea for each half -hour of the survey days. The
percent occupancy for each parking subarea is contained on Table 3 through 8.
This includes subareas 1 through 6. Parking subarea 7 is the parking lot for the
vacant building. There were some vehicles parked in that lot that can be
attributed to City Hall. Table 9 provides the occupancy data for the City Hall
Ramp (subareas 4 and 5) including the vehicles parked in subarea 7. The parking
occupancy totals for the sum of subareas 1 through 6 are shown on Table 10. A
graphic illustration of the occupancy percentage of each parking subarea is shown
on Figures 3 through 10. This is the same data that is contained on Tables 3
through 10, but shown graphically.
One method of determining the number of parking spaces required for a
commercial business is the use of parking spaces per square foot of building area.
The City of Fridley uses such rates for new facilities. The rate of one space per
150 SF is used for the medical facility and one space per 250 feet for the other
three buildings. These rates translate to 6.67 parking spaces per 1,000 SF of gross
floor area (SFGFA) for the medical clinic and 4.0 spaces per 1000 SFGFA for the
other three buildings. The parking rates for the City Hall, Medical Clinic and
professional building are shown on Tables 11 through 13.
IV. PARKING ANALYSIS
The four days worth of parking occupancy surveys provides an opportunity to
assess existing conditions. The more pertinent analysis indicates the following for
each building.
Medical Clinic - The clinic parking area on the west side of the building
reaches 80 percentage occupancy by 9:00 in the morning and reaches 90
percent occupancy within one -half to one hour later. The parking lot stays
at 90 percent full, or a little greater, until noon hour when the occupancy
drops to 70 -80 percent. After 3:00 P.M., the occupancy falls dramatically.
The clinic lot on the east side of the facility is used much less as peaks in
the 60 percent occupied range are experienced.
Cily Hall - The upper level of the city hall ramp exceeds 90 percent
occupancy for much of the day while the lower level exceeds 70 percent
only a very short period of time. The total of the two levels is 80 -85
percent occupied in the 9 A.M to 11:30 A.M. hours and slightly less than
80 percent in the afternoon hours.
Professional Building - Parking for the professional building rarely
exceeds 80 percent occupancy. Values in the 60 to 80 percent occupancy
range are more normal occurrences.
Parking Rates - The parking rates for the City Hall ramp peaks at 3.62
occupied spaces per 1,000 SFGFA. Rates in the 3.4 to 3.6 values are
typical for peak morning hours which reflect the peak parking demand
hours for a normal weekday. The medical center parking subareas 1 and 2
peak at 5.62 with ranges in the 4 to 5 values typical. The lot on the west
side of the professional building had parking area rates less than 2 spaces
per 1,000 SFGFA during all periods of the survey.
V. CONCLUSIONS
The parking for the 3 occupied buildings in the study area is, according to the four
days of survey data collected, approaching levels where users may have difficulty
finding a parking space during the peak parking usage periods. These peak
periods almost always occur during the morning from 9:00 to 11:30. The areas of
particular concern are parking for the medical clinic and parking for the upper
level of the City Hall ramp. The medical clinic parking issue exists on the west
side of the clinic while the parking lot on the east side has available space. It is
reported that approximately two- thirds of the Fridley professional building is
leased and utilized by the medical clinic. However it certainly appears as though
medical patrons of the professional building probably park in the medical clinic
parking areas as the professional building parking areas always has available
space.
The City Hall parking ramp upper level is well utilized while the lower level is
underutilized. Some City Hall parking is occurring in the former Target
Operations Center parking lot just adjacent to the pedestrian connection between
the two lots. The sharing of parking is exhibited at that location.
The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) has published a document titled
Parking Generation, 3rd Edition, 2004. This document provides parking rate data
for various land use types as a result of parking occupancy studies that have been
conducted. The data is reported as parking demand rate per 1,000 SFGFA. The
parking demand data for medical - dental facilities, government offices and general
offices are as follows:
• Medical -Dental Offices
Average Weekday Parking Rate = 3.53/1000 SFGFA
85th Percentage Rate = 4.30/1000 SFGFA
• Government Office
Average Weekday Parking Rate = 4.15/1000 SFGFA
85th Percentage Rate = 6.13/1000 SFGFA
• General Office
Average Weekday Parking Rate = 2.84/1000 SFGFA
85th Percentage Rate = 3.44/1000 SFGFA
The medical - dental parking rates shown in the ITE document are exceeded by the
rates for the medical clinic at the study site. The Fridley City Hall parking rates
are less than those in the ITE report. The professional building parking area rates
are much less than ITE office rates.
The presently vacant building contains approximately 78,000 SFGFA. The
parking lot has 293 spaces. That parking total produces a parking space rate of
3.75 spaces per 1000 SFGFA. During the parking surveys, there were occasions
when 17 -19 vehicles were parked in that lot and were City Hall associated. If 19
spaces are subtracted from the parking supply of 293, the remaining supply of 274
spaces produces a parking space rate of 3.51/1000 SFGFA.
Parking for office facilities is greatly connected to the number of employees
within the building. Some building tenants provide less space per employee than
others. The ITE report cites an average parking demand of 0.83 spaces per
employee and an 85th percentile value of 0.98 spaces per employee. Considering
the shared use of this parking lot with City Hall, it can be envisioned that the
vacant building parking area will be insufficient to accommodate the 85th
percentile rate. It is quite likely that the existing lot will be insufficient to
accommodate the predicted demand.
Other conclusions that involve the area being studied involve parking
management. The medical employees associated with the professional building
parking area should be made to park in the professional building area. We are
assuming that some park in the medical - clinic area. This could make some
additional spaces available in the medical - clinic area.
The lower level of the city hall ramp can be better utilized. The installation of
better signing indicating public parking at this lower level could be helpful. The
assignment of city hall employees to the lower level would help to keep the upper
level more available for visitors to City Hall.
The primary conclusion of the study is that the City should not relinquish the
potential of providing a parking structure at the parking area associated with the
former Target Operations Center building. Dependent upon the tenant of the
building, the parking demand may well exceed the supply. A new tenant may
well have more employees in the building than the parking can accommodate.
FIGURE 1 - STUDY AREA n Bonestroo
Rosene
FUTURE NEEDS PARKING STUDY �Anderiik &
Associates
CITY OF FR I D LE Y Engineers & Architects
MAY 2005 545 -05 -116
MISSISSIPPI ST.
JN
,�
I
P�
NOT TO
SCALE
L
0
H
m
�
O�` V
Q�
w
A
� GOB
FIGURE 1 - STUDY AREA n Bonestroo
Rosene
FUTURE NEEDS PARKING STUDY �Anderiik &
Associates
CITY OF FR I D LE Y Engineers & Architects
MAY 2005 545 -05 -116
MISSISSIPPI ST.
N
SUBAREA 7
G
JP
NOT TO 293
SCALE
SUBAREA 4 — UPPER 72
-1 SUBAREA 5 — LOWER 89
A �
o✓
w A ED
LO
H SUBAREA SUBAREA 3 3
= J
13 6 0� � O W
LL-
SUBAREA 2
,54 SUBAREA 1
00 - PARKING SUPPLY
FIGURE 2 - PARKING SUBAREAS
FUTURE NEEDS PARKING STUDY
CITY OF FRIDLEY
MAY 2005 545 -05 -116
Bonestroo
Rosene
0 Anderlik &
Associates
Eroneers & Archftects
Table 3 - Subarea 1
Percent of Parking Spaces Occupied
Subarea 1
30- Mar -05
31- Mar -05
4-Apr-05,
5 -Apr -05
7:30
14%
10%
3%
8:00
33%
19%
17%
29%
8:30
47%
21%
36%
.34%
9:00
57%
M%
38%
55%
9:30
62%
53%
67%
600/.
10:00
59%
50%
66%
62%
10:30
59%
66%
55%
59%
11:00
67%
78%
84%
57%
11:30
62%
52%
67%
53%
12:00
57%
47%
55%
38%
12:30
53%
34%
66%
29%
13:00
41%
34%
55%
45%
13:30
40%
34%
57%
53%
14:00
41%
45%
60%
60%
14:30
52%
45%
55%
57%
15:00
47%
47%
52%
55%
15:30
57%
43%
71%
59%
16:00
50%
40%
69%
53%
16:30
31%
29%
Note: Parking Subarea 1
has 58 total oarkina snares.
Table 4 -Subarea 2
Percent of Parking Spaces Occupied
Note: Parking Subarea 2 has 154 total parKmg spaces.
Area 2
30- Mar-05
31- Mar -05
4-Apr-05
5- Apr -05
7:30
45%
40%
36%
8:00
65%
57%
60%
62%
8:30
73%
69%
72%
71%
9:00
79%
85%
83%
86%
9:30
81%
89%
87%
87%
10:00
89%
910%
94%
87%
10:30
89%
90%
91%
96%
11:00
93%
890%
94%
93%
11:30
81%
86%
88%
84%
12:00
81%
73%
77%
70%
12:30
79%
710/6
73%
68%
13:00
82%
71%
82%
78%
13:30
84%
75%
79%
81%
14:00
83%
82%
90%
83%
14:30
83%
74%
92%
84%
15:00
86%
72%
84%
84%
15:30
79%
74%
80%
74%
16:00
58%
65%
71%_
73%
16:30
49%
55%
Note: Parking Subarea 2 has 154 total parKmg spaces.
Table 5 - Subarea 3
Percent of Parking Spaces Occupied
ivoie: rarKmg Subarea 3 has 48 total parking spaces.
Area 3
30- Mar -05
31- Mar -05
4-Apr-05
5- Apr -05
7:30
21%
8%
4%
8:00
38%
38%
17%
19%
8:30
65%
52%
35%
35%
9:00
75%
54%
44%
56%
9:30
79%
60%
63%
56%
10:00
69%
60%
83%
79%
10:30
75%
67%
79%
75%
11:00
77%
56%
88%
67%
11:30
75%
56%
67%
71%
12:00
67%
5o%
52%
69%
12:30
69%
48%
54%
65%
13:00
69%
48%
40%
75%
13:30
67%
67%
54%
81%
14:00
77%
73%
65%
81%
14:30
69%
73%
60%
81%
1 5:00
71%
77%
63%
73%
15:30
71%
56%
52%
73%
16:00
63%
56%
48%
69%
16:30
58%
48%
ivoie: rarKmg Subarea 3 has 48 total parking spaces.
Table 6 -Subarea 4
Percent of Parking Spaces Occupied
Note: Parking Subarea 4 has 72 total parking spaces.
Area 4
30 -Mar -05
31- Mar -05
4 -Apr -05
5-Apr-05
7:30
40%
47%
38%
8:00
72%
76%
61%
74%
8:30
83%
89%
81%
941/1.
9:00
100%
93%
92%
93%
9:30
99%
92%
94%
89%
10:00
96%
92%
97%
97%
10:30
92%
93%
97%
93%
11:00
89%
92%
96%
90%
11:30
88%
89%
88%
83%
12:00
75%
72%
82%
78%
12:30
78%
68%
74%
72%
13:00
81%
76%
83%
81%
13:30
82%
86%
92%
81%
14:00
86%
89%
89%
88%
14:30
82%
86%
86%
88%
15:00
83%
90%
92%
51%
15:30
78%
74%
81%
74%
16:00
69%
69%
69%
74%
16:30
51%
58%
Note: Parking Subarea 4 has 72 total parking spaces.
Table 7 -Subarea 5
Percent of Parking Spaces Occupied
Note: Parking Subarea 5 has 89 total parking spaces.
Area 5
30- Mar -05
31- Mar -05
4-Apr-05
5 -Apr -05
7:30
39%
40%
43%
8:00
52%
48%
53%
56%
8:30
67%
56%
61%
62%
9:00
64%
62%
36%
63%
9:30
73%
62%
69%
65%
10:00
70%
64%
63%
60%
10:30
70%
60%
64%
61%
11:00.
72%
61%
65%
61%
11:30
75%
57%
65%
58%
12:00
63%
55%
53%
57%
12:30
61%
49%
52%
54%
13:00
61%
52%
55%
55%
13:30
66%
52%
60%
60%
14:00
63%
53%
57%
60%
14:30
65%
56%
54%
63%
15:00
64%
53%
61%
91%
1 5:30
65%
54%
60%
89%
16:00
61%
51%
57%
63%
1 6:30
58%
46%
Note: Parking Subarea 5 has 89 total parking spaces.
Table 8 -Subarea 6
Percent of Parking Spaces Occupied
vote: rarKmg Subarea 5 has 16 total parking spaces.
Area 6
30- Mar -05
31- Mar-05
4-Apr-05
5- Apr -05
7:30
13%
13%
31%
8:00
31%
38%
25%
38%
8:30
38%
88%
31%
44%
9:00
38%
81%
31%
38%
9:30
44%
94%
38%
38%
10:00
44%
88%
38%
44%
1 0:30
38%
88%
31%
38%
11:00
44%
88%
31%
38%
11:30
31%
44%
31%
38%
12:00
25%
25%
31%
31%
12:30
31%
25%
25%
31%
13:00
25%
25%
31%
31%
13:30
31%
31%
38%
38%
14:00
38%
25%
31%
38%
14:30
38%
31%
31%
31%
15:00
31%
31%
31%
38%
15:30
31%
19%
31%
38%
16:00
31%
25%
25%
31
16:30
38%
25%
vote: rarKmg Subarea 5 has 16 total parking spaces.
Table 9 - Vehicles in Subareas 4, 5, and 7
Percent of Parking Spaces Occupied
Note: Parking Areas 4 plus 5 have161 total parKmg spar,
Vehicles in Areas 4, 5, and 7 are vehicles using City Hall.
This table represents the occupancy results for the City
Hall ramp and vehicles parked in Subarea 7.
City Hall P rking Ram
30- Mar -05
31- Mar-05
4- Apr -05
5-Apr-05
7:30
42%
46%
42%
8:00
65%
65%
60%
66%
8:30
81%
75%
75%
81%
9:00
84%
80%
67%
81%
9:30
89%
80%
87%
79%
10:00
87%
83%
90%
81%
10:30
86%
82%
89%
80%
11:00
84%
81%
89%
80%
11:30
86%
78%
83%
74%
12:00
71%
70%
73%
70%
12:30
71%
63%
68%
65%
13:00
73%
68%
73%
70%
13:30
80%
73%
81%
75%
14:00
79%
76%
78%
78%
14:30
79%
76%
76%
81%
15:00
78%
77%
85%
80%
15:30
76%
69%
79%
89%
1 6:00
70%
65%
72%
74%
16:30
60%
57%
Note: Parking Areas 4 plus 5 have161 total parKmg spar,
Vehicles in Areas 4, 5, and 7 are vehicles using City Hall.
This table represents the occupancy results for the City
Hall ramp and vehicles parked in Subarea 7.
Table 10 - Vehicles in Subareas 1 through 7 /Capacity
of Subareas 1 through 6
i otal spaces equals 437.
City Hall Parking Ramp
30- Mar -05
31- Mar -05
4-Apr-05
5-Apr-O5
7:30
36%
34%
30%
8:00
56%
52%
48%
54%
8:30
70%
64%
63%
65%
9:00
76%
73%
65%
75%
9:30
80%
78%
80%
75%
10:00
80%
79%
85%
79%
10:30
80%
81%
82%
81%
11:00
83%
81%
88%
78%
11:30
78%
74%
79%
73%
12:00
70%
64%
68%
64%
12:30
70%
59%
66%
60%
13:00
70%
61%
69%
68%
13:30
73%
66%
73%
74%
14:00
74%
72%
76%
76%
14:30
74%
69%
76%
77%
15:00
74%
70%
76%
76%
15:30
72%
64%
73%
76%
16:00
61%
59%
67%
69%
16:30
51%
51%
i otal spaces equals 437.
V
cc
CL
O
N
L
_0)
ME
LO Lf)
0
0 0
g a a
C07 M '[F Lo
O O O O O O O O O O O
oe
O co O r- LO d0 C07 N O O
T '
paldnaap juaojad
O
C7
CO
^rT
v
T
T
Q
O
T
O
T
O
O
T
O
C)
T
S
T
e°o
A
SAT 0
N O
T
C7
r
T
O
T
T
O
O
T
O
O
O
T
O
O
O
O
co
O
O
co
O
Percent Occupied
N W .01 Cn W v W
O O � O O O
O p
c c c c j
c
V
(W
O
W
8
W
W
O
Cflp
O
CC
W
O
j
�i
O
W
O
j
j
O
O
j
O
� N
-w O
j
� N
Co
O
W
j
W
W
O
j
g
�P
Co
O
..L
8
W
O
j
�nR
V
Qi
�r
W O
CA w o 0
Cn m
C
a
Cn
1
m
W
O
0
A
C
m
3A
V
GJ
O
OD
O
O
Co
O
CO
O
O
O
CJ
O
O
.1
O
W
O
..L
O
j
w
3 °
� N
�w O
j
� N
w
O
..L
ai
O
O
W
Ca
O
0
W
O
O
O
.l
W
O
.d
..L
W
O
Percent Occupies!
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 °o
0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0
� H
cn ? Ca O
Co
m
00
cn w
W
C
VI
MM�
W
AQA
iAI
�M
W
A�A
1
Percent Occupied
J.
.01 cn ai °° °o O
O
O O O O O O O O c c c
W
O
aD
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
O
CO
W
O
J.
O
O
O
J.
O
CA)
O
J
J.
V
J.
—1 w
3 °
J.
N
O• O
� N
(W
O
J.
w
j
W
W
Q
J
J
C
J
v
C
C
V
Gi
C
CO
C
d
G
C
Ff -441
V7 PW► O
t a N) N
C°)9 C°PI O O 7
U1 U7
W
C
V
m
I�Iw
V■
n
A
C
A�
V
fiJ
O
W
S
W
W
O
W
ci
O
CO
GO
O
^zO
�.J
j
O
W
O
J
O
� N
.y. O
� N
(iW
O
W
G
O
W
G?
O
..L
V
..L
W
.d
ASS
V
.l
W
O
j
^z�
V
W
Percent Occupied
N W A M W V Co 0 j
0 0 0 0 o O o O O o c�
OR o o 0 0 0 0
� H
(nl ? C4 o
oow
(n w o o
M w
In
W
C
M
W
w�
W
O
ci
n
C
m
n
W
O
OD
O
OD
W
O
O
O
O
J.
/O
V
..1
O
W
O
J.
O
O
J.
O
0. � N
g
� N
W
O
J.
V
W
CA)
O
O
O
..i
Cdi
Q
C
J
J
C
Percent Occupied
j
Ca p C)7 O V Co CO O
O O O
O O O O O O o 0 0
� H
m 4h, L O
0 o SU Al
Cn Ul O O
Cif CA
n
m
Q
3
WAA
,T
V■
,A
W
CL
n
0w
Qc
Cr O
n
^„
/`��
A W
�A
iY `Y
1�
!"F
`_%
2
W
0
O
W
Q
Q
CA)
O
CO
0
O
W
O
j
O
O
O
W
O
..L
O
0
1
(J1i
3 O
O N
v 8
� N
W
O
�.i
(zw
V
j
w
W
O
j
0
O
j
0)
0
0
0
1
U7
CA)
O
O
O
j
CA)
O
Percent Occupied
V7 CD j Co
O O O O O
0 0
O O O O O O O o n
� H
CA 4�6 W W
O
1 /
Ul CA
C
i
O
3
.0
O
0
C
�1
yn
M�
W
y
.i
S
O
C/�
S
Table 11 - City Hall (Subareas 4, 5, 6, and 7)
Parking Rate per 1,000 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area
Building Size = 41,692 Square Feet
30 -Mar -05
31 -Mar -05
4- Apr -05
5-Apr-05
7:30
1.65
1.82
-
1.75
8:00
2.61
2.64
2.40
2.71
8:30
3.26
3.24
3.00
3.29
9:00
3.41
3.41
2.71
3.29
9:30
3.62
3.45
3.50
3.19
10:00
3.53
3.55
3.62
3.31
10:30
3.45
3.50
3.55
3.24
11:00
3.43
3.48
3.57
3.21
11:30
3.43
3.19
3.33
3.00
12:00
2.85
2.78
2.93
2.81
12:30
2.88
2.52
2.71
2.61
13:00
2.93
2.71
2.95
2.81
13:30
3.19
2.95
3.29
3.05
14:00
3.19
3.02
3.12
3.17
14:30
3.19
3.07
3.07
3.24
15:00
3.14
3.09
3.41
3.24
15:30
3.05
2.73
3.17
3.60
16:00
2.81
2.59
2.88
2.97
16:30
2.47
2.30
-
-
Table 12 - Columbia Heights Medical Center (Subareas 1 and 2)
Parking Rate per 1,000 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area
Building Size = 34,500 Square Feet
30- Mar-05
31- Mar -05
4-Apr-05
5- Apr -05
7:30
2.26
1.94
-
1.65
8:00
3.45
2.87
2.99
3.28
8:30
4.06
3.42
3.83
3.77
9:00
4.49
4.38
4.35
4.75
9:30
4.64
4.87
5.01
4.90
10:00
4.96
4.90
5.28
4.93
10:30
4.96
5.13
4.99
5.28
11:00
5.28
5.28
5.62
5.10
11:30
4.64
4.72
5.07
4.64
12:00
4.55
4.03
4.38
3.77
12:30
4.41
3.74
4.38
3.51
13:00
4.38
3.74
4.58
4.23
13:30
4.41
3.91
4.49
4.52
14:00
4.41
4.41
5.01
4.72
14:30
4.58
4.06
5.04
4.72
15:00
4.64
4.00
4.64
4.67
15:30
4.46
4.03
4.75
4.29
16:001
3.42
3.57
4.35
4.17
16:301
2.70
2.96
-
-
Table 13 - Fridley Plaza (Subarea 3)
Parking Rate per 1,000 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area
Building Size = 31,827 Square Feet
30- Mar -05
31 -Mar -05
4- Apr -05
5-Apr-05
7:30
0.31
0.13
-
0.06
8:00
0.57
0.57
0.25
0.28
8:30
0.97
0.79
0.53
0.53
9:00
1.13
0.82
0.66
0.85
9:30
1.19
0.91
0.94
0.85
10:00
1.04
0.91
1.26
1.19
10:30
1.13
1.01
1.19
1.13
11:00
1.16
0.85
1.32
1.01
11:30
1.13
0.85
1.01
1.07
12:00
1.01
0.75
0.79
1.04
12:30
1.04
0.72
0.82
0.97
13:00
1.04
0.72
0.60
1.13
13:30
1.01
1.01
0.82
1.23
14:00
1.16
1.10
0.97
1.23
14:30
1.04
1.10
0.91
1.23
15:00
1.07
1.16
0.94
1.10
15:30
1.07
0.85
0.79
1.10
16:00
0.94
0.85
0.72
1.04
16:30
0.88
0.72
-
-
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey Fridley, MN
LRaLC VI QU
VVy
au- mar-u5
Pkg
"s 3
_ ����
Total
Included
in Total Occupied
Time
Area
�
;� �.
{Y�
Occupied
Handicap
Doctor
Rehab
15 Min.
Visitor
x
Parking
Parking
Parking
Parking
Parking
7 :30 AM
n
8
7:30 AM
2
70
1
5
7:30 AM
3
=` ,} °
10
7:30 AM
4
29
_
7:30 AM
5
x
35
7:30 AM
6
2
7:30 AM
7
3
8:00 AM
1
19
8:00 AM
2
$$
100
3
7
2
8:00 AM
3
_.w.
8:00 AM
4'
r
52
1. . .
8:00 AM
5
.'
46
8:00 AM
6
5
8.00 AM
7
.4
6
..................:..........
8:30 AM
1
27
:..:.:.
::..
8:30 AM
2
113
..
7
8
3
8:30 AM
3
31
1
1
8:30 AM
4
60
:..............
8:30 AM
5
60
8:30 AM
6
6
;.
8.30 AM
7
10
...........................
z
9:00 AM
1
Y"t*......`aa� . r 'rf
33 ::
......... .....:.
...:: -::.: .........
. :....:.'. .........
......... .......
::...
9:00 AM
2
122
7
8
2
.. .. .... ..
9:00 AM
3
36
1
9:00 AM
4
.
72
2
4
9:00 AM
5
57
.
:
9:00 AM
6
_5
6
9:00 AM
7
w
9:30 AM
1
-A m
36
9:30 AM
2
124
5
9
4
9:30 AM
3
,. ".:
38
9:30 AM
4
n.= ..._:v;
71
1
4
9:30 AM
5
i
}.
65
9:30 AM
6
9:30 AM
7
_f,...a.
8
:::.
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey
Fridley, IU{N
Date of Survey
30- 06 -05
Included in Total Occupied
Pkg
� r
�: �,��
Total
Handicap Doctor Rehab 15 Min. visitor
Time
Area
Occupied
Parkin Parkin Parkin Parkin Parkin
10:00 AM
1
wo 54
4
10:00 AM
2
137
6 11
1
10:00 AM
3
`�:
33
3
10:00 AM
4
69
10:00 AM
5
" E
62
10:00 AM
M' x
7
10:00 AM
7
10:30 AM
- .......:
10:30 AM
2
137
6 11 2
10:30 AM
3
36
10:30 AM
4��
66
1
10:30 AM
5
62
10:30 AM
6
6
10:30 AM
7
10
:......:........
11:00 AM
1
11:00 AM
2
ti >
143
7 12 5
11:00 AM
3
'
37
2
11:00 AM
4
EA
11:00 AM
64
11:00 AM
7
11:00 AM
7
� ::`�
8
.. ......
> ......... ........:
......... .....::.
11:30 AM
11:30 AM
2
y
�
124
5
12
2
11:30 AM
3_
36
1
1
11:30 AM
11:30 AM
5
A
67
11:30 AM
11:30 AM
7
12:00 PM
1�
33
12:00 PM
124
7
10
4
12:00 PM
3
12:00 PM
54
12:00 PM
5
5
56
_.:
12:00 PM
6
4
12:00 PM
7
.:.
5
,
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey
Fridley, MN
Date of Survey
30- Mar -05
Pkg
Total
Included
in Total Occupied
Time
Area
°F t
Occupied
Handicap
Doctor
Rehab
15 Min.
Visitor
D
Parking
Parking
Parkin
Parkin
Parkin
12:30 PM
1
31
12:30 PM
2
121
6
10
.:.......
12:30 PM
3
33
,.
12:30 PM
4
��
56
1
12:30 PM
5
'
:. max=
54
�:
12:30 PM
6
ti �v
5
12:30 PM
7
�� $
5
1:00 PM
1
��
24
1:00 PM
2
�- ��
127
5
12
1
1:00 PM
3
33
1:00 PM
4
58
1.
1
1:00 PM
5
=;
1:00 PM
6
. '; `ms:
4
1:00 PM
7_
6
1:30 PM
1
�.
23
1:30 PM
2
129
5
11
1
1:30 PM
3�
32
;.:
1:30 PM
4
` ;
59
1:30 PM
5
� ,� F,.,
59
1:30 PM
6
g
5
1:30 PM
7£
.u�
10
2:00 PM
1
��
x . ..
24
2:00 PM
Z
128
6
12
1
nx
2:00 PM
3
. v
2:00 PM
4_
62
1
2:00 PM
5
���
56...:
2:00 PM
6��,:
...
6
2:00 PM
7
.......:..:.............
st ih
2:30 PM
1
,;
30 >:
2:30 PM
2
�`
128
.....
7
12
3
2:30 PM
3
`
33
.
2:30 PM
4_
, ..
��
59
1
.
2:30 PM
5
58
2:30 PM
6�
6
2:30 PM
7
�
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Fridley, MN
Parking Occupancy Survey
Date of Survey
Included in Total occupied
Pkg
Total
Time
Area
Occupied
Parkin
Parkin Parking Parking Parkin
27
3:00 PM
..........
133
3:00 PM
11 4 . ........ ... .......... ....
34
3:00 PM
3
60
3:00 PM
3:00 PM
5
57
3:00 PM
6
3:00 PM
7
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
... ..
.. ..
3:30 PM
I
7.
121
3:30 PM
2
34
3:30 PM
3
5
3:30 PM
4
5
3:30 PM
5
3:30 PM
6
3:30 PM
7
4:00 PM
1
4:00 PM
2
4:00 PM
3
4:00 PM
4
4:00 PM
5
4:00 PM
6
4:00 PM
7
4:30 PM
1
4:30 PM
2
SRI
4:30 PM
4:30 PM
4
4:30 PM
4:30 PM
6
4:30 PM
7
1111 8
Fridley, MN
30-Mar-05
Included in Total occupied
Total
Handicap
b 16 Min. Visitor
Doctor Rehab
Occupied
Parkin
Parkin Parking Parking Parkin
27
..........
133
7
11 4 . ........ ... .......... ....
34
..........
60
.........
57
5
9
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
... ..
.. ..
....
33
7.
121
6
12 4 .......
34
. ......... .......... ........
5
5
................ .. ...... .....
1111 8
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey Fridley, MN
vate of Survey
31- Mar-05
Pk g
Total
Included in
Total Occupied
Time
Area
r� a �
Occupied
Handicap
Doctor
Rehab
15 Min.
Visitor
Parking
Parking
Parking
Parking
Parking
7:30 AM
1
�. av
6
�.
7:30 AM
2
61
3
2
1
7.30 AM
3
BEAM
4
7:30 AM
4
34
:..
7:30 AM
5
"
36
7:30 AM
6
2
7:30 AM
7
4
......�
8:00 AM
1K
11
8:00 AM
2
,. w
88
4
6
2
8:00 AM
3
z
18
8:00 AM
4
s i` 1
':.$ �µ...A �
55
'. .
i. ....::
8:00 AM
5
43
8:00 AM
6��
6
8:00 AM
7
6
.......
8:30 AM
1;
._.
_:
__.
8:30 AM
2
._o ` '
106
4
7
2
8:30 AM
3
..
25
1
8:30 AM
4
. �._. X � �y
64
8:30 AM
5
m
50
8:30 AM
6
;j ; :_
14
8:30 AM
7
:.. s_ ''
7
9:00 AM
1�.:
20
9:00 AM
2
...
131
..... ..............................:
4
...
11
:::.::.::.:.:..:..:.::::.:
4
9:00 AM
3
E .
9:00 AM
4
._ Ny
67
1
9:00 AM
5
55
9:00 AM
6
13
:
9:00 AM
7
7
9:30 AM
1
,,
31
9:30 AM
2
137
6
12
1
-'
.........:...:
9:30 AM
3n
29
1
1
X.
9:30 AM
4���
• _
66:
9:30 AM
5
55
9:30 AM
6
15
9:30 AM
7
" w
8
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey Fridley, MN
vaie Or survey
37- mar -05
Pkg
Total
Included in Total Occupied
Time
Area
:
Occupied
Handicap
Doctor
Rehab
15 Min.
Visitor
Parking
Parking
Parking
Parking
Parkin
12:30 PM
1
20
-
12:30 PM
2
.......
109
5
12
2
12:30 PM
3
23
._
12:30 PM
4
=
....
12:30 PM
5
.. :4
44
12:30 PM
6.
4
12:30 PM
7�
s ..
8
.
1:00 PM
1
�.
20
:
1:00 PM
2
r:
109
1
1
1:00 PM
3
23
1:00 PM
4
55
1
1:00 PM
5
Bloom
46
1:00 PM
6
_
1.00 PM
7.
.::...... ..::....
Y�
1:30 PM
1
>x y
..
; ........:....:....:.:::.::..:
; ::...
1:30 PM
2
� w . rv.
115
4
12
2
.
1:30 PM
3
32
1
-
1:30 PM
4
� . � .
62
:'...:
2
1:30 PM
5
�x :. � �,�
46
1:30 PM
6
5
_
1:30 PM
7
10
EVEN E
2:00 PM
1
26
2:00 PM
2
seam
126
6
11
2
2:00 PM
3k
,.Y v_ Fes:
35
2:00 PM
4
f
64
2
2:00 PM
5
r x;s
47
.
2:00 PM
6
..z
�.. :.:�
4
2:00 PM
7
11
_.
2:30 PM
1
26 :....:....:.............:.:
-
- :::..:.:
2:30 PM
2
��
114
5
11
2
-`
2:30 PM
3
35
2:30 PM
4,....
62
2:30 PM
5
�
50
2.30 PM
6
� p :
5
777777777
2:30 PM
7
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey
Fridley,
MN
Date of Survey
31-
Mar -05
included in Total Occupied
pkg �F
Total Handicap Doctor Rehab 15 Min. Visitor.
Time Area
r,x: Occupied
Parkin Parking Parkin Parkin Parkin
3:00 PM
27
3:00 PM
2 r
111
5 11
3:00 PM
3��
.�
37
3:00 PM
4
65
2
3:00 PM
IN 'z
47
3:00 PM
6,_�f-
5
3:00 PM
7
12
3:30 PM
25
3:30 PM
2
� y_
114
5 11 1
3:30 PM
3
,�c� , >; - `�=
27
:;
3:30 PM
53
3:30 PM
5
�3.
48
1
3:30 PM
6
::yY...�.
3
3:30 PM
7��b.
10
�:
23
: :........ :......:.
:......:
4:00 PM 1����
10
2
4:00 PM 2
100
7
--� ��:
27
4:00 PM 3
4:00 PM
4`
.x
50
4.00 PM
5
4
.
4:00 PM
6sr,
4:00 PM
7
.
17
4:30 PM
1
4:30 PM
2
�
85
7
10
2
4:30 PM
3
23
4:30 PM
4
42
;: x° .H°
41
2
4:30 PM
5
4:30 PNI
6
f �► T
4
4:30 PM
7�,,_,
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey Fridley, MN
w _
vaLW v1 purvey
4 -Apr -u5
Pk g
Total
Included in Total Occupied
Time
Area
A
Occupied
Handicap
Doctor
Rehab
15 Min.
Visitor
Parking
Parking
Parkin
Parkin
Parkin
8:00 AM
1�
10
-
8:00 AM
2
..
gfi
...... ..:.:..:.:....: :... : ::....:::::
93
4
5
3
8:00 AM
3
.: G-
8
8:00 AM
4�
1
8:00 AM
5
a�„ �`
47
8:00 AM
6
4
8:00 AM
7
5
8:30 AM
1
Y
21
8:30 AM
2
111
7
8
8:30 AM
3
17
. M.
.. .. ::
8:30 AM
4
Y
58
1
8'30 AM
5
_�
�� �:, a
54
8:30 AM
633
�.�
�..:
5
8:30 AM
7
._v
g
j 5
9:00 AM
1
9:00 AM
2
128
7
11
2
...
9:00 AM
3
21
1
9:00 AM
4::
66
=
1 9:00 AM
5
���:�°` _ ��:
32
9:00 AM
6
�°
5
9:00 AM
7
10
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey
Fridley, MN
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey
Fridley, MN
gate of survey
4-Apr-05
Pkg
Total
Included in
Total Occupied
Time
Area
r
Occupied
Handicap
Doctor
Rehab
75 Min.
Visitor
-�
Parking
Parking
Parking
Parking
Parking
12:00 PM
1
12:00 PM
2
ny
„� :,
119
6
23
3
12:00 PM
3
25
12:00 PM
4�
59
12:00 PM
5�`
4
47
12:00 PM
6��
5
12:00 PM
7
..::::.::...:....::: .::...:::.:...........:.::.:.:.
12:30 PM
1
.....
38
_
12:30 PM
2
113
6....:..:.
1.3..:..
4
12:30 PM
3
:.
26
1
xxo
12:30 PM
4
a�
53
12:30 PM
5
46
;
12:30 PM
6
�:
4
;
12:30 PM
7
:: :.x.. `
10
1.00 PM
1
.r
32
:.:: : :.:.
1:00 PM
2
'�
126
6
13
4
1:00 PM
3
19
2
:;:
1:00 PM
4
60
... ..
.......
1
1:00 PM
5
49
1.00 PM
6x.,m
5
1:00 PM
7-
a.: },.
9
1:30 PM
1
33
....... ......
.... ... ...... ....:..............:::
1:30 PM
2
�_��� � f ��
122
6
13
3
.. :::... :...:
:::.....:: :..
1:30 PM
3
p.
26
2
1:30 PM
4
x
66
::.....
:: .,.........:. >.'
2
1:30 PM
5�
...
53
.:.
1:30 PM
6
6
.
1:30 PM
7
12
........ .........
...
2:00 PM
1.
35
........
...............
.........
2:00 PM
2
m . ;,ry
138
7
13
2
2:00 PM
3
.. t- < .:
31
2
2:00 PM
4;.
:...v
:
2:00 PM
5
�
51
.:....:...........
1
2:00 PM
6
5
2:00 PM
7
.. ”
10
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking occupancy Survey
Date of Survey
Pkg
Time
Area
Rehab 15 Mini.
Parkin
--no
Pa k'
I-
2:30 PM
2:30 PM
2:30 PM
3
2:30 PM
4
2:30 PM
2:30 PM
2:30 PM
7
3:00 PM
1
3:00 PM
2
3:00 PM
3
3:00 PM
4
3:00 PM
—5
3:00 PM
6
3:00 PM
7
3:30 PM
1
3:30 PM
2
3:30 PM
3
3:30 PM
4
3:30 PM
5
6
3:30 PM
7
3:30 PM
4:00 PM
1
2
4:00 PM
3
4:00 PM
4
4:00 PM
4:00 PM
4:00 PM
6
4:00 PM
7
Fridley, MN
Handi
Doctor
Rehab 15 Mini.
Parkin
--no
Pa k'
I-
Parkin Parking-
° TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey Fridlev. MN
vate of survey
5- Apr -05
Pk g
Total
Included in Total Occupied
Time
Area
Occupied
Handicap
p
Doctor
Rehab
15 Min.
Visitor
Parking
Parking
Parking
Parking
Parkin
7:30 AM
2
7:30 AM
2
55
4
2
7:30 AM
3
2
:.
7:30 AM
4
W
27
7:30 AM
5
38
7:30 AM
6
S
7:30 AM
7
3
8:00 AM
1
:as
17
.. :.
8:00 AM
2.
96
1
7
2
8:00 AM
3
;, -
g
77777 7:
8:00 AM
4
53
:
8:00 AM
5
50
:
8:00 AM
6
6
8 :00 AM
7
r ,..
8:30 AM
1
20
8:30 AM
2
_
110
1
8
1
8:30 AM
3
17
8:30 AM
4
v
gg
:.... .
2
8:30 AM
5
�>
55
.: :. ...
8:30 AM
6
..,
7
8:30 AM
7
. ......:
7
......
MUM�
9:00 AM
1
_.
9:00 AM
2
132
5
10
1
9:00 AM
3
27
9:00 AM
4
67
1
9:00 AM
5
y .:
56
9:00 AM
6
" "3
6
9:00 AM
7
g
MIND
-
D
9:30 AM
1
z
35
.
:.
9:30 AM
2
$
134
7
11
:..::
3
9:30 AM
3-
27
1
9:30 AM
4
64
9:30 AM
5
58
9:30 AM
6
x
6
w�
9:30 AM
7
5
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey
Fridley, MN
TRAFFIC DATA INC.
Parking Occupancy Survey
Fridley, MN
Date of Survey 5- Apr -vs
Included in Total Occupied
Pkg k Total
Time Handicap Doctor Rehab 15 Min. Visitor
Area� ���� ��
Occupied
. Parking Parking Parking Parkin Parking
3:00 PM
1
NE0 3. �I, 32
#4� : 129
arr::
.:.......; ..........:
........: .........
.........
.
3:00 PM
2
5
10
1
.:
3:00 PM
3
35
1
1
3:00 PM
4
37 5i
2
3:00 PM
5
... 81
6
11
3:00 PM
6�.
3:00 PM
7e
:........
: ::
���
I R z
34
3:30 PM
1
-
3:30 PM
2_:
.,�° 114
4
10
3
3:30 PM
3
35
2
3:30 PM
4
fr 53
2
3:30 PM
5
79
3:30 PM
6n
H 6
3:30 PM
7
:;.. 12
4:00 PM
1
�..���: 31:..
........
�
4:00 PM
2
113
7
10
3
4:00 PM
3
33
2
4:00 PM
4
y
� � ~. 53
.
4:00 PM
5
5' 56
2
4:00 PM
6
4:00 PM
7
z 10
:.......:
:...... :: ::
..........
FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
June 2, 2005
911193
1. Island Park Drive .Area.
Staff sent out a Request For Qualifications on April 19`' to gauge the interest of developers in forming a
partnership to further explore the feasibility of doing a project in the Island Park Drive area. The RFQ
was sent to 13 of the areas largest developers having experience in large -scale redevelopment projects.
We received 3 responses (which have been included with your packet)
Staff has asked the 3 groups to make brief presentations to the HRA and Council at the joint meeting
scheduled for 6PM on June 8 (downstairs meeting room — box dinner will be provided). Each group will
be allotted 45 minutes, starting at 6:30. Each group has been asked to prepare a 10 -15 minute
presentation and then to plan on 25 minutes to answer questions. Please read through the materials
provided by each group and feel free to ask any questions you may have.
2.Gateway West
The Harvet's are almost completely moved out of the home at 27157 Place. Just a few minor items
need to be moved and then they will turn over the keys and we can process a payment for their moving
expenses.
Staff has been busy tying up all of the loose ends necessary to move towards the creation of the TIF
District, demolition the buildings by the middle of August, and having a signed development agreement
with a developer completed by mid - September. Leisch Associates will be conducting the hazardous
material inspections of the 4-plex & the Harvet property late next week. S.E.H. will be conducting the
interior blight analysis of the Harvet home on June 3r'.
3. Columbia Arena
There is nothing new to report on Columbia Arena as the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission is still
trying to determine the fate of the arena.
4. Housing Loan Program Update
CEE did a targeted direct mailing inviting residents to attend an open house on our loan program,
operation insulation, and the remodeling advisor services. The open house was held on May 24th in the
Council Chambers. 13 very interested homeowners attended a brief presentation on the loans and
services provide by the HRA & CEE. After a brief presentation, the group asked a number of very good
questions. If this type of direct mailing and open house format successfully leads to more loans
processed, we would like to follow up with more targeted mugs and open houses later this year.
5. Target NOC
Staff has met and corresponded with Mark McCary to discuss his purchase of the Target NOC on a
number of occasions over the past month. Mark is concerned that the site lacks the parking necessary to
attract quality tenants. Mark believes that the NOC is short at least 100 or more parking stalls. From
reading through the attached correspondence, you can see that Mark would possibly like an early buyout
of the HRA owned parking lot and assistance with the construction of a parking deck to serve the
building. You will also notice that we have requested more information so that we can thoroughly review
his request prior to making any recommendations to the HRA at your July meeting
fo
G. Columbia Park Medical Clinic Parking.
Like the Target NOC, we anticipate that Columbia Park will be making a formal request for assistance in
redesigning their parking lot to yield 34 more parking stalls at your July meeting. Columbia Park has
submitted a matrix depicting their investment in the property over the years and it does appear that they
have met their original commitments. Staff will thoroughly analyze their request and bring forward a
recommendation at your July meeting. The parking study shows that any improvements to parking on
their site is a benefit only to them.
If there are any items you would like covered in upcoming issues of the Non - Agenda Update please send
me an e-mail. bolinp @ci.fridley.mn.us
iii
YALE PLACE ASSOCIATES
81 South 9" Street #400
Minneapolis, MN 55402
May 6, 2006
City of Fridley
Community Development Department
6431 University Avenue, N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Attn: Mr. Paul Bolin
Re: Target Northern Operations Center
Dear Paul:
Thank you for taking the time to meet with our development team on Friday, April 29.
We came away from the meeting significantly more optimistic that all of the pieces can be put
into place to make the Target Northern Operations Center an economically viable property.
As we discussed at the meeting, the availability of adequate parking is paramount in
making the site feasible for today's office leasing demands. This was recognized as a potential
issue when the Contract for Private Development was negotiated in 1984. The City and Target
attempted to "hedge their bets" by creating parking ramp construction rights on Parcel B -3 at the
southeast corner of the Target property. The Contract contemplated that either or both parties
might construct ramp improvements on the approximately 41,000 square foot parcel. The ramp
improvements of each party might be constructed at one time or sequentially over a period of
years. The Contract allowed for the construction of the ramp improvements at any time before
2014 when the Lease - Purchase Agreement will expire.
In the ensuing twenty -one years, neither party has utilized its ramp construction rights.
With the Target building having been vacated, there was no pressing need for multi-level
parking. However, it is obvious that the City has unmet parking needs in the area. More
importantly, a successful re -use of the Target building would drive parking needs to a level far in
excess of available capacity. To be candid, if we cannot achieve a practical and cost - effective
solution to the parking problem, our attempt to acquire the property is likely to fail and the same
parking deficiency will continue to confound prospective buyers in the future.
There are several elements confronting both our development team and the City with
regard to the parking requirement. I will try to address each element, to the extent that it is
In possible at this time:
Area Parkin? Demand. The current surface lot on the Target property contains 260
parking spaces. For the building to be feasible for full office use, we anticipate the
need for parking at the level of five to six spaces per thousand square feet (375 to 450
spaces onsite). This addition of 115 to 190 spaces could not be accommodated on the
Parcel B -3 site without installing a very expensive multi-level ramp. On the other
MPLS -Word 91198.1
Mr. Paul Bolin
May 3, 2005
Page 2
hand, the installation of a single deck ramp over all of Parcel B -3 and most of Parcel
B -5 could accommodate all of the Target property parking needs and make available
100+ spaces for use by the City and Columbia Park Medical Group. In fact, until the
Target building is fully leased, the excess parking available for third parry use would
far exceed the 100+ space level. The Target property ramp could be viewed as a
practical long -term solution to the area parking demand, thereby assuring long -term
occupancy of all the office and medical buildings in the area.
II. Timeframe. You are aware of the very tight deadline set by Target in our agreement
for purchase of the property (closing by no later than June 30). In addition, the
construction process for the larger ramp would render substantially all of the surface
parking unusable. Given these factors, there is only one feasible timeframe for
construction: immediately following our closing on the purchase. Completion of the
ramp by no later than an October/November timeframe would permit us to proceed
aggressively with leasing efforts starting in July, while being able to commit to the
delivery of space and parking in a 120 -150 day timeframe. Being able to meet such a
timing commitment with prospective tenants will be every bit as important to the
success of the project as our ability to close on the property by June 30.
III. Feasibility and Cost. We currently believe that the Target site could accommodate a
single level ramp accommodating approximately 250 cars. Attached to this letter is
some very preliminary pricing for such a ramp. For this project to succeed, it will be
essential that our team and the City work together in effectively balancing cost
against benefit. We have also attached a depiction of one option for an exterior finish
on the ramp to show the appearance that can be created on a cost - effective basis.
IV. Constructing the Ramp. Since our entity will be most directly impacted by the timing
for construction of the ramp, we would propose to take responsibility for the
construction. The plans and specifications would certainly be subject to approval by
the City. We would also envision an exchange of information with Columbia Park
Medical Group, if that firm expresses an interest in use of the parking facility.
V. Feasibility of the Ramp. Obviously, the parking solution will only be achievable if
we can effectively address the issue of cost. It may be useful to evaluate any City
contribution relative to the likely alternative. If a ramp cannot be built, the Target
property may sit vacant for a number of years to come. With the Assessment
Agreement expiring in December, it is to be expected that Target will seek a
significant tax reduction on Parcel A. Parcels B -1 through B -5 will continue as
leased property generating only $15,000 per year for the City. The City will
undoubtedly collect its $300,000 payment in 2014, but that will be small consolation
for having this key location sit vacant.
On the other hand, if we can make the pieces fit, the City and Columbia Park Medical
Group may obtain essential parking on a very cost - effective basis. The Target building could be
redeveloped and the land lease arrangement with the City for Parcel B could presumably be
SAAADATAftle Place Assccia teslConespondencelFridley Parking Lot Memo.doc
GENERAL CONTRACTOR—COMMERCIAL
121 SOUTH EIGHTH STRErr
50HMINNEAPOLIS; MINNESOTA 55402
UMON, INC. OfFla: (612) 339 -3733
FAX: (612) 339 -2410
PROPOSAL
PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO:
Yale Place LLC
ATTENT1om
Mark
DATE-
562005
STREET:
5028 Bruce Place
JOB NAME
Parking Structure
CRY, STATE AND ZIP CODE
Edina Mn 55424
JOB LOCATICA@
6499 University Ave, Fridley
ARCHTTECT:
M TO
375 - 9295
JOB NUMBER:
05.1.160
ESTIMATDR:
Mike Johnson
We hereby submit specifications and estimates for:
Architectural, Structural, Mechanical, Electrical & Civil engineering
Excavation and concrete removal
Cast in place concrete
S ancrete supply and install
Electrical
Plumbing
Bituminous and concrete curb patching
Subtotal
General conditions
Subtotal
Fee
Subtotal
Contingency 7.5%
Total Budget
$
189,900.00
$
44,000.00
$
45 760.00
$
1,620,000.00
$
42 000.00
$
49,800.00
$
33,792.00
$
2,025,252.00
$
283,535,28
$
2,308,787.28
$
230 878.73
$
2,539,666.01
$
190,474.95
2 730140.96
We propose hereby to furnish material and labor- complete in accordance with above specificadoris, forthe sum of:
Two million seven hundred thirty thousand one hundred forty and 961100 ......................
Payment to be made as follows:
$ 2,730,140,96
All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be dorm in a worlaraniike
manner according to standard practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specie
lotions Involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders, and wit become
an extra charge over and above the estimate. AR agreements contingent upon strikes,
accidents or delays beyond our control Ovmer to carry fire, tornado and otter necessary
Insurance. Our workers are fatly covered by Workman's Compensation Insurance.
Authorized Signature
Note: This proposal may be withdrawn
by us if not accepted within 90 days.
Acceptance of Proposal The above prices, specifications and
conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authortaed
to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above.
signature
Date
Hanson Spancrete Midwest, Inc. P.O. Box 1360, Maple Grove, MN 55311 (763) 425 -5555
. _ �j
Pro.. Job No.
MEN
WON
■■■
Subj.
Sh..No.
By Date
Ir
,Pare Pface Associates, LLC
81 South tenth Street
Winneapofis, 9WX 55402
May 18, 2005
City of Fridley
Community Development Department
6431 University Avenue, N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Attn: Paul Bolin
Re: Target Northern Operations Center Building
Dear Paul:
I am writing to update you with regard to our continuing efforts to purchase the Target
Northern Operations Center at 6499 University Avenue. We have completed our title review and
have identified no significant problems that would impede closing. We are very close to
securing conventional financing for the purchase and will be working with the lender on the
required appraisal, environmental and other due diligence elements. The Option Agreement with
Target Corporation specifies that the very substantial Option Fee will become non - refundable as
of May 31, 2005. That date is the next key benchmark in our efforts to return this building to
productive use.
As we discussed at the April 29 meeting, the parking shortfall remains a major challenge
and added parking capacity will be essential to the long -term viability of the Target Building
project. Based on the preliminary findings of the parking study, it looks like this is the only long
term parking need in the area.
One other key challenge with regard to this property is the Target buy -out guaranty. If
the Target guaranty is not released by the City, Target would have the ability to kill the
transaction right up to the closing date. With the investment that our group will have to make in
due diligence and financing, we cannot take that risk. We also anticipate that obtaining approval
of a tax increment financing structure or other publicly - assisted financing will take longer than
the transaction timetable will permit.
We would like to propose the following as a solution to both of these problems:
r City of Fridley
May 17, 2005
Page 2
2. We would re nest that the
ai& 3 B ed on the p
3
This is the same stm
This would result in
side of the nronerty.
iping of the parking
the building.
City has allowed Medtronic to use for iemployee pakmglareas
�'i Ot�allow us to keep the large trees on the northeast
ut new an pmg along the center parkmgnes. It would also
mat oimpou_ sue o�iet. In conjunction with
we would also improve the flow of traffic to front entrance of
4. Lastly, we would like to design a
You may ask why the City should agree to this proposal. In our view, it has multiple advantages.
These include:
1. Elimination of a major contingency in our transaction with Target (most
important).
2. Elimination of the need for a credit analysis by the City with regard to our
ownership entity (as well as with regard to any potential future buyer).
3. Providing a simple, straight - forward method for the City to assist our
redevelopment efforts.
4. Guarantying to the, City the receipt of rent on the lease through 2014,
notwithstanding the outcome of discussions between the City and Target
concerning which party will ultimately be owner of the Treasury Note.
The present value of the waiver (approximately $170 000) would represent only about
o of our company's anticipated investment in the bui dingf and the site. We view this as a
meaningful, but very reasonable, level of support for our efforts with this difficult property.
We recognize that many developers might ask for a significantly greater contribution
from the City and County in undertaking a project of this scope and risk. To be candid, we have
neither the time nor the inclination to "squeeze every nickel" out of the City and County. We
need to move forward and we need to do so quickly. The waiver of the $300,000 buy -out
obligation would allow that to occur with minimal cost or complexity from the perspective of all
parties.
City of Fridley
May 17, 2005
Page 3
Please get back to' me with your thoughts once you have had a chance to review this
letter. If this approach is workable from the standpoint of the City, we would like to let Target
know as soon as possible. Thanks for your assistance, Paul.
Very truly yours_
I:
Chief Manager
G7YOF
FRIDLEY
FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432
(763) 571 -3450 • FAX (763) 571 -1287 • TTDPI'I'Y (763) 572 -3534
May 20, 2005
Mr. Mark McCary
Yale Place Associates, LLC
81 South Ninth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Dear Mr. McCary:
The purpose of this letter is to respond to your letter dated May 18, 2005
regarding your efforts to purchase the Target NOC property. In essence, your
letter asked the City /HRA to waive the requirement that you, as the potential
purchaser of the Target property and the presumed successor to Target's
obligations, pay $300,000 to purchase the parking lot in 2014. This letter
requests additional information and spells out the conditions the City /HRA would
most likely require to accommodate your request for assistance.
HRA, City Staff, and the HRA_s attorneys are requesting that the following
information be submitted so that a more thorough evaluation of your request can
happen. As you are requesting that the taxpayers of Fridley forego a sizable
amount of money in 2014 to assist your efforts in placing tenants in the Target
NOC building, staff needs the following information from you.
• Financial pro forma for your project. The HRA cannot waive $300,000
without an identified need and justification.
• Set of plans and estimated time frame for completing both interior
changes to the building and proposed parking ramp construction.
• Names of Yale Place Associates, LLC,'s partners.
• Bank references, lender commitments and /or other financial statements
showing that Yale Place Associates has the financial means to carry out
the purchase and redevelopment of the Target NOC site.
In addition, Staff and the HRA attorneys are concerned that your request, as
stated in your letter, leaves too many unresolved issues to be solved at a future
date. For staff to become more supportive of your request., the following matters
must be part of any assistance agreements
• Page 2
May 20, 2005
• Target must sign a release of any claims with respect to principal and
interest on the 1984 Treasury Bond that the City is currently holding and
using to cover the lease payments
• The City will require an easement to use 20 parking stalls along the Target
property's southern border, and tenants of the Target NOC building will be
prohibited from using the parking ramp at City Hall
• Target NOC property must be kept on tax rolls for a minimum of 25 years
• Sale of parking lot property would take place immediately, not in 2014
We understand that you are under a tight timeframe in your negotiations with
Target, however, we cannot rush into anything with taxpayer dollars at stake.
Once we receive the requested information staff will be able to make a
presentation of your request to the HRA and Council.
Additionally, you have requested that the City allow you to utilize 8.5' wide
parking stalls rather than the code required 10' wide parking stalls. As I stated to
you in a phone conversation, Medtronic was permitted, by the zoning code, 8.5'
wide stalls ONLY IN THEIR PARKING RAMP. As an office use, your building
would be required to have 10' stalls for your parking lot and could utilize a 9.5'
wide stall in a parking deck. A reduction to 8.5' stalls could only happen with the
Planning Commission and City Council's approval through a change in your site's
master plan (the required form and timeframe has been included with this letter).
You have obviously given your potential parking issues much thought and I hope
that the City /HRA is able to assist you in addressing your potential parking
issues. Creative solutions are always something that we are interested in.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
Sincerely,
Paul Bolin
Assistant Executive Director
Fridley HRA
CC. Lary Commers, Chair, Fridley HRA
Dr. William Bums, City Manager / Executive Director, Fridley HRA
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
James R. Casserly, Esq., HRA Attorney
YALE PLACE ASSOCIATES, LLC
61 South Plinth Street #400
Minneapolis, MN 55402
May 26, 2005
City of Fridley
Community Development Department
6431 University Avenue, N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
Attn: Mr. Paul Bolin
Re: Target Northern Operations Center Building
Dear Paul:
I want to thank you and Scott Hickok for meeting with us yesterday. I thought that the
discussions were productive and I have already gone back to Target on both the bond and the time
frame. I have yet to receive a definitive response on either issue, but we will do our best'to move
those matters forward with Target.
At the meeting, we also discussed your May 20, 2005 letter in some detail and you had
asked that I provide a written response that could be reviewed at the City. With regard to the
specifics of the May 20, 2005 letter, my response is as follows:
1. Request for Financial Pro Forma Information. 1 have no problem with sharing my
pro forma information with you. Obviously, the figures are contingent upon
variables not totally under our control, including the timing of leases, the tenant
leasehold improvement requirements, the parking ramp construction timetable, etc.
2. Set of Plans and Estimated Time Frame for Construction. I will certainly permit the
City to review the plans for the building as they evolve. It is still too early in the
process to provide anything definitive with regard to the parking ramp, although it
will obviously be better defined as part of the Master Plan amendment process.
3. Names of Yale Place Associates' Partners. The entity that will be purchasing the
building is 6499 Partners, LLC. I am the Chief Manager and will have perhaps a
half -dozen individual investors. I have no problem with disclosure to the City or the
public of my role in this project. On the other hand, I have no authority to release
the names of the investors for public disclosure. I can tell you that they are all
respected business people who will have a substantial cash commitment to the
redevelopment.
4. Bank References, Lender Commitments and other Financial Statements. 6499
Partners, LLC is a newly created limited liability company that will be investing
$1,000,000 to $1,200,000 in member equity for this project. The remainder of the
project financial needs will be financed through a bank loan. I anticipate personally
guarantying some or all of the loans. I would have no trouble identifying the
lender, but I do have concern regarding public disclosure of the bank loan terms.
rvtrls -wora 93777.1 On the other hand, you can be assured that we will not close with Target on the -
Mr. Paul Bolin
May 26, 2005
Page 2
purchase of the property if we do not have the financial resources readily available
to complete the redevelopment effort.
5. Target Release of Claims to Bond. We have made a request to Target that it
confirms its release of any claim to the Bond.
6. Easement for Twenty Parking Spaces. The granting of a formal parking easement
will not be possible, but we are certainly willing to be good neighbors with the City
and to permit intermittent use by the City of a portion of our parking area. We
would also be willing to allow some City parking during the lease -up process when
our tenants will likely not need all of the available spaces. 1 would assume that we
would formalize this arrangement in some kind of letter agreement as the closing
approaches.
7. Keeping Property on Tax Rolls. We would agree that, as long as our company owns
the property, it will not be taken off of the tax rolls. However, we cannot agree to
impose such a condition on possible future owners.
8. Immediate Sale of Parking Lot Property. We will work with the City to determine
what makes sense on this item. It may very well be to the benefit of both parties to
leave the lease in place through 2014 and to continue the rent payments, rather than
to convey the real estate immediately. I understand that you will be consulting with
Mr. Casserley on this issue.
9. Revised Parking Spaces. Assuming that we obtain an affirmative response from
Target with regard to the bond and the timetable, we will start working immediately
on a proposed amendment to the Master Plan showing the reconfigured parking and
the lay -out of a potential parking structure. We would hope, through the
amendment process, to address both the short term and long -term parking issues on
this site. We will also be seeking to amend the Development Agreement to
incorporate a release of Target, to address the disposition of the bond, and to
provide for purchase of Parcel B by our company, either now or in 2014.
I hope that this letter is useful to the City in better understanding our current efforts. Thank
you for your ongoing cooperation.
Very truly yours,
MPU,Word 93777.1
Fridley HRA
Housing Program Summary
Cover Page
June 2, 2005 HRA Meeting
Report Description
Loan Application Summary Loan application activity (e.g. mailed
out, in process, closed loans) for May
2005 and year -to -date.
Loan Origination Report
Loan Servicing Report
Remodeling Advisor &
Operation Insulation
Loan originations for May 2005 and
year -to -date.
Loan servicing by Community
Reinvestment Fund (CRF) for the month
of April 2005. Note, that the loan
servicing reports are usually available
10 days after month end.
Shows the number of field appointments
scheduled and completed the Operation
Insulation and Remodeling Advisor
Services administered by Center for
Energy and Environment.
H: \—Paul's Documents*HRAUHRA Agenda Items\2005Uune 2, 2005\Housing Program Cover Page Qune12005).doc
E
Eo
0
N
CO N
cu
A
-0
UL Q
N
C
to
O
J
N
C
O
R
V
O.
Q.
a�
w N
ea C
cts CL
Q O
v
N
c
ca
O
J
N
C
O
a+
V �
•Q d
a�
N
rC..I O
C w
R
V
y 3 a
z Q
�I
Qi
N
O
Al
.O
N 0 0 r 0C)
N
O
a
'O
R
'O
41
N
O
V
it
N
N
0� 04000000
O
a`
c
Lo 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
v V
V LL c
LL
CL c
LL �o�
CLL xLLJL.
U. �+ Q
J C
C •C c C
�W
•�dCL EmiaW
o >.°.'XEEcw
m VSz m
�OLL�U V
= =0
__22220
LO
N
r
O
M
r
Li
0
I--
B
Fridley HRA
Loan Origination Report
May 2005
Loan / Grant Originations
This Previous
Month Months YTD
Loans Issued 1 4 5
Grants Issued -
Total 1 4 5
Fundina Sources
Types of Improvements
Interior # of Projects % of Total
Bathroom remodel
-
This
Previous
-
0%
General plumbing
-
Month
Months
1
YTD
Fridley HRA
$
5,800
$ 32,143
$
37,943
MHFA
$
-
$ -
$
-
Met Council
$
-
$ -
$
-
CDBG/HOME
$
-
$ -
$
-
GEE
$
-
$ 5,018
$
5,018
Other
$
-
$ -
$
-
Misc. exterior projects
Total $
51800
$ 37,161
$
42,961
Types of Units Improved
This
Previous
Month
Months
YTD
Single Family
1
4
5
Duplex
-
-
-
Tri -Plex
-
-
-
4 to 9 Units
-
-
-
10 to 20 Units
-
-
-
20+ Units
-
Total
1
4
5
Types of Improvements
Interior # of Projects % of Total
Bathroom remodel
-
0%
Kitchen remodel
-
0%
General plumbing
-
0%
Heating system
1
20%
Electrical system
-
0%
Basement finish
-
0%
Insulation
-
0%
Room addition
-
0%
Misc. interior projects
-
0%
Exterior
Siding/Fascia/Soffit
-
0%
Roofing
1
20%
Windows/Doors
2
40%
Garage
-
0%
Driveway /sidewalk
1
20%
Landscaping
-
0%
Misc. exterior projects
-
0%
Monthly Servicing Report
Principal Paid
Interest Paid
Total Payments Rec'd
Ending Principal Balance
Loans in Portfolio
Monthly Servicing Fees
NET FUNDS RECEIVED
Delinguency Report
Time Frame
1 to 30 days Late
31 to 60 Days Late
Over 60 Days Late
Fridley HRA
Loan Servicing Report
April 2005
Pool
Pool
Pool
Deferred
Installment
Installment
Loans
Loans
Loans
-
2,301.66
28,777.07
-
726.45
2,412.75
-
2,580.89
31,636.38
29,738.16
176,904.96
577,275.75
6
17
50
Total
* April Information Received May, 10 2005
Pool 3
Deferred
Loans Total
31,078.73
3,139.20
- 34,217.93
19,917.92 803,836.79
4 77
$ 511.00
$ 33,706.93
Delinquent Delinquent Delinquent
Loans Payments Principal
1.00 $ 441.49 $ 19,145.31
1.00 $ 276.50 $ 8,738.43
2.00 $ 2,233.11 $ 7,244.03
4.00 $ 2,951.10 $ 35,127.77
% of
Delinquent
Principal
2.30%
1.00%
0.90%
4.20%
I
s
N
V
v♦
L
O
Q
W
O
AE
W
O
■�
m
LCD
� O
N
� N
0
L
CL
IL O
N
d d
E
O N O
CL 0
'CL V
a
in
dm
E�
0 r O N 0
•Q.Cn
Q
Nh
It
c
o d
o c
N O
N O O M
Z �
+� O
w
d m
� Gs
C O d'OO d
CL 0
.Q v
a
w
0d
E5
C) oo �r
.Q CO)
Q
a� CD
.0 coo � C n E E
r+
. C Q 'C CL W >, O C V O N
• 2 ALL <M'a -5 U)0Z❑
LO
N t0 d'
r
O O
a o
Qf
E e
O
Q.
Q
`O d.
co
Tv Ta is
O 7 O
� V �
Q O
E0
C
�O
C.
0.
.,
L
- E M .CQ .0C
m -C C
C C
Co L
Nh
It
c
o d
o c
N O
N O O M
Z �
+� O
w
d m
� Gs
C O d'OO d
CL 0
.Q v
a
w
0d
E5
C) oo �r
.Q CO)
Q
a� CD
.0 coo � C n E E
r+
. C Q 'C CL W >, O C V O N
• 2 ALL <M'a -5 U)0Z❑
LO
N t0 d'
r
O O
a o
Qf
E e
O
Q.
Q
`O d.
co
Tv Ta is
O 7 O
� V �
Q O
E0
C
�O
C.
0.
.,
LO
N t0 d'
r
O O
a o
Qf
E e
O
Q.
Q
`O d.
co
Tv Ta is
O 7 O
� V �
Q O
E0
C
�O
C.
0.
.,