HRA 10/06/2005 - 6203CITY OF FRIDLEY
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING
Thursday, October 6, 2005, 7:30 P.M.
AGENDA
LOCATION: Council Chambers (upper level)
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
September 1, 2005
CONSENT AGENDA:
Consider Claims & Expenses ........... ................................................. ..............................1
ACTION:
Approve Addition to Veit Contract .......................................................... ..............................2
Approve Terms Agreement with Blue Print Homes ................................... ..............................3
Approve Purchase of Parking Permits and Signage for City Hall Parking Ramp .......................... 4
Columbia Park Parking Lot Reconstruction Assistance Request ............... ............................... 5
INFORMATION ITEMS:
Wnnric of PP.aCe UDdate ......................... .......................................... ..............................6
Mnrthetnr Rail Corridor UDdate .......................................................... ............................... 7
MonthlyHousing Report ..................................................................... ..............................8
ADJOURNMENT:
CITY OF FRIDLEY
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 1, 2005
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Commers called the Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting to
order at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members Present: Larry Commers
John Meyer
Virginia Schnabel
William Holm
Others Present: Paul Bolin, Assistant HRA Director
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Gay Cemey, HRA Counsel
APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES — August 41', 2005
MOTION by Commissioner Holm, seconded by Commissioner Schnabel, to approve the
minutes as presented.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Consider Claims and Expenses
MOTION by Commissioner Holm, seconded by Commissioner Schnabel, to approve the
consent agenda.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
ACTION:
Approve HRA Levy for 2006
Mr. Bolin reported that since 1996 the HRA levy has supported housing rehabilitation
programs in Fridley. This levy is used to make payments on $1,500,000 given by the
City to fund the RLF. The current balance of the loan is $480,123. The levy is equal to
.0144% taxable market value. The 2006 tax levy will allow HRA to collect $343,135.
The impact on the taxpayer for a $200,000 home would be $28.80 a year and a
$1,000,000 commercial property would be $144 per year. (these figures are the same
as last year)
HRA Meeting Setpember 12005 2 of 7
Staff recommends approval of the levy resolution. This resolution was reviewed by
Krass, Monroe and must be certified to the County by 9/15/05. The City Council is
scheduled to take action on this item on 9/12/05.
Chairperson Commers asked Mr. Bolin to verify that all funds will be designated to the
payment of the City loan.
Mr. Bolin will research the payment process and reply back to the HRA committee at
the October meeting.
MOTION by Commissioner Schnabel, seconded by Commissioner Holm, to approve the
HRA Levy for 2006.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
• Award demolition contract for Gateway West
Mr. Bolin stated that any demolition of properties over $50,000 is required to go through
a formal bidding process. Staff opened up the bidding process for the Gateway West
properties at 10:00 a.m. on August 31st, 2005 through the Star and Tribune. They
received the following bids:
Veit $89,628
Frattalone $103,916
Both of the companies are very reputable and capable of performing the task at hand.
Staff recommends awarding the contract to Veit. Veit would be able to begin demolition
within ten days of signing the contract as that is approximately the time required to
receive a pollution control permit.
Chairperson Commers questioned if all salvageable materials have been recovered
and if anything else is available to offset the current bid.
Mr. Bolin explained that back in July deconstruction services salvaged everything
possible. There may be a chance that someone may want to purchase a garage and the
fire department is interested in burning a few homes as a fire drill. This could
accumulate some cost savings to offset the current bid. The fire department will have to
inspect the homes to decide which homes will be the most economical to bum. Some
homes may require hazardous materials to be removed; therefore it may not be
economical to burn those homes.
Commissioner Meyer asked for an amendment to the current action plan to include
"less any set offs or deductions of burnable homes ".
MOTION by Commissioner Schnabel, seconded by Commissioner Meyer, to award Veit
the demolition bid of $89,000 gross, less any set offs or deductions of burnable homes.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
HRA Meeting Setpember 1 2005 3 of 7
Approve selection of Developer for Gateway West
Mr. Bolin stated that at the August meeting, staff was given the approval to seek out
developers that can build houses HRA had envisioned for the Gateway West area. Staff
recommends that a motion be approved selecting Blue Print Homes as developer for
Gateway West. By approving Blue Print Homes, staff can formalize terms and drafts
needed for a development agreement which could be presented at the October meeting.
Blue Print Homes has the ability to construct a wide variety of home designs that will add
value to the Hyde Park neighborhood. Staff has toured three homes and the design,
quality of materials and craftsmanship is all first rate. Jeff Magdik (owner of Blue Print
Homes) is excited to build homes on 60' wide lots and would like the opportunity to
showcase his work to those driving by on University Avenue. Staff has corresponded
with buyers in the Blaine and Hugo areas who have used Blue Print Homes and they
have reaffirmed the same impression staff received. Mr. Magdik is great to work with
and builds a quality home.
Mr. Hickok presented a short slide show prepared with photos taken at some of the
homes built by Blue Print Homes. The photo's featured beautiful millwork, cabinets, built
ins and many upgrades that are available to the buyer. Blue Print Homes makes use of
every square foot of the home and never builds the same home twice.
Commissioner Meyer questioned if the Hyde Park Area can sustain a price point of
$250,000 - $400,000 plus the cost of the lot.
Mr. Hickok reaffirmed that the builder is careful not to overprice homes in the
marketplace and research confirms that the homes will hold their value. Blue Print
Homes would build two models and buyers will build their homes based on their needs
for a specific style and design.
Chairperson Commers questioned if any studies have been completed regarding the
value of these homes.
Mr. Hickok responded that the builder has evaluated the market and has learned that
buyers are looking for places to live within close proximity of work and shopping. This is
a national trend in land redevelopment and Gateway West is the perfect area to meet
the specific needs of this trend.
Commissioner Meyer questioned if we sign the agreement with Blue Print Homes if
there would be any restrictions to the outcome of the home.
Mr. Hickok commented that staff would address those issues at the October meeting
when they discuss the terms and conditions of the contract. To date, staff has no plan to
assign a dollar value limitation (high or low) with the buyer. If this is something HRA
would want to include in the terms and conditions, it can be up for discussion.
Commissioner Meyer questioned if we were going to have square footage restrictions,
layout requirements, mandatory upgrades, or minimum quality requirements.
Mr. Bolin commented that staff does not want to prescribe each home. The models that
Blue Print Homes builds will have many upgrades and it will be up to the buyer as to
HRA Meeting Setpember 12005
4of7
which upgrades they would like to include in their home. The builder will build to the
buyer's specifications. Staff does not want to make all amenities mandatory for each
home.
Mr. Hickok commented that the builder is excited to build on this site and the area is
prime location to show Blue Print Homes talent. Mr. Magdik will work out the details and
can build in safe guards at the top or bottom end of the price point.
Commissioner Schnabel commented that both homes in the slide show were well over
$500,000. She recommended staff to tour some homes in the lower price range to
ensure they hold their value.
Mr. Bolin responded that he and Mr. Hickok would tour the lower price point homes
before the next meeting.
Commissioner Meyer commented that selling homes of this value could be a
challenging task as they may be priced too high for the Hyde Park area. The City of
Fridley could face unfortunate situations if the homes do not hold their value.
Mr. Bolin stated that a home located on the northern end of the 5800 block on 3`d Street
was recently appraised for $400,000, so some homes in the area currently hold similar
value.
Commissioner Holm questioned if HRA is under any time restrictions to sign this
agreement.
Mr. Bolin responded that the sooner we complete this agreement, the sooner the City of
Fridley will be able to collect on the tax increments.
Chairperson Commers agreed that the time frame has already been extended too long
and it would be best to move forward with this project.
MOTION by Commissioner Schnabel, seconded by Commissioner Meyer, to select Blue
Print Homes as the Developer for Gateway West subject to approval of the final
agreement.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
• Approve Interfund loan between General Fund and TIF District #18
Mr. Bolin reported that the purpose of the interfund loan is to loan TIF District Number
18 (Gateway West) $ 1,000,000 to finance redevelopment efforts until such a time that
the District creates enough tax increment to pay back the loan. The loan terms are in
the amount of $1,000,000 at an interest rate of 5% with a loan length of 27 years or until
12/1/32. The loan may be paid off early if sufficient tax increment is available.
Chairperson Commers asked for a budget on the different projects related to Gateway
West and to include running totals so the HRA is aware of the actual funds that are
being spent on this project.
HRA Meeting Setpember 1 2005
5of7
Mr. Bolin commented that staff will provide an updated budget sheet each month. To
date $1,700,000 has been spent on Gateway West.
Commissioner Schnabel asked if staff could add a budget column to the report. This
way HRA could compare budget and actual figures.
Mr. Bolin stated that a budget column could be added, but noted that when the budget
was created, categories were staff "best guess" at costs and revenues.
MOTION by Commissioner Holm, seconded by Commissioner Schnabel, to approve
resolution HRA 2005 -05 Interfund loan between General Fund and TIF District #18.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECALRED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
Islands of Peace
Mr. Bolin reported that staff met with representatives from Bancore Group and an
interim agreement of 60 -90 days will be necessary to further explore the feasibility of
moving forward with a project in the Islands of Peace neighborhood.
Staff asks for a motion to be approved to authorize the Executive Director to sign all
necessary interim agreements.
MOTION by Commissioner Holm, seconded by Commissioner Schnabel, to authorize
the Executive Director to sign all necessary interim agreements.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECALRED THE
MOTION CARRIED
Approval to Purchase home at 6000 East River Road
Mr. Bolin stated that in July staff was authorized to appraise the property on 6000 East
River Road. Currently this home is not connected to city water or sewer and the existing
septic system has failed. The property was appraised at $235,000.
Staff is asking for a motion to be approved authorizing staff to work with relocation
specialists to determine action benefits and make an offer to purchase the property. The
City of Fridley would be required to find a home of similar size and value for the seller.
The seller is willing and understands the buying process. Relocation expenses are
estimated at $3,000.
If the Island of Peace project moves forward, this would be a good starting point for the
development. If we do not go forward with the project, the City of Fridley may be able to
sell the property to a developer or create a park. The lot is about two acres and has
many large trees.
Commissioner Meyer questioned if the current sewer and water conditions have been
taken into account under the current appraisal amount.
HRA Meeting Setpember 12005
6of7
Mr. Bolin confirmed that the sewer and water conditions were taken into account. The
home- was built in 1942 and has had minimal upkeep and improvements. It is
recommended to demolish the home, remove the septic tank and leave the lot in its
natural state until a project arrives.
MOTION by Commissioner Holm, seconded by Commissioner Schnabel, to authorize
staff to make a purchase offer at 6000 East River Road not to exceed $235,000 plus any
relocation fees.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECALRED THE
MOTION CARRIED
INFORMATION ITEMS:
• Monthly Housing Report
Mr. Bolin reviewed August loan applications. The City of Fridley received four loan
applications and closed on two. There are a total of 17 loans year to date which
exceeds last years total of 16 loans for the entire year. A direct mailing will be
distributed to all Fridley residents in the next few weeks offering an interest rate of 4% on
loans. The loans issued last month for HRA loans totaled $51,656 brining the year to
date total to $320,636 out of City funds. Currently there are three delinquent loans in the
amount of $3,000 for loans totaling just under $16,000 which is less than two percent of
the total loans.
Operation Insulation and Remodeling Advisor had one visit in August and no calls. The
mailer to be distributed to all City of Fridley residents should promote loans also should
increase our loan totals.
Chairperson Commers asked if the $51,656 is a continuation of the revolving loan
fund. He did not think the funds should be categorized in the general fund and that we
had a separate revolving loan fund for the continuation loans.
Mr. Bolin responded that the number corresponds to two new loan expenses that are up
for approval. The totals match up with the loans issued in July. He will double check the
numbers and resubmit in October if necessary.
Chairperson Meyer asked if the Target tax situation has been resolved.
Mr. Bolin stated that Target understands and will comply. They closed on Wednesday
after negotiating for two days.
Chairperson Commers asked if the City of Fridley had any obligations with Target
Superstore when they rebuild.
Mr. Hickok presented a brief update on the conversion of Target to Target Superstore.
The Petco currently located next to Target will be relocated as a free standing building
closer to 53`d Street. Petco will be rebuilt and occupied this year.
After the holiday season Target will move out of the current building, demolish the
building and begin construction of the new Target Superstore. Target Superstore will be
HRA Meeting Setpember 12005
7of7
on the same area, facing the same direction but the elevation will be raised. This will
bring a new look to the area with great architecture features.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION to adjourn.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE
MEETING ADJOURNED.
Respectfully submitted by,
✓
Krista Monsrud
Recording Secretary
ACTION ITEM
HRA MEETING OF OCTOBER 6, 2005
QTY OF
FRIDLEY
Date: September 26, 2005
To: William Burns, Executive Director
From: Paul Bolin, Asst. Executive HRA Director
Subiect: Gatewav West — Addition to Demolition Bid M -05 -102
At the September 1, 2005 HRA meeting, the Authority approved awarding a demolition
contract to Veit Companies for an amount not to exceed $89,628. Veit began the pre -
demolition asbestos and hazardous materials removal on September 16th and found
additional asbestos in the ceiling (vemiculite) of the property located at 271 57th Place.
The removal of this additional asbestos has added $6,490 to the contracted amount.
The storm on September 21St knocked down a number of large trees and branches on
the Gateway West properties. Staff has asked Veit to remove these trees and
branches. This will also be treated as an addition to the existing contract. Veit will bill
us for the actual time spent on the tree and branch removal. Staff does not expect this
to exceed a few thousand dollars, as they will be hauling the brush to the City's site at
the Columbia Arena. Staff anticipates having a total prior to the HRA's October 6th
meeting.
This work was deemed necessary for the Gateway West project to move forward and
staff made an executive decision to allow Veit to proceed with the work. Staff
recommends that you formally approve the additions to the Gateway West demolition
contract with Veit Companies.
ACTION ITEM
HRA MEETING OF OCTOBER 612005
QTY OF
FRIDLEY
Date: September Lb, zuuo
To: William Burns, Executive Director
From: Paul Bolin, Asst. Executive HRA Director
Subiect: Gateway West — Developer Terms Agreement I M -05 -103
Last month, staff recommended that the HRA approve a motion authorizing staff to
begin work on drafting a development agreement between Blueprint Homes and the
HRA for the Gateway West project. Legal Counsel and staff drafted a development
terms agreement and provided a copy to Blue Print Homes for their review.
Blue Print Homes requested some changes to the contract, specifically the structuring
of the $700,000 land payment. Blue Print Homes has requested that they be allowed to
purchase 2 -3 lots initially for model home construction and then the remaining lots as
buyers become interested in the builders homes. The HRA's legal counsel made this
change and a new copy has been given to Blue Print Homes (and included in your
packet). It is anticipated that the development terms agreement will be signed by the
developer prior to the HRA meeting on Thursday night.
Staff recommends that the HRA approve and sign the development terms agreement,
barring any major unfavorable changes to the agreement between now and Thursday.
This agreement will serve as the foundation for the development agreement to be
brought forward at the HRA's November meeting.
V23 9/28/05
TERM SHEET
CITY OF FRIDLEY /GATEWAY WEST
Redeveloper: Blueprint Homes, Inc.
Authority: The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Fridley, Minnesota (the "Authority')
Redevelopment Property: Fifteen tax parcels owned by the Authority., consisting of a North
Site and a South Site., generally bounded on the east by University
Avenue, on the south by 57th Place, on the west by 3rd Street and
on the north by 60th Avenue as shown on Exhibit A. The
Redevelopment Property also includes portions of City rights -of-
way and alleys to be vacated as set forth on Exhibit A.
Creation of TIF District: The Authority has created a redevelopment tax increment
financing district for the Redevelopment Property (the "TIF
District ").
Public Improvements: The Authority will perform and pay for the following work on the
parcels in the Redevelopment Property before conveying the
parcels to the Redeveloper:
• Building demolition and removal of demolition debris,
basements and driveways
• Site clearance
• Sanitary sewer to the edge of each of the North and South Sites
• Water mains and laterals to the edge of each of the North and
South Sites
• Environmental remediation, if necessary
• Vacation of the public rights of way indicated on Exhibit A
• Ornamental fencing along University Avenue Ctiming to o be
coordinated with Redeveloper's construction of the Minimum
Improvements)
Site Improvements: The Redeveloper shall construct and pay for all site improvements
according to City- approved plans, including:
• Utility relocation and connection within the Redevelopment
Property
• Landscaping
• Grading and import/export of soil
• Retaining walls and fences, if needed
Zoning and Land Use
Approvals/Easements: Normal and customary site and building plan review requirements
will be followed. Except as set forth below under "Fee Waivers",
the Redeveloper shall pay for any necessary platting, plat
amendment, preparation of restrictive covenants, easements, and
any other documentation necessary for the construction and sale of
the Minimum Improvements. The Redeveloper shall be
responsible for obtaining all land use, platting and zoning
approvals.
Permits/Fees: The Redeveloper shall comply with all applicable City building
codes and construction requirements. Except as set forth below,
the Redeveloper will pay the normal and customary permit, plan
review, utility access and park dedication fees and shall be
responsible for obtaining all building permits prior to construction.
Fee Waivers: The City will waive its normal fees for right -of -way vacations and
for replatting. The Redeveloper will be responsible for any fees or
charges imposed by the County or any other agency or
municipality)_
Minimum Improvements: The Redeveloper shall construct approximately 14 -16 single -
family homes ranging from 1,400 to 2,100 square feet. The
Redeveloper shall use its best efforts to cause the unit sales prices
to range from $250,000 - 350,000. The floor plans and home
designs will be consistent with the plans included in the
Redeveloper's response to the Authority's Request for Proposals.
The quality of the Minimum Improvements shall be comparable to
or better than that currently being constructed by the Redeveloper
at its projects in Hugo, Blaine and Oak Grove.
A site plan of the Redevelopment Property showing the expected
configuration of the Minimum Improvements appears as Exhibit B.
Specifications of construction materials and fixtures and available
upgrades are outlined in Exhibit C.
Timing of Construction: • Begin on or about Nevembef T-2005 April 15, 2006 or as soon
as the lifting of winter road restrictions permit
• Complete on or about Aily lipecember 31, 2007
Development Costs: The Authority shall pay for environmental remediation, if any, of
the Redevelopment Property. The Authority will pursue any
eligible programs for reimbursement of environmental remediation
costs. At the Authority's request, the Redeveloper will perform
K
remediation and the costs will be credited against the purchase
price for the Redevelopment Property.
Survey: The Authority will provide a survey of the Redevelopment
Property such as will permit conveyance of the North Site and the
South Site to the Redeveloper under a title commitment with no
exceptions for survey matters.
The Redeveloper shall obtain and pay for any ALTA surveys
which may be required for the platting process or which it may
desire in order to sell the completed homes.
Land Sale Price: The Authority shall sell the Redevelopment Property to the
Redeveloper for a price of $700,000 payable iii eash at Ghw,4ng as
set forth under "Conveyance" below.
Conveyance:
Redeveleper -may Deeembef 31,2005 (t "C After the
Authority has completed the Public Improvements (which it
undertakes to complete as soon as practicable) the Redeveloper
shall accept conveyance of the Redevelopment Property according
to the following schedule:
• The first three (3) home lots as soon as practicable following
the Authority's completion of the Public Improvements and
recordation of the final plat
• An additional two (2) home lots at least on a quarterly basis
thereafter
At the closing of each conveyance the Redeveloper shall pay a pro
rata share of the total land sale price in cash.
Title: The Authority will transfer marketable title by quitclaim deed and
will pay for a title commitment. Any title insurance and/or
endorsements requested by the Redeveloper will be paid for by the
Redeveloper. At the Closing the Authority will provide the
Redeveloper with evidence of marketable title.
Taxes: Prorated as of closing: Authority to pay prior, Redeveloper to pay
future.
Assessments: Authority to pay pending and levied.
w
Due Diligence: The Redeveloper shall have the right to enter the Redevelopment
Property and perform any environmental or soil testing and other
due diligence the Redeveloper deems necessary for a period of 30
days following execution of an agreement. The Redeveloper shall
hold the Authority harmless from any liability resulting from
entering upon the Redevelopment Property for such purposes.
Authority shall provide the Redeveloper with any documents,
including correspondence with any environmental agency,
affecting the Redevelopment Property.
Remedy Upon Redevel-
oper's Default: The conveyance transferring the Redevelopment Area to the
Redeveloper will contain a right of reverter which will be superior
to the rights of any liens, except that the Authority will subordinate
its interest to the Redeveloper's construction lender's mortgage.
The right of reverter shall be released for each finished home upon
the sale of such home.
Effect of Term Sheet: This Term Sheet outlines the terms under which the parties are
willing to enter into a contract for private redevelopment, but does
not constitute an offer or acceptance on either party's part. All
rights and obligations with respect to the Redevelopment Property
shall only be as provided for in a Contract for Private
Redevelopment approved by the HRA Board.
GAWPDATATTRIDLEY\6100CUERM SHEET V2-.3.DOC
19
NORTH SITE:
0
0
9 -
19
Redevelopment Property
(Parcel Diagrams)
i 13 C
N
I
BLO&
22
�u
M
MEN
5
s.
Y
OCK --
21
►
Mel
�x
w
1�
1 �
R
SOUTH SITE:
W
-J II- - -- -J
9 1 PI fi fe 1) r
G
I
h
C'3
rm
4
a
0y OAI
s
k
o
/I
1
1
1
Redevelopment Propert y (continued)
(Parcel List)
NORTH SITE:
Address I Legal Description PIN
1
5955 3rd Street NE
Lots 25 and 26, Block 12, Hyde Park
23- 30 -24 -22 -0136
2
5931 3rd Street NE
Lot 24, Block 12, Hyde Park
23- 30 -24 -22 -0135
3
5925 3rd Street NE
Lots 22 and 23, Block 12, Hyde Park
23- 30 -24 -22 -0134
4
5923 3rd Street NE
Lot 21, Block 12, Hyde Park
23- 30 -24 -22 -0133
5
5917 3rd Street NE
Lots 19 and 20, Block 12, Hyde Park
23- 30 -24 -22 -0150
6
Unassigned
Lot 18, Block 12, Hyde Park
23- 30 -24 -22 -0130
7
5901 3rd Street NE
Lots 16 and 17, Block 12, Hyde Park
23- 30 -24 -22 -0129
8
—
(to be vacated) Alley east of Lots 16-26 and west
of University Ave ROW (will vacation of east
half require MnDOT conveyance ?)
—
9
—
(to be vacated) 59th Ave NE ROW south of Lot 16
—
SOUTH SITE:
Address Legal Description PIN
10
Unassigned
Lot 16, Block 21, Hyde Park
23- 30 -24 -23 -0038
11
—
(to be vacated) Alley east of Lot 16 and west of
University Ave. ROW
—
12
—
(to be vacated) 58th Ave NE ROW south of Lot 16
—
13
Unassigned
Lots 9 and 10, Block 28, City View
23- 30 -24 -23 -0130
14
Unassigned
Lot 9 and north'' /2 of Lot 7, Block 28, City View
23- 30 -24 -23 -0129
15
—
(to be vacated) 3rd St/Jackson St ROW west of
Lots 6 and 7
—
16
Unassigned
Lot 6 and south %2 of Lot 7, Block 28, City View
23- 30 -24 -23 -0128
17
—
West 7 feet of vacated alley lying east of Lots 6-10
—
18
—
Vacated 57%2 Avenue NE ROW south of Lot 6
—
19
2715 7th Place NE
East %2 of Lot 7 and all of Lots 8 and 9, Block 2,
City View
23- 30 -24 -23 -0013
20
281 57th Place NE
Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, City View
23- 30 -24 -23 -0014
21
Unassigned
Lot 12, Block 2, City View
23- 30 -24 -23 -0015
22
Unassigned
West 25 feet of Lot 13, Block 2, City View
23- 30 -24 -23 -0016
23
—
(to be vacated) 57th Place ROW south of Block 2
—
I1:
Site Plan
Ili
Construction Materials and Fixtures; Available Upgrades
rJ AGENDA ITEM
HRA MEETING OF OCTOBER 6 2005
QTY OF
FRIDLEY
Date: September 26, 2005
To: William Burns, HRA Executive Director
From: Paul Bolin, Asst. Executive HRA Director
Subject: City Hall Parking Ramp Signage
M -05 -101
Introduction
This past spring the engineering firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, & Anderlik (BRA)
was hired to conduct a future parking needs analysis for the SE quadrant of
Mississippi and University Avenue. BRA conducted a number of parking counts
over a number of different days to identify peak demand times and locations.
Additionally, BRA engaged in a number of conversations with the representatives
of all four properties to further analyze their potential parking needs. The study
concluded that City Hall only had a perceived parking problem and that there was
not a "one ramp to meet everyone's needs solution ".
City Hall Parking — Summary Findings
• Study shows only a "perceived problem" as open parking stalls are always
available in the lower level of the ramp.
• Improved signage would help to guide City Hall visitors to parking areas.
• Employees choose to park in Target lot to avoid door dings and /or get
exercise.
Suggested Course of Action:
• Sign every stall in lower level, "Employee Parking Only— Permit
Required"
• City Attorney Fritz Knaak has said this is legal
• Anoka County has a similar system
• Sign northern -most row of upper level, "City Hall Visitor Parking Only —
7:30AM — 5PM'
• City Manager to instruct all employees to park in lower level of ramp
What is HRA's Role?
Discussions with the City's Public Works Director indicate that the proposed
signs would cost approximately $8 /sign. The HRA, as owners of the lot, would
H:\— Paul's Documents \HRA\HRA Agenda Iterns\2005 \0ctober 6, 2005 \October6HRA(ParkingSigns).doc
pay for the signs and parking permits ($2 -$3 /permit). The City's Public Works
staff would be responsible for installation of the signs. It is anticipated that the
signs and permits will cost the HRA approximately $1,500.
Natalie Pfeffer, property manager for the Fridley Plaza Clinic Building, agrees
that this solution would be beneficial to the tenants and visitors to her building. In
essence this would free up 50+ parking stalls on the upper level, where they
would be most convenient for her building. Additionally, two lower level parking
stalls would be designated for use by Columbia Park for overnight parking of their
two mail delivery pickups that have parked in the lower level for a number of
years.
Staff requests that you approve a motion authorizing staff to order the necessary
signage and parking permits, pending approval of the City Council to proceed
with signing the parking lot.
H:\— Paul's DOCUments\IIRA\HRA Agenda Items\2005 \October 6, 2005 \October6HRA(ParkingSigns).doc
�►
ri
MY OF
FRIDLEY
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
AGENDA ITEM
HRA MEETING OF OCTOBER 6, 2005
September 29, 2005
William Burns, HRA Executive Director
Paul Bolin, Asst. Executive HRA Director
Columbia Park Medical Group Parking Assistance
M -05 -104
INTRODUCTION
Columbia Park Medical Group (CPMG) is asking that the HRA provide them with
$166,000 towards their parking lot project. The HRA owns the (roughly) westerly
135' of the Columbia Park Clinic parking lot and therefore, CPMG feels the HRA
should pay 45% of their project costs.
HISTORY
You may recall that CPMG sought and received approval to amend their S -2
Master Site Plan, to allow for changes in their parking layout, in the fall of 2003.
On July 28, 2004 CPMG sent a letter to the HRA requesting financial assistance
with their parking lot project. The HRA discussed the request at their August 5,
2004 meeting and asked that staff further investigate the history and any
agreements between CPMG and the HRA.
At the HRA's September 3, 2004 meeting Mr. Hickok reported that he had met
with CPMG to analyze the documents and review any contractual language
related to the parking lot. His research indicated that there seemed to be little
more than a handshake agreement to allow use of the parking lot as part of the
City's economic development efforts. There was no evidence of a formal lease
or any other agreement until CPMG asked the City to be involved with
refinancing some industrial revenue bonds in 1992. Columbia Park was required
to invest $20,442 /year in capital improvements and present an annual tabulation
to the City in exchange for the City's assistance in the refinancing.
Columbia Park had failed to provide any of the required tabulations of their
capital improvements. It was decided that the HRA should not take action until
there was sufficient proof of the capital improvements. CPMG did provide a
listing of their capital expenditures between 1992 and 2004, totaling over $1.5
million dollars, but failed to provide any compelling reasons for the HRA to assist
their parking lot construction project.
H:\ Paul's Documents\IIRA\HRA Agenda Items\2005 \October 6, 2005\ October6HRA (ColumbiaParkAssistance Memo).doc
In a letter dated September 20, 2005 CPMG once again asked that the HRA
financially contribute to their parking lot reconfiguration. Further, they asked that
the HRA respond by October 3rd. I spoke with CPMG's representative, Sonia
Feinberg, and informed her that the HRA's meeting date would not work with her
timeframe. I further explained that the recent parking study indicated that any
improvements done to the CPMG parking lot would only be a benefit to CPMG
and that staff would recommend against the HRA providing financial assistance.
Sonia stated that she thought our financial participation was_ unlikely and that
they were going to move forward with their reconstruction project even if the HRA
did not pay any portion of the cost. She inquired about the possibility of
acquiring, through purchase, the portion of the parking lot currently owned by the
HRA. I stated that (sale of property) may be something the HRA would be
interested in provided an agreement to allow City Hall parking be included.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the HRA formally deny CPMG's request for financial
participation in their parking lot reconstruction project.
Staff further recommends that the HRA authorize staff to explore the possibility of
selling the HRA's portion of the parking lot to CPMG for a fair price, and without
impacting the City's ability to park in the lot when necessary.
H:\— Paul's Documents\HRA \HRA Agenda Items\2005 \October 6, 2005\ October6HRA (ColumbiaParkAssistance Memo).doc
s.
r
September 20, 2005
Mr. Paul Bolin
Assistant Executive Director
Housing Redevelopment Authority
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Re: CPMG: Fridley Office Building
Parking Lot Modification Project
Mohagen/Hansen Project No. 03309.00PM
Dear Mr. Bolin:
Mohagen
Hansen
Architectural
Group
On behalf of Columbia Park Medical Group (CPMG), I would like to follow -up on our original
correspondence of July 28, 2004 (reference the attached letter dated July 28, 2004) regarding the
renovation and upgrade project for the City of Fridley /Columbia Park Medical Group existing parking
lot located at 6341 and 6401 University Avenue NE, Fridley, Minnesota.
CPMG is inquiring if the Housing Redevelopment Authority (HRA) had reviewed our original
proposal letter for the establishment of a partnership between CPMG and HRA and if they had reached
a decision to our request to provide a $166,000 financial contribution to the parking lot project. This
request is 95% of the total project cost of $370,000 as outlined in our original letter. As we get ready to
kick off the project this fall, CPMG is finalizing their finances and would like to receive a formal reply
to our request of July 28, 2004, in order to execute the necessary financing.
We believe this is a wonderful project and will truly benefit and improve the safety of the Fridley Plaza
Community which serves a broad spectrum of City and healthcare patrons. CPMG would be honored
and delighted to have the HRA partner with CPMG on implementing the parking lot public safety and
infrastructure upgrades.
Upon your review of this letter, we would be pleased to address any questions or concerns you might
encounter and would welcome a response to our request by October 3, 2005.
We thank you for your consideration to our request and look forward to your response.
Best regards,
Moha en/Hansen Architectural Group *101116W. 11 a
Mark L. Hansen, AIA
Principal
Colu is Park Medical Group
Sonia Feinberg
Director Facilities/Materials Management
Encl: Request Letter, dated July 28, 2004
City Council Action Taken Notice, dated November 4, 2003
1415 E. Wayzata Blvd
Suite 200
Wayzata, MN 55391
Telephone 952.473.1985
Fax 952.473.1340
1.yT4_�i. www.mohagenhanson.com
4
Mohagen
Hansen
Architectural
Group
July 28, 2004
Mr. Grant Fernelius
Assistant Executive Director of BRA
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Re: CPMG: Fridley Office Building
Parking Lot Modification Project
Mohagen/Hansen Proposal No. 03309.00PM
Dear Mr. Femelius:
On behalf of Columbia Park Medical Group (CPMG), Mohagen/Hansen Architectural Group is
submitting this letter as a follow up to the City review meeting of June 17, 2004, to discuss the
potential partnership between the Housing & Redevelopment Authority (BRA) and Columbia Park
Medical Group (CPMG) in association with the parking lot modification project at the Fridley Medical
Office Building located at 6401 University Avenue NE and the adjacent west parking lot owned by the
City of Fridley
The parking lot modification project is a carry-over from the master plan amendment Project #03-01,
which was approved by the City of Fridley on November 4, 2003. Upon reviewing the project with
the City and finalizing the scope of work, CPMG inquired if the City would be willing to partner with
CPMG in the upgrade of the parking lot, since both parties use the parking lot and because the west
lot is actually owned by the City of Fridley.
Scott Hickok, Director of Community Development, informed CPMG that the City would be willing
to discuss the benefits of a joint partnership, but Mr. Hickok could not speak directly for the HRA. It
was suggested we put the partnership request in writing and formally address our request to the
HRA. The City also informed us that they would need to know the value of the improvements and
the requested level of participation
In response to our conversations we have enclosed the requested construction cost information as
well as the proposed level of participation. We have also outlined the proposed benefits associated
with the parking lot modification as noted below.
1415 E. Wayzata Blvd
Suite 200
Wayzata, MN 55391
Telephone 952.473.1985
Fax 952.473.1340
Is www.mohagenhansen.com
A
7
® Professional Service Agreement
CPMG: Parking Lot Modification Project & Building Expansion Study
July 28, 2004
Page 2 of 3 .
Parking Lot Modification Project
1. Proposed construction cost estimate
a. Reference the attached construction cost estimate from Timco Construction
b. Cost estimate
Construction $330,647
- Base Construction ( 311,185)
- Alternate 1 ( 19,462)
A/E Fees $38,00'0
Total: $ 368,647
The Alternate #1 as identified in Timco's Construction Cost Estimate involves resurfacing the
drive -in front of the main drop -off to the clinic.
2. Proposed level of participation
Cost Estimate Site Area Level of Partici ation
• CPMG $ 202,756 50,000 sf 55%
• City of Fridley $ 165.891 41.500 sf 45%
Total: $ 368,647 91,500 sf 100%
The level of participation was based on the area of improvements to the lots held by individual
owners.
3. Benefits of the parking lot modification
a. The modifications will simplify the site circulation and improve patient and employee access,
and the net increase will be 34 parking spaces.
b. The north entry lane will be shifted to the west to provide better access with improved site lines
off of Formies Avenue. One curb cut is eliminated.
c. The main east/west thoroughfare off of the west frontage road will be aligned with the main
building drop off area and planter boxes will be installed to align the access road.
d. The entire site will be reconstructed with curb and gutters, and the entire parking lot will receive
a new bituminous topcoat.
e. The remnants of the existing north/south curb dividing the CPMG parking lot from the City's
west parking lot will be removed for the parking lot re- alignment in order to improve circulation
and parking capacity.
f. New landscaping will be added to the existing site.
g. The project is proposing to irrigate the entire site including the boulevard along the west frontage
road.
h. The northwest driveway from Wells Fargo onto the west frontage road will be modified to
accommodate the new curb and gutter. (The cost of this work, if executed, will be paid by Wells
Fargo.)
i. The west parking lot will be designed with new site lighting for improved safety.
j. The upgraded civil work will include the following:
New watermain for future fire supression system
• Re- routing of storm water from east to west utility lines
Installation of a new storm water treatment system
• Required and approved by the City.
k. The planning and design of the parking lot modification project has been executed in conjunction
with City Staff in all areas of development.
1. Improvements to the City's property will be financed in a joint effort with CPMG therefore
reducing the initial expense to the City.
■ Mohagen/Hansen Architectural Group
C
® Professional Service Agreement
CPMG: Parking Lot Modification Project & Building Expansion Study
July 28, 2004
Page 3 of 3
As you can see, the outcome of the parking lot modification project is extremely beneficial to both parties
and would be a true asset to the long -term development of the campus as well as the street frontage along
University Avenue.
We understand the modifications to the parking lot are expensive and that is the reason CPMG is unable to
execute the scope of the project by themselves and are proposing a partnership with the City on such a
valuable project.
Upon your review and evaluation of the enclosed information, should you have any comments or require
additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us at (952) 473 -1985. Following your review, we
would appreciate if an HRA representative would contact CPMG to discuss the outlined proposal, their
commitment to the project, and their financial level of participation on the above referenced project.
We thank you for your consideration and we look forward to your timely response, in an effort to assist in
completing the project this fall.
Best regards,
Mohagen/Hansen Architectural Group
k4 . t
Mark L. Hansen, AIA
Principal
Enc: Parking Lot Modification Drawings, 8-1/2" x 11"
Timco Construction Cost Report, July 27„ 2004
C: Scott Hickok, City of Fridley, Director of Community Development
Sonia Feinberg, Columbia Park Medical Group
Dennis Wipp, Columbia Park Medical Group
Dr. William Burns, City of Fridley Manager
k\ jobs\ columbiapark \fridleyplmclinic \docs \corns \ltr hra— partnership- jutyV.doc
■ Mohagen/Hansen Architectural Group
al
CRYOF
FRIDLEY
FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER - 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 - (763) 571 -3450 - FAX (763) 571 -1287
CITY COUNCIL
ACTION TAKEN NOTICE
November 4, 2003
Mark Hansen
Mohagen/Hansen Architectural Group
1415 East Wayzata Blvd., Ste. 200
Wayzata, MN 55391
Dear Mr. Hansen:
l� c f �1'
R r= t r
�B 6 jP .�, Y
Zi VV
On November 3, 2003, the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a Master
Plan Amendment, MP #03 -01, to amend the Master Plan for Columbia Park Medical Center
Campus, to allow for future parking and building expansion, legally described as Lot 1 and Lot
2, Fridley Plaza Center, according to the plat thereof of record in Anoka County, Minnesota,
generally located at 6341 University Avenue NE.
Approval of this Master Plan Amendment and Project Plan Approval is contingent upon the
following stipulations:
1. Petitioner to provide landscape plan for the complex prior to issuance of a building
permit.
2. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary building. permits prior to construction.
3.. The proposed additions shall be architecturally compatible with the existing. building
and finished with complementary building materials.
4. Parking stalls to be reduced to a minimum of 9 feet width in all parking areas except
for those stalls in the first row west and first row east of the building. In those aisles
ADA stall dimensions shall apply to any handicap parking stalls. All other stalls in
those two aisles shall be a minimum of 10'. Parking stalls shall be striped in
accordance with the design on file in the office of the City Engineer.
If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call me at 763- 572 -3590.
Sincer
S Hickok
Community Development Director
SHrt
Action Taken Letter — Columbia Park Medical Center Campus
Page 2
November 4, 2003
cc: Dennis Wipperling
Address File
Plat File
Stacy Stromberg
Mary Hintz
Assessing Department
Please review the above, sign the statement below and return one copy to the City of Fridley
Planning Department by November 17, 2003.
Concur with action taken.
C -03 -131
tl
e
❑VERHANGING CURB
CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
NOTE; STRIPES TO BE 4° WIDE.
y:S :Ra A'.Mrt4m�Y[6fPW:rr„p.(F: ]nv
PARKING . STALLS
DOUBLE STRIPE
NOSE TO NOSE STALLS
Li
6° 6#
NOTE: STRIPES TO BE 4° WIDE,
NOTE-. NOSE TO NOSE REQUIRES 20' DEEP STALLS
CITY OF PARKING STALLS - 9' WIDTH
F7-\ DOUBLE STRIPE
L--j R I D LE Y DRN: MAW DATEs7 /5/90 1 SCALES 3/16' =1'
P
a
FACE OF CURB
11:31
OVERHANGING CURB
CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
NOTE: STRIPES TO BE 4 WIDE.
Q
CITY O PARKING STALLS - 10' WIDTH
SINGLE STRIPE
RI D LE 1 DRN, MAW DAM 7/5/90 1 SCALES 3/16' =1'
Columbia Park
Medical Group
February 7, 2005
Scott Hickok
Community Development Director
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, MN 55432 -3590
Re: Capital expenditures
Dear Mr. Hickok,
I want to thank you for taking the time to meet with Mike Hurley and myself on Thursday,
January 27, 2005. The discussion was centered on the west parking lot of Columbia Park
Medical Group/Fridley complex. As you are aware, CPMG is planning to renovate this
area to create additional parking spaces for our patients and staff. Due to the cost of the
project, CPMG has approached the City of Fridley for some monetary assistance to help
complete this project. The two attachments are the requested information, itemizing the
capital expenditures to both facilities since 1992. If you need additional information or
clarification of any of the data, please call me at (763) 586 -5824 or email me at
soniafeinberg@cpmg.org.
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Sincerely yours,
f
Sonia Feinberg
Director of Facilities
Columbia Park Medical Group
cc. Mike Hurley
Andover Park Clinic Brooklyn Park Clinic Columbia Park Clinic Fridley Plaza Clinic
13819 Hanson Boulevard NW 10000 Zan Avenue North 4000 Central Avenue NE 6341 UN .hy A. NE
Andover, MN 55304 Brooklyn Pack, MN 55443 Columbla Height% MN 55421 Fdit, MN 55432
7633723710/Fax 763352-0490 763372- 5710/Fax 763. 5698200 763-572- 5710/Fax 763/782.9100 763. 572- 5710/Fax 763 -MS -5889
www.apmg.org
Administrative Office Building
6401 UNvets4 Avenue NE. Subs 100&200
Fridley, MN 55432
763372- 5710/Fax 763 -571
Q. LL
=3 od
0 W
C� 0^^
_ 0—
U-
V L
-a �O
N
Y
C
Co X
W
E
O
U
Co
0
O
N
cm
O
U
4)
❑
0000
0000
CO
tnrCO
`7
CA
M
C7
tO
C6
M
tf}
COO
OD
r'
69
�fi
1�
q
ti
ffi
o000
0
C-4666
Nc'7ODCO
I�
ti
tf}
o0In
Cn
r
N
Efi
0_co
'q'
EA
'f
tf}
00
C)
00
1`O
O
as
ti
69
C)
O_
C
w
0000000
000o00o0
c 6
OOChMNO
r-
L616
tf}
L D'cr),
ti
Ei}
O_
01D
O
EA
Nof000�
r
O
tf}
O
ti
to
69
r-
06
Ef}
to
r
tf?
-o
r
O
m
O
LO
t�
1`
m
P.
ch
N
RW3
W3,
m
O
m
CL
LL
E
o
t�
0
O
0
O
LL
0
aCL
o
w
a
c
c
U
v
m
a.o
m
5
>
3
w
N
cc
m
C
C
m
0
a
(D
C
to
N
Y7
3
fA
Q
cA
m
V
_3
o
O
w°'8
C
.0
U
�LL
a
o
oc
=3
O
mo
0-0
0"!E
a0Oc
..
m
CL
a
m
o
a
m
•ca
c
LL
c
C
g
p
N
a
c
ao
o'er
cm.oa
>
LL
LL
=
j5
W
0
:S
m°6
p
0
c
m
Em
Qa
m
0iiLL
6•o._UOCC)Um
mm
p�
c
o__
U
0
>
U-
t
_L-
m❑
CL
o
°
m�
4)
o
E
m
"gym
-
c�
m
Cm")
�..
❑
E
0
rA
>
3a
°$o
-o
o
m
o$ata
Woo-ac0)
o0
E
�amo.ga
LL
a-
2-0-2
ate)
L-
m
m
m
❑
�p
�Dtai
0WW
mw
m
E
mti
o
mLL
a
om
w
wv
=acn
ma
m
��
°-a
Q
o
c
o�i
o�
o�'c�0
VII
o.Q
0
2
m
p
m
T,
LL
N
�
m
C
a;
c��
�
N
O
�4)or
-C
ca
.'..'
w0gw.s2Emmm�
o
•O
m
'om
EL
c�co
dim
�_8
0
Woo
E
c8
°
`
om
w
8
_c
cm
°U
o�'o
o
m
c
Eo
o
>
o
EOo
%3
�O
ma
aLL�O
o
m
v��.3a
m°
m
m
of
m
❑it
ma
LL
m
_3
o
ZmaLL
m
c�a
o
�-
NMCntQ
0
0
0
0
CDOOr
0
0
0
0
rr
0
0
rNNNNNCOd•
0
0
Cl
0
0
Cl
Co
0
0000
0)
CA00
00
0000000
O
re-rr
'�7`0G0
rrrN
tACV
Or
NN
Q
c-r
,
NNNNNNNN
01Dc-
rrrrr0
�0nr�
NC-4MQ
8a
c:3M6
6
80
C`
CO
C�
r
co
1�
IT
r
r
r
co
r
r
Frauenshuh Companies
Fridley Plaza Office Building
Record of Building Improvements
2/7/2005
Year
Cost
Improvement
1994
$3,000.00
Renovate dumpster enclosure with new sidewalk
1995
$15,192.75
Lighting Retrofit from T -12 to T -8 Electronic ballasts
1995
$28,725.00
Renovate Suite 300 - Associated Counseling Clinic
1995
$26,000.00
Renovate all common area carpet and wall covering
1996
$12,000.00
Decoratel.upgrade 1 st floor restrooms to meet ADA
1996
$6.000�Q_�e_OoYate la0 sisgapir _�aCC�und�uilding-zerimeter _.._..
1998
$4,000.00
Reglaze multiple windows
1996
$3,000.00
Replace exterior signage
1996
$4,000.00
Install handicap accessible door openers at 2 entries
1997
$4,000.00
Reglaze multiple windows
1997
$4,000,00
Completed renovation of landscaping
1998
$6,800.00
Repair roof to perimeter
1998
$4,000.00
Reglaze multiple windows
1999
$36,300.00
Remodel Suite 304 - Behavioral Health Services
2000
$5,359.00
2nd floor common area restroom remodel
2000
$1,581.00
2nd floor common area remodel
2000
$3,800.00
Remodel Suite 205 - Credit Card Center
2000
$3,450.00
Prep and Paint north stairway walls and stairs
2000
$3,400.00
Prep and Paint south stairway walls and stairs
2000
$4,070.00
Repl Door #301, laminate repair to lobby planters
2001:
$7,227.00
Remodel Suite 205 - Clinical & Forensic Psychology
2001
$3,861.00
Remodel Suite 201 - Melcher Law Office
2001
$16,000.00
Caulk first half building perimeter windows
2001
$10,570.00
Remodel Suite 301 - Newquist 8. Bkstrum
2002
$19,452.00
Caulk second half building perimeter windows
2002
$63,440.00
Replace membrane roof with new built up roof
2002
$1,133.70
Replace recesed pedimatframes at two entrances
2002
$2,331.32
Upgrade common area door handles to ADA levers
2002
$2,175.00
Remodel elevator lobby cab interior with Belbien
2003
$518.00
upgrade elevator communication device to ADA
2003
$1,663.00
Added electronic infrared safety device on elevator doors
2003
$2,732.00
Replaced all smoke detectors with new
2003
$5,188.00
Install vinyl stair treds in North stairwell
2003
$3,000.00
Replace cracked, damaged marble floor tiles with new
2003
$13,293.00
Replaced compressor and contactors for rooftop unit
2003
$503.98
Replaced restroom faucets, fittings
2004
$3,802.91
Install vinyl stair treds in South stairwell
2004
$1,680.00
Prep and paint all common area corridor door frames
2004
$1,705.00
Add emergency powered battery lights in restrooms
2004
$1,045.00
Replace caulking on building exterior perimeter edge
2004
$5,870.00
Replace first floor common area corridor garpet
2005
$6,085.00
Replace second floor common area corridor carpet
Total $352,053.66
ACTION ITEM
HRA MEETING OF OCTOBER 6, 2005
MY of
FRIDLEY
Date: September 29, 2005
To: William Burns, Executive Director
From: Paul Bolin, Asst. Executive HRA Director
Subiect: Islands of Peace — Update M -05 -107
Bancor Group
The HRH's legal counsel has been busy over the last month drafting a "letter of
undertaking" (recent draft attached) that spells out the roles and responsibilities of the
City /HRA and Redeveloper in the early investigative stages of this potential project. It is
highly likely that a final version will be available by the HRA's October 6t�' meeting.
Bancor has been taking an early look at potential site designs for the Islands of Peace
neighborhood. Staff has not seen any of these early designs but will bring them
forward to you as soon as they are made available to us.
6000 East River Road
Last month the HRA authorized staff to make an offer to purchase the property at 6000
East River Road. The property owner has a failed septic system and had approached
the City about an interest in purchasing the property.
Staff worked with Wilson Development to draft the purchase agreement and figure
relocation benefits. The offer was verbally accepted for the Appraised value of
$235,000 plus $4,900 in relocation benefits. We are waiting to get the signed purchase
agreement returned. There are 3 sisters, living in greater Minnesota, that need to sign
the agreement.
A blight analysis will be completed once the signed purchase agreement is returned.
Staff will be asking that the HRA and Council approve a blight resolution that will allow
the home to be demolished shortly after to avoid the ongoing costs that would arise
from vandals, looters, and trespassers.
v2 9/28/05
LETTER OF UNDERTAKING
This Letter of Understanding entered into this day of , 200-,2005
by and between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley,
Minnesota, a Minnesota public body corporate and politic (the 'HRA" ), the City of
Fgid ^1 emfien ( "QW'` and The Bancor Group, Inc., a Minnesota
corporation, on behalf of a consortium including itself, Plum Investment Company, Key
Property Development Company and Central Community Housing Trust the
"Redeveloper").
RECITALS
First: The HRA did on or about April 18, 2005 authorize solicitation of
qualifications for the redevelopment (the "Project ") of portions of Fridley bounded by
Islands of Peace Park, Stevenson Elementary, East River Road and Georgetown
Apartments (the "Project Area ");
Second: Pr-epesalsResponses were received from parties interested in developing
all or part of the Project Area;
Third: Interviews of pr-epeser -sM onders were conducted by the Board of the
HRA and the City Council of the City of Fridley, a municipal corooration (the "City");
Fourth: The HRA, on August 4, 2005 endorsed staff to begin discussions with the
DevelepeefRedeveloper for the redevelopment of the Project Area;
Fifth: The HRA and City wishMshes to cooperate with DeveleperRedeveloper's
initial efforts in o anal e the potential and feasibility of redevelopment and
isare willing to proceed as described in this Letter;
Sixth: The parties acknowledge that Develop fRedevelopeer will expend
substantial time and effort; and incur substantial expense in analyzing the feasibility of
the redevelopment; and
Seventh: DevelepefRedeveloper is willing to undertake the above described
activities with the reasonable assurance from the HRA and-Gity that flieyi.t will support
and cooperate with Develeper enRedeveloper in its redevelopment efforts.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual obligations
of the parties contained herein, each of them does hereby represent, covenant and agree
with the other as follows:
1. Under-taking byj2p�@�
Y-
14 is undeoteed dia4 the above listing items is in
of geneFal
f that ffamer-ei
items:%411 be added to these steps as the paities undutake the s and
these -Reed to be Offeugheut the
that seme e-f
steps are engeiRg er- wiH r-e examined pfeeess.
14 is undeoteed dia4 the above listing items is in
of geneFal
f that ffamer-ei
items:%411 be added to these steps as the paities undutake the s and
these -Reed to be Offeugheut the
that seme e-f
steps are engeiRg er- wiH r-e examined pfeeess.
1. Preliminary Nature of Agreement
a) The HRA and Redeveloper_ agree that this Agreement is intended
to be preliminary in nature. Before the HRA and Redeveloper can make a decision on
whether to proceed with the Project, it will be necessary to assemble and consider
information relating to the economics, site assembly, phasing, environmental remediation
and other aspects of the Project. The purpose of this Agreement is to allow Redeveloper
an opportunity to assemble such necessary information, to prepare a redevelopment
proposal and to negotiate with the HRA concerning the execution of one or more
contracts for private redevelopment (collectively, the "Redevelopment Agreement")
which, if executed, will set forth the rights and responsibilities of the HRA and
Redeveloper with respect to such Redevelopment.
It is the intention of the parties that Redeveloper will proceed with
the development activities necessary to permit redevelopment in a manner, and on terms
and conditions, which are mutually acceptable to Redeveloper and the HRA. The parties
acknowledge that in order for redevelopment to occur. Redeveloper may at some point
request financial and/or site assembly assistance from the HRA This Agreement does
not constitute either approval of such financial or site assembly assistance nor does it
obligate the HRA to provide such assistance but the HRA shall cooperate with such
efforts to obtain and will reasonably consider requests for financial and/or site assembly
assistance.
[Moved to Section 4 and revised somewhatl
�- 2. Phased Development
(a) The Develeper;Redeveloper and the HRA-- and —tee y
acknowledge that the Project Area may be redeveloped in ver a
number of years. The Redevelepmefftiedevelgpment of the Project Area, including the
scope, nature and location of phased redevelopment, will be subject to such priorities as
the DeveleperRedeveloer, in its reasonable judgment, deems consistent with the master
plan and market conditions, taking into consideration the following variables: timing,
geographic areas within the Project Area;, the scope of necessary up blic improvements;,,
and the type of development to take place (for example, residential or commercial).
As a result f the phased r-ed ele o„+ of-the nr-e eet �Offea the (h ) The
HRA anticipates that it will enter into aone redevelopment agreement for the Project Area
with the Developer- h h . provide f separate redevelopment agreements tM the
Developer- phases of r r-edevelepmepA of the Pr-eje^+ "- ^Redeveloper which
will address any necessary phasing of the Project. The terms and conditions of such
redevelopmentcontract shall be subject to the mutual agreement of the
DeveleperRedeveloper and the HRA.
43. Undertakings by Develeperof Redeveloper
(a) Within thirty fLOhdays of the execution of this agreement the
DeveleperRedeveloper will:
a) —ERgage a paFfial - c: eUndertake a Phase I
environmental review of the Project Area, which review shall
be lknited te-t is review of publ a ''°eefdsneed not include
interviews of current property owners.
• b}— Prepare a preliminary economic analysis of the
Redevelopment cf the Project -rea.
If the DeveleperRedeveloper completes (a) and r"' abevesuch tasks within thesuch 30
day period, subject to the HRA staff reasonably approving the analysis when taking into
account the preliminary nature of the information -gathefireeessthe Developer-::e "-
basis, then have an additional six� days in whieh to meet wi� petenfial;aser-s fer- the pufpese of
who the petenfia4 users may be and what #fpes
pr-edae4s may make niie sense f the Project Area.. Rathering_process, then
(h) Redeveloper shall have until December 31, 2005 to:
3
Identify site constraint
In consultation with the HRA the City and community
create a vision for the Project Area
Meet with potential users for the p=ose of determining
on a preliminary basis potential markets products and uses
Analyze preliminary economic feasibility
Create a blob concept of how the Project Area may be
redeveloped
Develop a reasonablv_detailed concept for the Prnig Area
including the identification of potential specific products
and uses
At the conclusion of this sbEt�--90 -day period, the D&veleperRedeveloper agrees to
provide a report to the HRA at its January 5, 2006 meeting of the information obtained.
S. U- fi the eetY pletiel of the its 7.. A above, the T t d H ♦ l
1hey se eleet, it is agFeed that the
%=ll 3aegetiate -anal rmtsr inte a feFmal agreement Fe..- the step( moved to
Section S belowl
64. Undertakings of HRA
(a) The HRA agrees to cooperate with Redeveloper in Redeveloper's
undertakings, and specifically agrees that during the term of this Letter the HRA will not
Li) provide or enter into an agreement for provision of financial assistance to any third
party in connection with any proposed development within the Project Area. or (ii) except
as may be necessary in connection with the provision of public improvements not related
to new development or redevelopment by a third party within the Project Area, condemn
or agree to proceed with the condemnation of any property within the Project Area to
assist or facilitate redevelopment within such area by any third party The u_u_A
acknowledges that Redeveloper has during the term of this Letter the exclusive right t to
deal with the HRA on matters relating to the redevelopment of the Project Area
During the may— day —period dewribedo_f the Redeveloper
undertakings set forth in paragraph 4abe3v-e—;3 the HRA will take the following actions:
Q a) -Study the legal and funding constraints pertaining to the
Islands of Peace Park, including any options to reconfigure dwpa k boundaries of the
parlor to improve the park in a manner that enhances it as an amenity to the adjacent
neighborhood.
ii b`xPlereExplore ways that the adjacent proposed rail
+ +' f �North Star Corridor can be included in the . Project and
determine if such inclusion would make the project eligible for additional grant funding
or would otherwise assist the Proi ect. -
iii c-) -Study the adjacent bluff line and river setbacks. "—moo
fy and locate any existing information that identifies the location of the ordinary
high water level.
iv Identify the location of existing utilities serving the Project
Area.
o Evaluate the TIF possibilities for the Project Area,
including which types of districts would work best and whether the blight test for a
redevelopment district is likely to be met.
tyi
Determine the HRA's willingness to use eminent domain if
all of the Project Area cannot be acquired voluntarily.
vii Explore grant opportunities and other funding sources.
viii Determine the HRA's and the City's willingness to allow
the density and mix of land uses required to increase the financial feasibility of the
project.
-
5 Determination Whether to Proceed Upon the completion of the items in
paragraphs 3 and 4 the Redeveloper and HRA will determine in their respective sole
judgments if they elect to continue to work together toward the redevelopment of the
Project Area. If they so elect, it is agreed that the parties will negotiate and enter into a
formal agreement for the next steps which can be expected to include:
• Selection of specific products, providers and uses
•
Timing of site acquisition
• Phasing and other timing issues
• Development of a finance plan for the project
• Execution of one or more redevelopment agreements for the
Project Area
• Preliminary and final plat approval
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly
executed in each of their names as of the date first above written.
Fes- HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA
5
By:
Its Chair
By:
Its Executive Director
THE BANCOR GROUP, INC;.,
By:
Its President
G:\ WPDATA \FIFRIDLEY168\DOCS\LETTER OF UNDERTAKING V2 DOC
\-
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
HRA MEETING OF OCTOBER 6, 2005
CRY OF
FRIDLEY
DATE: September 30, 2005
TO: William W. Burns, Executive Director Fridley HRA
FROM: Scott J. Hickok, Community Development Director
Paul Bolin, Assistant Executive Director Fridley HRA
SUBJECT: North Star Corridor Update M -05 -108
INTRODUCTION
The Northstar Corridor Rail Authority and its consultants continue to move ahead on the
components of the Northstar Corridor Rail Project. We have included a copy of the most recent
update from the Authority for the HRA member's convenience. Two major components lead our
discussions as we continue to meet with representatives of this project. These components are: the
Discussions on the "Third Main" line; and the question, "Who is going to own the development
land around Fridley's east station site ?"
ELEMENTS
The Third Main Line:
Many may recall the discussion during earlier hearings about a third main line (a third parallel set
of tracks). The Northstar Rail Authority folks were not pushing for a third line, because they
intended to utilize on existing tracks. The folks at Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) have
had a different view of this issue. BNSF believes that in order to maintain a level of rail activity
consistent with that of today, and meet growth expectations, they will require a third parallel
track. For the most part the rail corridor right of way is of a sufficient size to accommodate that
addition. However, North of Mississippi Street along the west side of the existing tracks
additional rail right -of -way will likely be required. Along the eastern shore of Locke Lake there
will likely be tree and backwater/wetland mitigation required as a result of the P line. Near the
Springbrook Nature Center a fence will be required to be moved. The fence was erroneously
placed on BNSF property at some point in recent History.
Who is going to own the land surrounding the East Station Site?
There are numerous options for who may own the land surrounding the east station site on Main
Street at 61' Avenue. The three main options that have been discussed as of late are: 1. That the
County will purchase the east and west station sites and the rail authority will reimburse the
County for those portions that are required to accommodate the commuter rail and its associated
activities. 2. The Rail Authority will purchase the station sites. 3. A blended combination of
options 1 and 2 along with the City HRA purchasing the portion of the east station site that would
be suitable for transit oriented development/residentia4.,
We can assure you that staff has not been out committing HRA dollars to this project, without the
Authorities concurrence or even much chance for much discussion. However, for discussion
purposes, we have been contemplating the alternative. Options 1 and 2 are fairly self - explanatory.
Option 3 would work like this: The owner of the property at Main Street and 61' Avenue is
Nielsen and Associates. They are not willing to divide up the land to sell in pieces. As a matter
of fact, they have not been negotiating (from what I understand) and likely are looking for a
condemnation settlement, rather than a negotiated sale. The County HRA will likely purchase the
entire piece. The Federal Transit Authority would then purchase the piece directly related to the
Commuter Rail improvements, parking walkways, etc That FTA piece would be the center of the
14 acre site. The remaining pieces north and south would be available for development. The
City of Fridley has typically worked independent of the County HRA and believes that for that
reason, this too would be a project that our HRA would like to take the lead on, rather than
mixing City and County HRA activities.
What might this cost?
We've asked Frank Dunbar, Dunbar Development Corporation to provide an estimate of the cost
of land that would remain, after the FTA would purchase its share. That number will likely be
available by the time that the HRA meets next Thursday. No commitment will be required of the
HRA at that time, but we believe it is a discussion that we must have to understand what level of
interest the HRA has at this time.
Each meeting with the Northstar Group seems to end in the same question. Who is going to own
and develop the remainder of the site? Soon an answer will be required so that the real costs of
the Northstar project can be identified.
CONCLUSION
As was mentioned earlier in this update, no action will be required of the HRA at this time. A
discussion to evaluate the level of HRA interest in participating in this development would be
helpful however so that we can further discussions with Northstar representatives and down the
road draw some conclusions about ownership and who will take the lead in the transit oriented
development.
NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR RAIL PROJECT
Monthly Report
August 2005 Draft
��7�AH ES'O';t
m
..;
T
Minnesota Department of Transportation
in Cooperation with the
Northstar Corridor Development Authority
and the
Metropolitan Council
Northstar Project Office
155 Fifth Avenue South
Suite 755
Minneapolis, MN 55401
612- 215 -8200
The Northstar Corridor Rail Project
V; A1cdtc411 AN Till"
Dw.toun StGoad
IAt7CTrostC�ater't
)
yyj� Cloud 1.= ;East St-Cloud Phase 2
•.ee '
- -, (Proposed Facture Route)
-s
A'iissisip�i
ltircr �
ves
Becker Phi e 1
�
Big Lake (2004 Minnesota Bonding Request)
. Elk River
to q
Ritlee l
t
.boka °' Coon Rapids
Fridley
W4
a Sim
I >� a�
IT imen'
mi eations
�� aba�N
°�# v� Medical
f�
Cmer
e4p0 , /St. Paul
International &port
lfctl oC Ae�trka
Monthly Report -2- Northstar Corridor Rail Project
August 18, 2005
I. Introduction
The proposed Northstar Corridor Rail Project (Project) will provide commuter
rail service along a 40 -mile corridor from downtown Minneapolis to Big Lake,
Minnesota parallel to Trunk Highways 47 and 10. It will use existing rail
tracks owned by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) and
include 6 stations. The commuter line is expected to carry 5,600 passengers
per day by the year 2025. The rail line will have inter -modal connections to
bus transit and to the Hiawatha Light Rail Transit (LRT) line. The Northstar
connection to LRT consists of a four -block extension on the north end of the
Hiawatha LRT to reach the downtown Minneapolis commuter rail station.
With the exception of the downtown Minneapolis station, all of the stations will
have park and ride facilities.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn /DOT), the grantee, is
working closely with its partners, the Northstar Corridor Development
Authority (NCDA) and the Metropolitan Council, to deliver the Northstar
Project. The Northstar Project Office (NPO) was established with staff from
each partnering agency to oversee the implementation of the Project.
Since the last written report to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), dated
July 2005, the following occurred and are described in this report:
• The SAFETEA -LU bill authorized $80 million for Northstar
• NPO submitted draft materials to FTA to seek a "Recommended"
rating and approval for entry into final design
• The Northstar Risk Assessment process began August 9, 2005
• Continued to meet with city staff and elected officials regarding station
design, building codes and permit process
• BNSF design agreement kick -off meeting occurred August 4th
• FTA produced draft procurement system review report
• NCDA approved a contract on August 4th with Marsh USA, Inc. for
broker /insurance consulting services
• Continued Northstar public information efforts
• Conducted interviews for Deputy Director of Design position
Monthly Report -3- Northstar Corridor Rail Project
August 18, 2005
II. Project Milestones
The following table lists the major milestones in the development and ongoing
implementation of the Northstar project.
Northstar Project Milestones
Date
March 2000
Activity
Major Investment Study completed— Commuter rail
recommended
June 2000
FTA-approved entry into Preliminary Engineering
Draft Environmental impact Statement (DEIS) published
October 2000
Janua 2001
Su lemental Information to the DEIS published
March 2002
Final Environmental Impact Statement published
December 2002
FTA issued Record of Decision
Minnesota Legislature commits $37.5 million in bonding for
Northstar
April 2005
4t" Quarter 2005
FTA annroves ent into Final Desi n
Minnesota Legislature commits remaining state funding for
Northstar
May 2006
50
FTA issues Letter of No Prejudice enablin 3 utility relocation
FTA enters into Full Funding Grant Agreement for Northstar
Jul 2006
October 2006
Spring 2007
Cnstruction begins
Earl 2009
ve
III. Project Finances
Project Budget
The following table lists the existing Northstar Project budget by FTA
Standard Cost Category.
Project Budget
No.
No.
Category
Amount (YOE $
10
Guideway & Track Elements
$67,871,900
20
Stations, Stops, Terminals, Intermodal
$20,665,500
30
Support Facilities: Yards, Shops, Admin. Bldgs
$21,829,500
40
Sitework & Special Conditions
$17,539,000
50
Systems
$7,568,700
Construction Subtotal (Categories 10 -50
$135,474,600
60
ROW, Land, Existing Improvements
$8,497,100
70
Vehicles
$76,604,300
80
Professional Services
$35,410,300
90
Unallocated Contingency
$7,985,100
Subtotal (Categories 10 -90
$263,971,400
100
Finance Charges
$1,258,100
Total Project Cost
$265-229-5001
Monthly Report -4- Northstar Corridor Rail Project
August 18, 2005
Funding Sources
The Northstar project was authorized for $80 million in the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-
LU) bill passed by Congress on July 29. The following table summarizes the
sources of funding to date for the Northstar Project, including federal
appropriations to date. The NCDA member counties have passed resolutions
committing their full share of the Northstar Project. Their commitment to date
totals approximately $44 million or $26 million in addition to that shown below.
Northstar Pro ect Funding
Sources to Date
Source
Federal
State
Met Council
NCDA
1998 Twin Cities Transitway Projects
$ 350,000
$ 287,56
Section 5309 (Grant MN -03 -0056)
1999 STP Grant Section 5307 (MN -90
$ 3,999,981
$ 1,000,000
X110
1999 STP Grant Section 5307 (MN-90
$ 2,000,000
$ 500,000
X138)
2000 CMAQ Grant Section 5307
$ 960,000
$ 69,885
$ 170,11
(Amendment to MN -90 -X138)
2000 & 2001 Twin Cities Transitway
$ 4,346,669
$ 1,086,66
Projects Section 5309 MN -03 -0088
2002 New Starts Section 5309 (MN-
$ 9,900,131
$ 2,475,033
03 -0111)
NCDA — Advanced & Final Design
$ 10,000,00
NCDA (Hennepin County) — LRV
$ 6,300,000
Procurement
2003 New Starts Section 5309 (no
$ 4,917,912
grant yet)
2004 New Starts Section 5309 (no
$ 5,659,028
grant yet)
2005 New Starts Section 5309 (no
$ 4,960,000
rant et
2005 Minnesota Bonding
$ 37,500,000
Total 1
$ 37,093,721
$ 39,069,885
$ 2,475,033
$ 17,844,
The NCDA member counties have passed resolutions committing their full share of the Northstar project. Their
commitment to date totals approximately $44 million or about $26 million more than the $17.8 million shown above.
Project Obligations
The following table lists the contracts and obligations that have been incurred
by the Northstar project, including the amount expended to date. All funds
expended to date have been for professional services.
Monthly Report -5- Northstar Corridor Rail Project
August 18, 2005
Based on invoices received by MNDOT to date.
IV. New Starts Criteria and Request to Enter Final Design
The Northstar request for a change in rating from "Not Recommended" to
"Recommended" and the draft request to enter final design were submitted to
FTA in July. A matrix summarizing all the documents associated with that
request follows:
Matrix of Documents for Re-Ra ing and Ent into Final Des! n
Northstar Project Obligations and Expenses
Status
NEPA
Pu ose
Contractor
A roved October 2000
Ob1I aced
A roved, 2001
Ex nded
$
Balance
through Preliminary Engineering
Final Des! n A Ilication
Draft FD Application Cover Letter
$
8,474,650.71
$
8,474,650.71
Submitted 03/31/2005
Value Engineering Report
dvanced Preliminary Engineering
Kimley Horn & Assoc
$
$
428,900.00
150,000.00
$
$
341,522.64
146,491.92
$
$
87,377.36
3,508.08
Pro ect Management
Kenneth Stevens 2004
$
220,000.00
$
28,127.81
$
191,872.19
P act Management
Kenneth Stevens 2005
Richardson, Richter &Associates 2004
$
322,000.00
$
308,788.66
$
13,211.34
Pro act Mana ement
Pro act Mana ement
Richardson, Richter & Associates 2005
$
473,300.00
$
Mn /DOT, Metro Transit, NCDA
BNSF Design Agreement
$
$
473,300.00
47,876.95
Proilect Management
Loch & Associates
$
$
50 000.00
248,569.00
$
$
2,123.05
248,569.00
$
-
Pro act Management
Mn/DOT under MN -03 -0088
Mn/DOT under MN-03-01 11
$
320,000.00
$
5,764.17
$
314,235.83
Pro act Management
Host Railroad Ne otiations
Greene -Es el 2004
$
100,000.00
$
45,172.94
$
$
54.827.06
300,000.00
Host Railroad Ne otiations
Greene -Es eI 2005
$
$
300,000.00
158,000.00
$
$
-
79,297.14
$
78,702.86
ech Su ort for Rail-ma--Negotiations
Main Line Man a lament
$
245,285.00
$
$
245,285.00
Public Information
Northwoods Advertising
Station and Maintenance Facility
$
4,173,632.00
$
1,091,237.65
$
3,082,394.15
dvanced & Final Design
Kimle Hom & Assoc
LRT Advanced & Final Design &
$
3,098,927.00
$
566,388.70
$
2,532,538.30
Commuter Rail Oversight
LTK Engineering
$
6,300,000.00
$
$
6,300,000.00
Li ht Rail Vehicle Procurement
Bombardier
dvanced & Final Design of Track &
$
1,112,188.00
$
$
1,112,188.00
Si nal Improvements
BNSF
$ 26,175,451.71
$ 11,338,134.59
$ 13,725,129.12
Grand Total
Based on invoices received by MNDOT to date.
IV. New Starts Criteria and Request to Enter Final Design
The Northstar request for a change in rating from "Not Recommended" to
"Recommended" and the draft request to enter final design were submitted to
FTA in July. A matrix summarizing all the documents associated with that
request follows:
Matrix of Documents for Re-Ra ing and Ent into Final Des! n
Deliverable
Status
NEPA
DEIS
A roved October 2000
Su lement to DEIS
A roved, 2001
FEIS
Approved March 2002
Record of Decision
Issued December 2002
Final Des! n A Ilication
Draft FD Application Cover Letter
E- mailed 07/11/2005, Submitted 07/14/2005
Project Reports
Project Management Plan
Submitted 03/31/2005
Value Engineering Report
Submitted 05/24/2005. PMOC submitted
favorable comments to FTA 06/3012005.
Financial Plan
Submitted 07/14/2005
Request to Enter Final Design — Includes
Submitted 07114/2005
make the case narrative, project summary,
project schedule, New Starts criteria, travel
forecasts, Summit results, cost estimates
Quality Plan
E- mailed 07/11/2005, Submitted 07/14/2005
Real Estate Plan
E- mailed 07/11/2005, Submitted 07/14/2005
Commuter Rail Fleet Mana ement Plan
E- mailed 07/11/2005, Submitted 07/14/2005
Cover Letter and Response to FTA's
E- mailed 07/11/2005, Submitted 07/14/2005
Request for Information on Level Boarding
Issues
Before and After Study Plan
E- mailed 07/11/2005, Submitted 07/1412005
Project Agreements
Inter - agency Cooperation Agreement—
Submitted 06/30/2005
Mn /DOT, Metro Transit, NCDA
BNSF Design Agreement
E- mailed 07/11/2005, Submitted 07/14/2005
Monthly Report -6- Northstar Corridor Rail Project
August 18, 2005
Matrix of Documents for Re-Ra Ing and Ent into Final Design
Deliverable
Status
Other
07/14/2005
Letter requesting FTA to raise value
thresholds for local property acquisition
decisions
Submitted 07/14/2005
NPO staff traveled to Chicago to meet with FTA Region V staff on July 14.
Staff from the regional office of the Federal Railroad Administration also
attended as well as existing Project Management Oversight Consultant
(PMOC) staff from Hill International and future PMOC staff from Jacobs Civil.
They discussed the process for achieving a new project rating and gaining
FTA approval to enter final design.
NPO staff provided a draft schedule for the process of gaining approval to
enter final design. Project sponsors recognized it was an aggressive
schedule and described the importance of providing a solid cost estimate to
the 2006 Minnesota Legislature for deliberation about the second and final
state commitment of capital funds for the Project.
FTA staff confirmed that it was highly aggressive schedule, stating the risk
assessment exercise must be completed prior to entry into final design, and
will likely lengthen this schedule (see the Risk Assessment Section of this
report).
The following is a draft revision to the schedule discussed on July 14,
incorporating issues raised by FTA.
Revised Draft Schedule for Northstar Ent into Final Design
Activity
Completion
Mn /DOT submitted draft request to enter final design
07/14/2005
Procurement System Review (PSR) draft report
07/27/2005
Risk Assessment: Preliminary review of documents
08/03/2005
Mn /DOT sent letter describing environmental issues to FTA—
Washington
08/05/2005
Mn /DOT submitted follow supplemental information to FTA—
Washington
08/09/2005
Risk Assessment: On -site document review
08/11/2005
FTA review of New Starts criteria
08/24/2005
PMOC review of technical capacity and capability
08/24/2005
PMOC spot report
08/24/2005
Mn /DOT response to PSR draft report
08/28/2005
Follow up meeting on request to enter final design
08/30/2005
Risk Assessment: Mn /DOT risk mitigation plan
11/11/2005
FTA recommendation and start of 30 -day Congressional review
period
11/18/2005
FTA approval to enter final design
12/19/2005
Monthly Report -7- Northstar corridor Rail Project
August 18, 2005
Level boarding was discussed at the July 14 meeting. The NPO staff
described BNSF's clearance requirements and the conclusion that mini -high
block platforms appear to be a logical solution to providing level boarding for
disabled passengers. FTA will review the Project data submitted in response
to FTA's level boarding questions.
FTA and Project staff also discussed environmental documentation of project
changes. FTA's Planning and Environment Office in Washington requested a
letter summarizing the Project's changes so that FTA can determine if the
associated environmental documentation and record of decision amendment
must be complete before approval could be granted to enter final design.
That letter was sent to FTA on August 5, 2005.
V. Risk Assessment
A team led by representatives of the new PMOC from Jacobs Civil visited the
NPO on August 2 and 3 to review project documentation. They determined
there was sufficient information to conduct the Risk Assessment. The team
returned August 9 through 11 for an on -site document review and corridor
tour. Future steps will include review of the scope, schedule and cost
estimate; development of the risk register; contingency analysis; risk
workshop; un- mitigated scenario risk assessment; risk mitigation workshop;
and mitigated scenario risk assessment. Mn /DOT will then prepare a risk
mitigation plan. The process is scheduled to conclude in mid November.
VI. Property Acquisition
The acquisition of real estate for the commuter rail stations will be funded by
a grant from the Metropolitan Council, as well as grants from Mn /DOT of
federal funds. The NCDA has requested its member regional railroad
authorities of Anoka, Hennepin and Sherburne Counties to acquire the
necessary property for the commuter rail stations and the maintenance facility
on behalf of the Northstar Project. The NCDA will provide grant funding for
the property acquisition to the regional railroad authorities. In order to
transfer such funds to the regional railroad authorities, it is necessary to enter
into subrecipient agreements, incorporating the terms and conditions of the
grant agreements.
On August 4, 2005, the NCDA authorized its Chair to finalize negotiations and
execute subrecipient agreements with Anoka County Regional Railroad
Authority, Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority and Sherburne
County Regional Railroad Authority to provide funding for the acquisition of
the necessary property for commuter rail stations and the maintenance
facility.
Monthly Report -8- Northstar Corridor Rail Project
August 18, 2005
O
cis
16
A)
ff
IL
cc
0
�o
E
0
cc
5
0
z
to
r- CD
CL0 Cl N
N .
co
0
LL
Z,4
21
L4
z
z
to
w
w
�3
w
Ij
w
ul
m
y
-as
w
S
9
6
•
LL
-IjA
16
A)
ff
IL
cc
0
�o
E
0
cc
5
0
z
to
r- CD
CL0 Cl N
N .
co
0
O
O W)
O
CL
16
CD
O
ca
0
"a
'E
0
0
Z
O
LO
0
CL
0 C> C11
00
IT
.1.
H.
H.
X
X
LL
x
>
I �j
>
>
I
z
z z
U
z z
z
R
z z
w LU
z.�
K R
- R
W
lz
53
16
CD
O
ca
0
"a
'E
0
0
Z
O
LO
0
CL
0 C> C11
00
� 3
a`m
r
Wyu>
00
E
`s U 7
co
�m
oa
z
e�
0
z
A
At
I;
�a
e�
6 a
a 0
O
z
B
8
N
to
2
_
_
U
U
O
O
a
E
0
U
w
y
L
0
Z
IL
r- o
CL N
C6
C
c0
G Q
-u2
ƒ)
v/\
E
tka
,)
)�
. !!
�
$2|
$a
,|
&$|
&
7 �!
2
�
�
!
�
�
§
§
§
|
�
|
$
- &-
�!!!
�
�
\
k
,
|
|
2
|
\
k
§
\
\
{
\ \
)
\ )
\
9
} 6
\
)
R
®
I
S)
n
�
k
.
3
d
�
k
�
LO
CL
it co
6k
��
VII. Advanced Design
Advanced design is underway, with the assistance of two teams of consultants.
A team led by Kimley Horn and Associates (KHA) is responsible for the six
commuter rail stations and the maintenance facility including the central control
facility. A team led by LTK Engineering (LTK) is responsible for the LRT
Connection and providing technical support for KHA's work on the commuter rail
stations and maintenance facility. The entire project design team meets on a
weekly basis.
Project staff and consultants are evaluating several major issues including
Central Control Communication technology and location; Inter -modal station
coordination with prospective developers and uses; and level boarding in
compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Metro Transit made an
operational decision to locate the Control Facility at the existing Transit Control
Center (TCC).
Project staff and consultants continue to meet with city staff and elected officials
to keep each city informed about progress on station design, building codes and
permit processes to ensure full understanding of expectations and plans. Staff
presented a status report to the Big Lake City Council on August 10 and held a
work session with Fridley City Council on August 15.
The City of Anoka is pursuing a Congestion Mitigation /Air Quality (CMAQ) grant
for a parking ramp at the Anoka commuter rail station. Addition of a ramp at this
site would reduce the parking lot footprint and property requirements for the
current Northstar station.
Project staff and consultants also meet as- needed with the City of Minneapolis,
State Historic Preservation Office and Minneapolis Heritage Preservation
Commission on design issues of the LRT Connection and inter -modal station.
Coordination meetings with the Twins baseball team, HOK stadium architects,
Hines Development Group and Hennepin County continue in an on -going effort
to design an inter -modal facility that will work with the various potential future
adjacent land uses.
VIII. BNSF Negotiations
The NCDA and BNSF have initiated design of the rail capacity improvements in
accordance with the Rail Passenger Capital Improvement Agreement and
Amendment No. 1. Acting Deputy Director of Design Ken Stevens, together with
representatives from Northstar consultants KHA and LTK, met with BNSF staff
and design consultant Toltz, King, Duvall and Anderson (TKDA) on August 4.
BNSF had twelve people in attendance.
Discussion focused primarily around design process, schedules, and
coordination between BNSF, BNSF design consultants, and Northstar
consultants. Schedule issues such as lead -time to acquire personnel and
Monthly Report -13- Northstar Corridor Rail Project
August 18, 2005
materials to implement a construction plan were identified and discussed. BNSF
agreed to expedite flagging services, utility locations, and design coordination in
an effort to maintain the current design schedule and deliver a reliable cost
estimate by year -end.
IX. Twins Baseball Stadium and Inter -modal Station Design Coordination
The Minnesota Twins and Hennepin County have agreed to a funding plan for a
new baseball stadium in downtown Minneapolis. The stadium site sits adjacent
to the inter -modal station connecting Northstar commuter rail and the Hiawatha
LRT Connection. The plan for the $478 million facility will include private funding
from Twins owner Carl Pohlad and public money from the county in the form of a
0.15% sales tax. The Minnesota Legislature must approve any county invoking a
sales tax. The Legislature did not do so during the regular 2005 session nor in
the special session that ended July 13. Governor Pawlenty may call for a special
session to address stadiums and other issues this fall.
The property owners of the Twins ballpark site have teamed with Hines
developers and announced plans for a major transit oriented development either
with or without the ballpark. Stated plans include 1,000 residential units with a
ballpark or a mixed -use development including 3,000 residential units without a
ballpark. The property owners cite the inter -modal access afforded by Northstar
and Hiawatha as key elements in their development plans. Staff continues to
meet with both ballpark designers and the developers in an effort to come up with
a design for the vertical circulation component that will not preclude either a
baseball stadium or development.
X. Procurement System Review
The FTA conducted a procurement system review of Mn /DOT and the
Metropolitan Council, including the Northstar and Hiawatha Projects. Staff from
Leon Sneed and Associates arrived June 6 and departed June 24. The review
team also visited Anoka County to interview NCDA procurement personnel and
view NCDA procured contracts.
Mn /DOT received the review team's draft report on July 29, 2005. It described
shortcomings they found in the overall procurement processes of each
organization as well as shortcomings within specific contract files. Mn /DOT and
NCDA will respond to the draft report by August 28, 2005.
XI. Risk Management
On August 4, 2005, the NCDA approved an agreement for broker /insurance
consulting services with Marsh USA, Inc. The total contract amount, including
options for insurance placement, is $567,400. The term of the contract will
commence upon execution and will continue until July 31, 2009. The scope of
services includes four key areas, including:
Monthly Report -14- Northstar corridor Rail Project
August 18, 2005
1. Project risk assessment. Marsh will conduct a comprehensive risk
assessment to identify exposures arising in the construction and operation
of Northstar. Based on identified exposures, Marsh will design a risk
mitigation plan to finance or transfer identified risks.
2. Project consulting services. Marsh will consult with the NPO on
appropriate risk and insurance provisions in construction contracts and,
importantly, will advise the BNSF negotiating team on provisions relating
to indemnification and insurance.
3. Insurance placement and administration. Marsh will design, market and
negotiate the insurance program for the project, including coverage for
builder's risk, rolling stock, railroad liability, railroad protective,
environmental liability, and project professional liability.
4. Optional services relating to claims /loss control and safety services. At
the request of the project, Marsh and its DBE subconsultant will facilitate
the adjustment of claims and losses and address safety issues.
The Marsh contract was procured in accordance with NCDA, Mn /DOT, and FTA
procurement policies.
XII. Land Use
The Northstar Project Office met with staff from the cities of Anoka, Big Lake,
Coon Rapids, Elk River and Fridley in July 2005 to discuss concepts for transit
oriented development adjacent to the commuter rail stations.
XII1. Community Involvement
The following public meetings, events, and presentations have occurred since
the July 2005 Northstar report:
Date(s)
Audience
July 13, 2005
Presentation to the Tour Minnesota Organization,
Minnesota Tourism Industry Organization at the
Science Museum. About 40 people in attendance.
July 26 -31, 2005
Anoka County Fair, Information Booth
July 28, 2005
Richfield Rotary
August 4, 2005
1 NCDA Board Meeting, Anoka
XIV. Project Staffing
Metro Transit conducted interviews with five candidates for the vacant Deputy
Director of Design position within the Northstar Project Office on July 20 and 22,
Monthly Report -15- Northstar corridor Rail Project
August 18, 2005
2005. Second interviews of the top two candidates were held August 5, 2005.
Metro Transit will make their selection soon.
Meanwhile, the position has been - filled on an interim basis by a combination of
Jon Olson, the Anoka County Public Services Division Manager and registered
engineer, and Ken Stevens, a long time consultant to the Northstar Corridor
Development Authority and former director of the Hennepin County Regional
Railroad Authority.
XV. Next Steps
Project staff will work with FTA to revise material and provide information as
needed for FTA to change the project's rating from "Not Recommended" to
"Recommended" and to approve entry into the final design phase. Project staff
will communicate with FTA Region V and headquarters staff and PMOC
throughout the review process to ensure timely project responses and progress.
Concurrently, project staff will work with the team from the PMOC conducting the
risk assessment.
NPO staff are working with BNSF on the design of track and signal
improvements. Initial efforts will concentrate on preliminary design of
improvements that were not covered in the earlier preliminary engineering effort.
Project staff will continue working closely with station cities and counties on
design issues. Public information efforts are ongoing with a Northstar project
booth at the Minnesota State fair being a highlight of the coming month.
Monthly Report -16- Northstar Corridor Rail Project
August 18, 2005
Fridley HRA
Housing Program Summary
Cover Page
October 6, 2005 HRA Meeting
Report Description
Loan Application Summary Loan application activity (e.g. mailed
out, in process, closed loans) for
September 2005 and year -to -date.
Loan Origination Report
Loan Servicing Report
Remodeling Advisor &
Operation Insulation
Loan originations for September 2005
and year -to -date.
Loan servicing by Community
Reinvestment Fund (CRF) for the month
of August 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.
PLEASE NOTE:.
CEE was not able to provide the updates in time to be
included with your packet.
Staff will hand out the information prior to the meeting on
October 6.
H:- Paul's DocumentsWRAMRA Agenda Items\2005\October 6, 20051Housing Program Cover Page(October2005).doc
N
d
FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
October 6, 2005
1. Storm Damage.
Early estimates from the City Forester indicate that over 2,000 boulevard and park trees were lost in the
September 21' storm. Storm related tree removal, cutting, and hauling will continue for a number of
weeks. The City Building Official estimates that there are 200 -300 homes with minor damage (missing
shingles, fascia., soffits, cracked rafters, etc.), but as insurance adjusters get out to visit properties and trees
are removed this number may climb. The Building Official reported that there were a number of
detached garages that were destroyed in the storm.
As residents recover from the storm and insurance coverage is figured out, we will likely see an increase
in the demand for the City's low interest loan program. Coincidentally, CEE sent out a city -wide flier
promoting our housing program just this week.
2. Medtronic — Ehlers TIF Review
At the June meeting Rick Pribyl asked that you approve an agreement that allowed Ehlers and Associates
to work with Medtronic. You will find a memo from Rick and an update from Ehlers attached to this
non - agenda update.
3. Project Expenditure Tracking
Per Commissioner's requests that more expense detail be provided, Finance staff has started to track and
will report expenditure and revenue information for the Gateway West and potential Islands of Peace
project on a monthly basis. The first detailed report is attached.
4. Follow up to questions From Last Meeting.
At the September 1 meeting members of the Authority asked for clarification on a few different items.
Below are the questions and responses from the HRA Accountant.
1) On the tax levy ..... what kinds of obligations are on the funds after repayment of the loan happens?
ie. what else can we use this money for?
In regards to the HRA tax levy, once the loan with the city is paid offit is my understanding that
the tax levy can be used for any non- TlFrelated HRA expenses.
2)On the HRA Expenses for approval. -there is an item (2) new loans for $50,602 ... the Authority was
wondering if that was coming out of the general fund or the RLF?
The $50,602 in newrevolvingloans is coming out of the Revolving Loan Fund, not the general
fund.
5. Planning Department Update
City Planning staff is working on a number of zoning ordinance changes. Of particular interest to the
HRA is a proposed zoning text amendment to allow homes on the narrower lots to be closer than 10'
from the side yard property lines provided the structure is no closer than 15' from the neighboring
structure. Detailed information on the other zoning ordinance changes is attached.
6. Old Central Senior Condominiums
The City has been told by developers for both projects that they would like to break ground yet this year.
Before construction can begin, however, both developers need to have final plats approved by Council
and must gain approval of building plans by Fridley's Chief Building Official prior to any construction.
The City has also been told that both developers have discussed the potential sale of their projects. At
this point, however, there is no indication that either project has been sold.
U I ►L �M
FINANCE DEPAR TMENT ri
CITY OF FRIDLEY
To: William W. Burns, Executive Director of HRA
Paul Bolin, Assistant Director of HRA
From: Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director
Paul Eisenmenger, HRA Accountant
Re: Medtronic Value Petition Tax Increment Adjustment
Date: September 30, 2005
RICHARD D. PRIBYL
FINANCE DIRECTOR.
Attached you will find a memo from Shelly Eldridge from Ehlers, Inc. related to the
Medtronic tax increment project that we have them working on. As you recall this is
regarding the change in value related to tax years 2003 and 2004. She states in her memo
that she is still working on this project and is in the process of reviewing county records.
She did indicate to me that this project has become more complex than she had originally
anticipated due to the way that Anoka County calculates tax increment. It appears to
Shelly that because Anoka County calculates the tax increment for each district on a
district wide basis and not a parcel by parcel basis this has caused a discrepancy in
attempting to calculate a parcel by parcel increment.
As she states, she is continuing to work on this project and will update us when she has
more information.
RDP /me
Attachment
EHLERS
& ASSOCIATES INC
OTo:
Rick Pribyl
From: Shelly Eldridge
WSubject:
Medtronic Value Petition Tax Increment Adjustment
Date: September 27, 2005
Rick:
As requested I have reviewed the documents relating to the Tax Court Petition by
Medtronic, Inc. for the tax years of 2003 and 2004. I am in the process of reviewing the
detail from Anoka County to determine if the adjustment to the tax increment was
reasonable.
There are two ways that tax increment financing districts are administered. Counties,
throughout the state, administer a district on a district wide basis, whereas, developer
agreements view the district on a parcel by parcel basis. This causes some inherent
problems.
When a county calculates tax increment, it is done at the time the taxes are being spread
for a tax year, in this instance payable 2003 and/or 2004. When a county distributes taxes
that are collected, the tax increment is distributed based on an average percentage which
is applied equally for all parcels in a district. This percentage is calculated on the taxes to
be collected when tax statements are sent out. If an adjustment is made during the year
(2004) or in a previous year (2003) the percentages for redistributing the taxes or refund
is not changed to reflect the new numbers. As a result, the adjusted amount of tax
increment from the County will be calculated and distributed differently than if the
calculation was done on a parcel by parcel basis.
My research has determined that this is in fact the case for the Medtronic tax adjustment.
I'm in the process of completing the analysis to determine the amount of the discrepancy
for each of the years. I will forward this information as soon as it's available.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive (651)- 697 -8504 Fax: (651) 697 -8555
Roseville, NIN 55113 -1105 Shelly @ehlers - inc.com
http: / /www.ehlers- inc.com
9
Revenues:
Tax Increment
Grants
Bonds
Interfund Loans (from GF)
Land sales
Total Revenues
Expenditures:
Building
Land
Contracted Services
Professional Services
Advertising
Utility Services
Payment on interfund loans
Total Expenditures
Over /(Under)
ISLANDS OF PEACE
FINANCIAL UPDATE
AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2005
2005 TOTALS
64 64
11,406 11,406
11,470 - - - 11,470
(11,470) - - - (11,470)
NOTE: All expenses related to this potential future project have been paid out of the HRA's general fund.
FRIDLEY HRA
TIF DISTRICT #18 - GATEWAY WEST
BUDGET COMPARED TO ACTUAL
AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2005
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Budget
Actual
Tax Increment Revenue
$ 2,000,000
$ -
Investment Earnings
$ 20,000
$ -
Bond Proceeds
$ 750,000
$ -
Loan Proceeds
$ -
$1,500,000
Special Assessments
$ -
$ -
Sales /Lease Proceeds
$ 800,000
$ -
Grants
$ 200,000
$ 200,000
Miscellaneous
$ 530,000
$ -
Transfers In
$ -
$ -
TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS
$ 4,300,000
$1,700,000
USES OF FUNDS
Land /Building Acquisition
$1,800,000
$1,388,547
Site Improvements /Preparation Costs
$
300,000
$
-
Installation of Public Utilities
$
100,000
$
-
Streets and Sidewalks
$
100,000
$
-
Bond Principal Payments
$
750,000
$
-
Bond Interest Payments
$
575,000
$
-
Loan Principal Payments
$
-
$
200,000
Loan /Note Interest Payments
$
575,000
$
-
Administrative Costs
$
100,000
$
93,725
Contracted Services
$
-
$
15,328
Advertising
$
-
$
1,152
Property Taxes
$
-
$
9,161
Utility Services
$
-
$
651
Miscellaneous
$
-
Transfers Out
$
-
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS
$ 4,300,000
$1,708,564
NOTE: The budgeted numbers come from the TIF plan budget which Krass Monroe created.
Zoning Text Changes Proposed
Scott Hickok, Fridley's Community Development Director reports that his staff is recommending
a variety of changes to Fridley's zoning code this fall. These include changes in parking
requirements in all commercially zoned areas. After review of requirements in other cities and
review of requirements associated with recent Fridley projects, Scott and his staff are
recommending that the number of required parking spaces be reduced from 6.6 spaces per 1000
square feet of floor space to 4 spaces per 1000 square feet of floor space. The change will
provide a more realistic requirement that will better serve business needs and also allow room for
more landscaped areas and less runoff from commercial properties into creeks, rivers, and ponds.
Staff is also recommending several other zoning code changes to the Fridley Planning
Commission and Council. In addition to recommending that temporary. storage containers be
allowed on C -2 and C -3 commercial properties (see article in the September /October newsletter),
staff is also proposing to better define semi trailer uses in M -2 heavy industrial districts. Future
staff recommendations will also suggest changes in screening requirements for rooftop
mechanical systems and other changes relating to non - conforming properties. These latter
changes will serve to bring Fridley codes into conformance with recent State law that allows
reconstruction of non - conforming structures where more than 50% of the building has been
destroyed by fire or other cause. The final zoning text change pertains to Fridley's shore land
requirements. These latter changes apply to the proximity of buildings and impervious surfaces
to lakes, rivers and creeks. They would bring Fridley's shore land building requirements into
conformity with state mandates.
The commercial parking requirements and the temporary storage container recommendations
were discussed by the Planning Commission at their September 7 meeting and heard by City
Council at their September 26 meeting. Public hearings on the other four recommendations will
be held during the final three months of the year.
If you have questions or comments about these proposed changes, we invite you to call Scott
Hickok at 572 -3590. Alternatively, e -mail the City at Fridley gci.fridle .in .us.