04/18/2005 CONF MTG - 4572�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLE1f
CITY COUNCIL
CONFERENCE MEETING
April i8, ZOOs — 7:0o p.m.
Fridley Municipal Center
Conference Room A
1. Report from Consultant on Northstar Development Impacts.
2. Islands of Peace Project.
3. Bonding for Street Reconstruction Proj ect.
4. Rice Creek Watershed District.
5. Community Park Ball Fields Regrading.
6. Lawn Sprinkling Restrictions.
�
�
ClT�Y OF
FRIDLEY
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE MEETING OF APRIL 18, 2005
April 13, 2005
William W. Burns, City Manager��
��
Scott J. Hickok, Community Development Director
Paul Bolin, Assistant Executive HRA Director
Joint Application to Metropolitan Council for Livable Communities
Act Grant to Studv Potential Northstar Corridor Development
INTRODUCTION
As you may recall, in 2002 the City, entered into an agreement for joint study with
Anoka County and the Cities of Anoka and Coon Rapids. This study would focus
on potential Northstar Commuter development impacts and suggest development
scenarios for the property adjacent to the station sites in each of three
communities. The timing of the actual work for this study collided with the Fridley
Housing Forums and consequently, we asked that the consultant study potential
development and to make their recommendation (or present a series of options)
to the City Council and�taff. Earlier this year, Bill Smith and Harold Skjobestad,
of BIKO & Associates, presented their findings to staff and asked for input on
options presented. From that meeting, BIKO has now completed their report and
have now asked for permission to make a presentation to the City Council.
ELEMENTS OF PROJECT
This approach is somewhat unique in that typically communities apply as
individual entities for funds for their individual projects. Also, independently, the
County cannot seek Livable Communities Grant Funds. A city must serve as the
lead agency and fiscal agent. The project in this situation was envisioned (by the
County) to be a joint planning effort focusing on housing needs adjacent to the
Northstar Commuter Rail Corridor.
As with all grants, a local match was required. At that same time, the County had
commissioned a countywide housing study with Maxfield Research in the amount
Joint Study for Commuter Rail Related Development
April 13, 2005
PAG E 2
of $75,000.00. County staff verified with the Metropolitan Council that those
funds could be used as the three cities entire local match, as long as the grant
amount the three cities requesf is $75,000.00, or less. The cities requested
$75,000.00 and we received the full amount ofi the request.
This project served as an excellent opportunity to receive outside planning
expertise and recommendations, without incurring additional cost in the City's
Planning budget. It also may serve as a backdrop for future development
discussion for land surrounding the Northstar Commuter Station site.
This approach while interesting, hit staff and the Council at a time when the first
priority would seem to be site approval of the station site. However, in the spirit of
multi-jurisdictional cooperation and with this program being consistent with the
City's past Heights joint planning efforts and consistent with the City's desire to
obtain Livable Communities dollars for future housing opportunities, the study
was approved and work commenced.
A full report is now available upon request.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council allow a short (15 minute) block of time at its
work session meeting of, April 18, 2005, to allow BIKO and Associates the
opportunity to present its findings to the City Council. These findings are meant
to be a basis for further development discussion. Upon receiving Council's
direction, staff will use the findings in whatever manner Council deems
appropriate.
M-05-31
'!
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
DISCUSSION ITEM
CONFERENCE MEETING OF APRIL 18, 2005
Date: April 13, 2005 �
To: William Burns, City Manager�
From
Subject
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Paul Bolin, Asst. Executive HRA Director
Islands of Peace Project RFQ
M-05-30
The possible sale of the properties at 190 and 191 Island Park Drive have generated a
number of discussions and work tasks for staff. At the joint Council / HRA meeting on
March 28th Community Development and HRA staff were given the direction to begin
discussions with the development community as to what types of projects may be
desirable in the Island Park Drive area. There was also much discussion of not
purchasing any properties until there is a clearer vision of the final project, acquisition
costs, relocation costs, and sources of funding such a project.
After hearing the discussion at the joint meeting, having further discussions with a large
developer (Dave Newman), and consulting with our counterparts in other cities, it
seems that developing an RFQ and selecting a developer to partner with in creating a
vision is the next logical step in the process. Until a final project is defined, it is
impossible to develop potential costs and identify resources to pay for the project. Staff
is recommending that the Council authorize staff to send the attached RFQ, with a
detailed cover letter, to selected developers in order to further explore the feasibility of
this project. Working with the developer will help to define what mix of building types
may be most attractive to meeting community wants and needs.
Staff would like to send out the RFQ as soon as possible and bring forward a
recommendation for the selection of the top developer(s) at the joint Council / HRA
meeting set for June 2, 2005. Staff envisions giving the Council and HRA an
opportunity to meet and question the finalists at the June 2"d meeting.
Islands of Peace
Redevelo ment Pro' ect
p J
East River Road £� Island Park Drive
Request for Quali�ications
Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, Minnesota 55432
Islands of Peace Redevelopment Project
Summary of Redevelopment Opportunity
Introduction
The Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) is soliciting qualifications from
private developers for potentially partnering on the Islands of Peace Redevelopment
Project. This Request for Qualifications (RFQ) information packet is the primary tool
that the City will use in selecting a developer for the project. This packet contains basic
information about the potential project and an outline for preparing a response.
Site Descriution
The potential redevelopment site is located
Just North of I-694 and West of East River Road.
The potential project area consists of thirteen
privately held parcels and City park land
comprising approximately 12 acres. Please
refer to Attachment B for more information.
The City does not have title to any of the
privately held parcels.
Redevelopment Vision
The goal of this project is to convert an
Area of dilapidated apartment buildings
into a viable residential development. The Fridley HRA
envisions a mixed-use, mixed-income, mixed-housing type development which
takes advantage of the close proximity to I-694, East River Road, a potential North Star
Commuter Rail station site, convenient shopping opportunities, nearby school and an
excellent system of parks and trails.
The ideal development must be sensitive to the needs of Fridley residents, enhance
access and connection to the Islands of Peace Park and the Mississippi River.
Site Assemblv and Control
The HRA has not assembled any parcels for redevelopment. The HRA seeks to partner
with a private developer before pursuing acquisition of the properties.
Other Information
To assist you in preparing a response, an aerial photo showing existing site
improvements has been prepared. See AttachmentA.
04/13/05
Page: 1 of 4
RFq IslandsPeace
Developer Selection
Developer selection will be based on qualifications, namely: experience, financial
resources, depth of staff, . It is hereby understood that submission of qualifications
imposes no obligation upon the HRA to proceed with the Islands of Peace
Redevelopment Project. The Fridley HRA reserves the right to reject any or all
submittals. A final decision on a developer is expected to occur sometime in early
summer 2005.
Project Time Line
May 2005
May — ]une 2005
June 2005
June — July 2005
July - August 2005
Proposal Deadline
City/HRA to review submitted qualifications
City/HRA may meet with top developers
City/HRA to select developer
Partnership agreement developed
Schedule developed for feasibility/ acquisition / development
Proposals must be received by 5:00 p.m., Friday, May 13, 2005 and should be
submitted to Paul Bolin, Assistant Executive Director, Fridley HRA, 6431 University
Avenue NE, Fridley, MN 55432. One or more developers may be asked to interview
before a panel consisting of the HRA and/or City Council.
04/13/05
Page: 2 of 4
RFq IslandsPeace
Islands of Peace Redevelopment Project
Submission Requirements
It is not the intention of this request to require a formal "proposal". The City/HRA want
to determine a developer's interest, experience, and financial capability for the project.
We would appreciate that answers to the following questions be as concise as possible.
However, we certainly welcome any information that will assist us in evaluating your
interest and qualifications to partner in a project of this scope.
Please submit your response to the following questions on 8.5 X 11 paper. If there are
oversized materials, please submit 14 copies:
1. Developer name, address, contact person, e-mail address, website, phone and
fax numbers.
2. Name of proposed project manager and resume of experience.
3. Names, addresses, e-mail address, website, and phone and fax numbers of
architects, planners, market consultants, leasing agents, or other contractors
anticipated for the project. Include resumes of key individuals.
4. Written discussion of the developer's perception of the market potential for the
project area specifically addressing the mix of unit types, occupancy type, and
potential to include affordable units into the site. The discussion should include
potential unit prices, rents, values, amenities, density and other relevant
information.
5. Description of experience in working with the public sector especially in regards
to redevelopment projects integrating affordable housing with market rate and
upper-end housing.
6. Provide two bank references including the name of the bank or financial
institution, address, phone and fax numbers, and contact person.
7. Provide a current financial statement of the developer and partners (this
information should be in a separate envelope labeled HRA Attorney and will be
kept confidential).
8. Brief description of what the developer would expect from the City/HRA with
respect to public improvements, site improvements, environmental assessments
and related expenses.
9. Description of representative development projects completed within the last
three years. For two of the projects include an explanation of the process,
project financing, brochures, photographs, artists renderings, project pro formas,
etc. Developers might select these two projects base on their similarity to this
RFQ, uniqueness of design, involvement of the public sector or other issues.
10. Provide five references of city officials of completed development projects and
any references from other cities.
Contact Person
04/13/05
Page: 3 of 4
RFq IslandsPeace
Each developer should prepare fourteen copies and submit them to:
Paul Bolin
Assistant Executive Director
Fridley HRA
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, Minnesota 55432
Questions can be directed to either Paul Bolin, Fridley HRA at #763-572-3591 or Scott
Hickok, Community Development Director #763-572-3590.
City Fax #763-571-1287
City TDD #763-572-3534
Attachments
A. Aerial photo of area
B. Assessors information for properties in development area
04/13/05
Page: 4 of 4
RFq IslandsPeace
-----Original Message-----
From: Hickok, Scott
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 10:36 AM
To: 'dennis.welsch@ci.Roseville.mn.us'; 'tsimonson@ci.shoreview.mn.us';
'mmcmonigal@stlouispark.org'; 'mgrimes@ci.golden-valley.mn.us';
'grant.fernelius@newbrightomm�.gov'; 'James.Ericson@ci.mounds-view.mn.us';
'Scott.Clark@ci.arden-hills.mn.us'; 'bpalmborg@ci.richfield.mn.us'
Subject: Redevelopment Questions
Dear Friends and Community Development Colleagues:
The City of Fridley is contemplating a redevelopment project that would
involve the purchase of 11 apartment buildings (primarily 12-unit buildings
70 — 80% occupied), a duplex, and 2 single family homes. Twelve and a half
acres of land are involved. The acreage abuts the Mississippi River and a
riverside park. Though the plan is in its early stages, development talks have
gained momentum by receiving considerable early stage City Council
support. While having exciting potential, it may be one of if not the most
aggressive redevelopment in recent Fridley's history.
Your cities have been doing great things and it has been exciting to see the
change. You likely have done a redevelopment or redevelopments that make
this 12.5 acre project look small. As a result, our staff was hoping to gain
from your experience. We have prepared a short survey and hoped that at
your convenience you could answer the questions and respond back. Of
course, redevelopment is very complex and your experience may not be
neatly defined by answers that fit in the small spaces below. We'll be glad
to take whatever piece of your experience you can share and welcome any
and all advice we receive.
Thank you in advance for your help.
Questions for Redevelopment Proiects
1) Has your city recently (past 5 years) undertaken any redevelopment efforts were
you were buying a large number of homes?
2) If so, what were the elements of the project?
a. Original Site
i. Original Land Use(s)
ii. Size acres.
iii. # of properties acquired
3) Were any of the properties acquired multi-family residential? #
of units
a. Were relocation benefits paid? $/unit removed
b. Did you work with a relocation consultant ?
Who?
c. Did you approach the acquisitions in a piecemeal fashion, or enter into
negotiations with all property owners at the same time?
4) Were all acquisitions voluntary or was condemnation necessary?
5) What was the final project? (ie. Type of development: residential, commercial,
industrial, or mixed use, # units, sq. footage of retail, etc.)
6) Did the City act as developer, hire a developer, or partner with a private
developer?
7) How was final project design developed? (in-house, consultant, developer)
8) What was the City's investment in the project? What were the before & after tax
values for the project area?
9) Did the City's actions result in any lawsuits? As best possible, please explain the
elements of the lawsuit(s).
10) Any other comments/advice you would care to share with a City contemplating a
large redevelopment project?
Thank you for your help.
Scott
Seott J. Hiskok, AICP
Community Development Directar
City af Fridley
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley. MN 55432
(163) 572-3590
hickoksL� si.fridley.mn.us
To:
From:
Re:
Date:
MEMORA
�
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
CITY OF FRIDLEY �
fDVM
RICHARD D. PRIBYL
FINANCE DIRECTVR
William W. Burns, City Manager �{ �
�
Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director
Bonding for Street Reconstruction
April 14, 2005
In preparing the Budget for 2006, staff reviewed a possible change to
method of financing the street reconstruction projects for the years 2005,
2006, 2007 and 2008. Due to the magnitude of the projects and the impact
that it has on the city's overall fund balances, an alternative financing
tool is being proposed.
The proposed method of financing these projects would be to use General
Obligation Bonds sold over a four-year period to provide the funding for
the projects. The debt would then be paid back over a period of ten years
on each of the issues. The total bond size would be reduced by the
applicable state aid and annual assessments that go along with each years
project as shown below.
Project Assessment General Total
Total Portion Levy Portion Bond
2005 $ 2,100,000.00 $500,000.00 $ 1,175,000.00 $ 1,675,000.00
2006 $ 2,300,000.00 $ 500,000.00 $ 1,375,000.00 $ 1,875,000.00
2007 $ 2,400,000.00 $ 500,000.00 $ 1,475,000.00 $ 1,975,000.00
2008 $ 2,500,000.00 $500,000.00 $ 1,575,000.00 $ 2,075,000.00
As this table indicates, an additional annual general levy would be
required for the repayment of this general obligation debt. This would be
outside of any levy limit imposed by the State and also would be outside of
the charter limitation. Since the County is still suffering from the
effects of their computer conversion, we have not received current
valuations to use to estimate property tax consequences, but have estimated
them using the information we had available this past summer/fall when
working on the Nature Center. On the next page you will find the estimates
of what a home valued at $200,000 would incur in additional taxes based on
the levy to repay the new General Obligation debt for the street
reconstruction. The debt was amortized over a period of 10 years. The ten
year period has been used in this case simply due to the past policy of
spreading assessments over a period of ten years on street reconstruction
projects. The special assessments that are a part of the project are also
based on ten years.
(EST.)
Total
Bonds Bonds Bonds Bonds Annual
2005 2006 2007 2008 Taxes
2006 $ 14.00 $ 17.00 $ 31.00
2007 $ 14.00 $ 17.00 $ 18.00 $ 49.00
2008 $ 14.00 $ 17.00 $ 18.00 $ 19.00 $ 68.00
2009 $ 14.00 $ 17.00 $ 18.00 $ 19.00 $ 68.00
2010 $ 14.00 $ 17.00 $ 18.00 $ 19.00 $ 68.00
2011 $ 14.00 $ 17.00 $ 18.00 $ 19.00 $ 68.00
2012 $ 14.00 $ 17.00 $ 18.00 $ 19.00 $ 68.00
2013 $ 14.00 $ 17.00 $ 18.00 $ 19.00 $ 68.00
2014 $ 14.00 $ 17.00 $ 18.00 $ 19.00 $ 68.00
2015 $ 14.00 $ 17.00 $ 18.00 $ 19.00 $ 68.00
2016 $ 18.00 $ 19.00 $ 37.00
2017 $ 19.00 $ 19.00
Please be aware that these are only estimates and we have not involved
Ehlers as yet. Should Council find that this proposal has merit, we would
review this information with Ehlers and update this information with all
the current market data.
�
City of Fridley
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager �� PW05�030
�
FROM: Jon t�l: liaukaas, Public Works Director
DATE: April 15, 2005
SUBJECT: Rice Creek Watershed District
A portion of the 2005 street reconstruction project is in the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD)
and, therefore, we need to obtain a permit from them prior to beginning construction. We have
been working with them for the past few months to create a plan that is acceptable to tl�em and
meet their permit requirements. The RCWD rules are quite vague for reconstruction projects and
that is why this process has taken so long.
There are two primary issues the RCWD is looking for conslxuction projects to address: treatrnent
of storm water and infiltration/ground water recharge of excess runoff. In the District s opinion, our
street reconstruction project is a°land disttarbing act�vity in their definition of °development" and,
therefore, we are required to meet their rules despite the fact that we are not increasing the
impervious area at all. They have been relatively consistent on this issue for some time and only
give exemptions if the physical characteristics won"t allow it
The second issue dealing with infiltration is more af a prob{em. According to the District
ac#rtinistrator, their Board members have asked them to take a tighter interpretation of the rules
and require infiltration on all projects unless tl�e soils or ground water prevent it Rule C.3.k. reads
as follows:
Devetaprnent resulting in the creation of impervious surfaces must explicitly
adcl�-es.s use of besi management practices (BMPs) to first fimit the toss of pervious
area; and second, to infiltrate runoff which does occur from impervious areas to
the extent feasible considering site-•specific conditions. BMPs include the use of
vegetated swales, pond outlets perched above ground water levels, use of
infiltration systems, ....
In the District s opinion, even the replacement of our roads is considered creation of impervious
surfaces and, therefore, we must meet this infiltration requirement
April 15, 2005
Page 2
The treatrnent of the storm water runoff can be accomplished through the installation structural
storm water treatment devices similar to what we installed on the south side of Locke Lake. The
cost for this is estimated to be �60,000 to �75,000 for this area. To create underground
infiltration using perforated storm sewer pipe and large gravel beds is estimated to cost �60,000
to �90,000 for this area.
This becomes much more important in 2006 when the entire 3.6 miles of reconstruction is within
the RCWD and would require a permit and storm water improvements to meet their rules.
The City attorney, Fritz Knaak, has given us an opinion that the District rules may not be
enforceable. We would like to discuss with the City Council to what extent we should fight the
RCWD on these requirements.
Jtlti:cz
City of Fridley
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager���
FROM: Jon t1. 'flaukaas, Public Works Director
DATE: April 12, 2005
SUBJECT: Community Park Ballfield Regrading
PW05-029
When putting together the 2005 str-eet reconsfi uction project, we realized there was going to be
a substantial amount of excess granular material that could be used to improve the drainage of
the Community Park ballfields.
We will see a savings of several thousand dollars by having the material disposed of and graded
out at Community Park, but it will not offset the additional expenses of completing the project
The seeding, infield construction, changes to the fencing and installation of a new imgation system
will cost an additional $60,000 to �70,000. This would have to be a fund transfer to make the
money available.
This project can significantly improve the quality of our playing fields and attract high quality
players and tournarnents to our system. The three year phased approach structures the project
in such a way that the current activities will be minimally impacted.
We would like to discuss this with the City Council at the upcoming conference meeting on April
18, 2005. Recommend the City Council approve the proposed project to regrade the Community
Park ballfields.
Jtltl:cz
City of Fridley
TO: William W. Bums, City Manager �
� �
FROM: Jon t�tlaukaas, Public Works Director
DATE: April 12, 2005
SUBJECT: Lawn Sprinkling Restr-ictions
PW05-028
The Water Enterprise Fund is expected to realize a net operating loss in excess of �280,000 in
2005, based on usage over the past several years. This is primarily because of the recent Charter
Amendment that limits the increase in the water rate to 1.8%. This limited increase does not cover
the increase in power costs, permitting, chemicals, backwash disposal and other outside costs of
production to the City. In essence, it costs the City �1.31 to produce 1,000 gallons of water and
we can only charge �1.12 per 1,000 gallons of water. We lose money on every gallon of water we
produce.
ln order to promote water conservation and reduce or limit our losses to the Water Fund, we
propose to have the City Council enact a lawn sprinkling restriction beginning this summer. While
an out right ban on lawn sprinkling would do much more, it becomes very punitive and will onty
hurt Fridley"s image.
The most common form of lawn sprinkling restriction is the odd/even method. Properties with an
odd number address are allowed to sprinkle on odd numbered dates and vice versa. Watering
would also be restricted to only the moming hours between midnight and noon to reduce the
amount fost through evaporation. This is very common throughout the metro area. Other cities
that have enacted such ordinances have experienced a 10% to 20% reduction in the peak water
use.
We would educate our citizens through the newsletter, the Fridley cable channel, the Pocus I`lews,
the Star Tribune 1`lorth Metro Section, and our City website.
Enforcement would be relatively simple but would take up some staff time. We propose to allow
one warning followed by fines for future infractions.
We would like to discuss this issue with the City Council at the April 18, 2005 conference meeting
and recommend the City Council enact a moming odd/even lawn sprinkling ban immediately.
Jt1tl:cz