HRA 01/09/1986 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING
THURSDAY, JANUARY 9, 1986 7;00 P,M,
City of Fridley
AGENDA
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING THURSDAY, JANUARY 9, 1986 7 :00 P.M.
Location: Council Chamber
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Housing & Redevelopment Authority Minutes : December 12, 1985
ADOPTION OF AGENDA:
UPDATE ON UNIVERSITY AVENUE CORRIDOR 1 - 1H
REVISED RESOLUTION NO. HRA 21-1985 REQUESTING CITY COUNCIL
TO SELL G,O. TAX INCREMENT BONDS 2 - 2F
HRA'S OPTION ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
63RD AVENUE AND UNIVERSITY AVENUE SERVICE ROAD 3 - 3K
REVIEW S-2 ZONING FOR 100 TWIN DRIVE-IN PROPERTY 4 - 4G
LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR RELOCATION EXPENSES FOR TENANTS AT
5747 CENTRAL AVENUE N E 5 _ 5E
EXECUTION OF QUIT CLAIM DEED ON LOT 6, BLOCK 1 , FRIDLEY PLAZA
ADDITION 6 - 6E
CLAIMS , 7
OTHER BUSINESS:
ADJOURNMENT:
CITY OF FRIDLEY
HOUSING & REDEVELOR'1ENT AUTHORITY
MEETING
DECEMBER 12, 1985
CALL TO ORDER :
Chairperson Commers called the December 12, 1985, Housing & Redevelopment Authority
meeting to order at 7:08 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Larry Commers, Elmars Prieditis, Duane Prairie, Walter Rasmussen,
Virginia Schnabel
iMeiabers Absent: None
Others Present: Nasim Qureshi , HRA Director
Samantha Orduno, City of Fridley
Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator
John Flora, Public Works Director
Rick Pribyl, Acting City Finance Director
Dave Newrian,Ci ty Attorney
Jim O'Meara, O'Conner and Hannon
Jim Casserly, Miller & Schroeder,
Dennis Schneider, City Councilman
Gordon Backlund, State Representative
Dave Weir, Woodbridge Properties
Sid Inman, Holmes & Graven
(See attached list)
APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 14, 1985, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO APPROVE THE NOV. 14, 1985,
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENTAL AUTHORITY MINUTES AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
APPROVAL OF NOVEIIBEf 25, 1985, SPECIAL HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO APPROVE THE NOV. 25, 1985,
SPECIAL HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES AS WRITTEN.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE ,MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY f4EETINGi DECEMBER 12, 1985 PAGE 2
1. PRESENTATION BY STATE REPRESENTATIVE GORDON BACKLUND:
I•1r. Corners stated that Representative Gordon Backlund, who was serving on
one of the committees dealing with the funding of education, had asked to
cone to the meeting to give the HRA some information relative to school aid
and the effect, if any, he might envision as a result of the tax increnent
financing that has taken place throughout the state.
Representative Backlund stated that they have been holding hearings in the
School Aids Finance Division of the House, and the School Aids Finance Division's
purpose was to fund Kindergarten through 12th grade education in Minnesota,
made up of partial state aid and partial local tax revenue from property tax.
During the interim, they are going to study two particular areas that have to
do directly with property tax, one is fiscal disparities and the second is tax
increment financing. He thought it might be of interest to the HRA to know
they are, in fact doing this and to gain the HRA's insight and thoughts and
recommendations regarding what they should do as far as looking at these issues.
Representative Backlund stated they held a meeting that day, one of many
hearings, on tax increment financing and the way tax increnent financing affects
school aid formula itself. They are going to be making some recommendations to
the Tax Committee and the Tax Committee will be looking at that as a topic during
the Feb. 1986 session.
Representative Backlund stated that as he understood tax increment financing,
when the HRA, through the City, approves a tax increment district, that district
is developed and the increased revenue for that goes to pay the bond. The input
from other taxing authorities, school districts, watersheds, the county, and
anyone else, was an indirect informal type of input as opposed to veto power
or direct input.
Representative Backlund stated their input, as they are going through the
process, is after the bonds are paid off, there is excess money left over some-
times, and the tax increment districts of the cities have options available to
them under the statutes right now:
1 . They can use the money to pay off other districts.
2. They can give the money back to the other taxing authorities.
3. They can basically use it for whatever they want.
Representative Backlund stated they are looking at the school aid funding
because they guarantee a level of funding for education and part of that is
made up from property tax. If the tax increment district is in fact paying
off its bond early and has extra revenue coming in, they are looking at a
possible source of revenue by having it agreed that the extra money would be
shared among the taxing districts,not only in the city, but also the county
and state education, as well as any other district.
Representative Backlund stated they have not come to any conclusions, other
than they were presented with this information. His reason for appearing before
HOUSINS & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1985 PAGE 3
the HRA was to get the HRA's opinion as a group and as individuals as to whether
they should look at the statutes and make an adjustment so when a tax increment
bond is, in fact paid off and paid off early, should that money then be distri-
buted to the other taxing authorities, should it be used for a third purpose,
or any other ideas for the best use of the money?
Representative Backlund stated the second part of this was looking at the
fiscal disparities overall . The way the bill has been implemented, he did not
foresee any changes in it, hut, in his opinion, it should be looked at as part
of the overall property tax change.
Mr. Rasmussen suggested Representative Backlund write the HRA members a letter
addressing these concerns so the HRA members could give it some thought before
respondi ng.
Representative Backlund stated he would be happy to do that. He stated nothing
was going to be done formally until the sessions begin in February.
Mr. Ccnmers stated the HRA had discussed at various times if there was any
vehicle of getting some of this money back to the school districts. They had
not been able to come up with any kind of idea.
Representative Backlund stated that it was a legitimate option now under the
statute.
Mr. Newman stated his office, as well as Jim O'Meara's office, had done some
checking on this, and it was their opinion it wasn't provided for under the
statute. If what Representative Backlund said was correct, then that statute
should be clarified.
Representative Backlund stated he would be happy to provide the HRA with that
information.
Mr. Commers stated the HRA appreciated Representative Backlund' s coming and
bringing them up to date on what was going on at the State Legislature.
2. CONSIDERATION OF REVISED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH LOU LUNDGREN:
Mr. Qureshi stated the project had been reduced from 234 units to 118 rental
units and 1 manager's unit, and from 12 stories to 6 stories. The HRA will
be providing only one floor of underground parking. Because of this substantial
change, the HRA is being asked to approve the resolution which reaffirms the
development agreement with these changes.
Mr. Rasmussen asked about the rent structure.
Mr. Lundgren stated the rents ranged from $567 for one bedroom to $1 ,000 for
three bedrooms. He stated the units are all large, and the rents do include
all untilities. An underground garage is $45/month.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1985 PAGE 4
Mr. Prieditis stated that besides the substantial changes to the height and
number of units, had the concept of the building changed?
Mr. Lundgren stated there were no other changes in the quality of the building.
The building will be built of very high quality materials; however, they have
added an additional amenity, an enclosed small swimming pool, that was not
included with the 12 story building. They have also done some minor plan
change in terms of relocating and centralizing the exercise room, sauna, and
those kind of amenities, instead of in different locations which they were
before.
MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION
NO. HRA 18 - 1985, RELATING TO THE AMENDED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
HRA AND FRIDLEY PLAZA ASSOCIATES.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Qureshi stated Mr. Lundgren would like to go on Mr. Levy's property to do
some soil borings and some surveys. Mr. Newman has been trying to formalize
an agreement with Mr. Levy. Mr. Levy has agreed to allow Mr. Lundgren to go on his
property, but he wants the whole parcel he owns treated as one parcel for
acquisition purposes. It was the city assessor's and Mr. Newman's opinion that
it would really not impact the acquisition process.
Mr. Qureshi stated the HRA' s next meeting was Thursday, Jan. 9, 1986. Would
Mr. Lundgren be willing to work around this until the next meeting when they
would have more detailed information?
Mr. Lundgren stated he had no problem with this being considered at the
Jan. 9th meeting.
3. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT OF THE 100 TWIN DRIVE-IN SITE:
MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARING OPEN AT 7:43 P.M.
Mr. Qureshi stated the properties being discussed were three parcels which
are presently being used as the 100 Twin Drive-in Theatre, and another piece
of property owned by Mr. Gerald Johnson, which is northeast of the drive-in
property. Also, there was an outlot owned by Mr. Johnson which would also be
part of the agreement and acquisition for some right-of-way needed to do
intersection improvement.
Mr. Qureshi stated this was a nine-phase development. The developer had
neighborhood meetings where the proposal was discussed with the neighborhood.
Per the HRA's instructions, notices were sent to a much broader area than
required and notices would be sent for future meetings on this development.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETINGS DECEMBER 12, 1985 PAGE 5
Mr. Commers asked Mr. David Weir to give a general overview of the proposed
development.
Mr. Weir stated they were proposing a master plan office development. The
overall development calls for approx. 748,000 sq. ft. of space, primarily
office structures, a free-standing restaurant, and a business class hotel. He
stated they have been working for a number of months trying to negotiate with
Mr. Johnson for his property. At this time, they have not been able to get
an actual signed agreement.
Mr. Weir stated the overall concept is a campus approach. One thing they feel
is extremely important is to go in and develop the total site in terms of the
infra-structures, landscaping, street system, and create an environment and
set the tone right from the onset.
Mr. Weir stated the traffic situation has been one of extreme importance to
them. Two weeks ago, they had a meeting with the neighbors, and the neighbors
have had a long-standing concern about the traffic situation. Through the
efforts of city staff, he felt they have come up with a reconfirmation of what
is needed for the interchange. He stated that at this time, he would like to
ask Mr. Jim Benshoof, Benshoof & Assoc. , who is a Registered Transportation
Engineer working with Woodbridge, city staff, and outside engineers, to make
sure the kinds of things being proposed for the development will enhance the
situation and now continue to aggravate an existing problem.
Mr. Benshoof stated they have conducted detailed traffic analysis of this
proposed development and its implications on the roadway system in the area.
He stated he would summarize their findings.
Mr. Benshoof stated they have looked at the implications on the local roadway
system and the regional roadway system, Highway 65 on the east, 694 on the
south, and Highway 47 on the west. As to the local street situation, the
City has planned improvement to the frontage road between 57th Ave. and 7th
St. , just to the west of the development. That will be beneficial in accommo-
dating traffic between this site and the west from Highway 47, thereby providing
an alternate route that will relieve 57th Ave. and 7th St.
Mr. Benshoof stated they projected future traffic volumes to the year 1999
that would occur after the development was in place. Seventh St. , in particu-
lar, and other local streets, they found well within the normal standards and
guidelines for the type of roadway for which they were designated.
Mr. Benshoof stated the traffic control at the intersection of 57th Ave. and
7th St. very likely will need to be upgraded to a 4-way stop prior to the time
of full development to accommodate the projected volumes. Similarly, the
traffic control at the intersection of the frontage road and 7th St. is
currently and will have to continue as a 4-way stop to accommodate projected
volumes.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1985 PAGE 6
Mr. Benshoof stated that as the implications of the development on the
regional roadway systems, they found there were several improvements that
will be of benefit to serving the traffic on those roadway systems related
to this development:
1. The upgrading of 694 planned for 1988 to provide 3 lanes in
each direction.
2. The 610 bridge over the Mississippi River will provide a very
important alternative crossing of the river and will relieve
some of the usage that now occurs in this area of Highway 65
and Highway 47.
Mr. Benshoof stated they did find a need for upgrading the intersection at
Moore Lake Drive and Highway 65. The intersection is now operating at
capacity limits, and even without this development with just the natural
growth that will occur, the intersection would need upgrading. They have
developed a concept plan for that upgrading that will provide an additional
left turn lane from the south to proceed to the west; an additional lane
for movements from the north into the site and to the south; the upgrading
on the east leg of Old Central in accordance with the plans already developed
for the city. They believe those plans are right on target for what is
needed on the east leg of the intersection and will complement the improve-
ments on the west leg.
Mr. Benshoof stated the plans are in a concept stage at this point subject to
further refinement. They are working with the City Engineer, city traffic
consultant, State Dept. of Transportation, and Anoka County. They find that
with these improvements, the intersection will accommodate projected 1999
traffic volumes at about the sane level of service as is presently being
provided with existing traffic volumes.
Mr. Benshoof stated they will be preparing a specific traffic report to be
submitted at future meetings.
Mr. Qureshi reviewed the development agreement with the HRA.
Mr. Comers stated Mr. Rasmussen was going to review the financial situation
of Woodbridge Properties and give a brief report.
Mr. Rasmussen stated he had a meeting with Mr. Dave Newman, and he was satisfied
with this project itself and with Uoodbridge Properties' financial situation.
Mr. Casserly reviewed the financial numbers with the HRA.
Mr. Commers asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to make
any comments regarding this proposed development.
Mr. Kirk Hart, Skywood Inn, stated he was representing the Fridley Chamber
of Commerce. The Fridley Chamber of Commerce would like to go on record that
they were behind this new development. They conducted a survey and had an
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1985 PAGE 7
•
overwhelming response of their members in favor of the proposed development.
He stated the Chamber of Canmerce's only concern was they would like to see
the hotel/convention center phase moved up from 8-9th phase to possibly the
first, second, or third phase.
Mr. Weir stated they would be happy to move the phasing of the hotel up, but
from past experience, they have found it does not always work to use an
hotel as an inducement to lease office space. They are somewhat torn on this
issue. He stated there are a lot of employees in the area, and there was the
possibility of getting an agreement from employees in the area committing to a
number of room days per year. At this time, they have not had time to explore
that possibility.
Mr. Weir stated hotels are extremely risky to build and operate. They want
to make sure they get the very best hotel that complements the other efforts
they are undertaking, and they want it to be market-driven.
MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO RECEIVE THE LETTER DATED
DEC. 11, 1985, FROM DANIEL C. FICKEN, CHAIRMAN OF THE FRIDLEY CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, INDICATING THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE'S SUPPORT OF
THIS PROPOSAL.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Robert Gordier, 5705 Quincy St. , expressed his concern about traffic and
that traffic was operating at capacity limits on West Moore Lake Drive and
Highway 65 right now. He was also concerned about how the skyline would look
from his home with the high office buildings.
Mr. Weir stated the 8-story building would be about as high as the drive-in
screen is right now on the property. He stated part of the rationale for the
location of the buildings was to pull them away from the residential area;
also part of the rationale in getting them closer to the freeway related to
the noise issue as well , yet providing different heights of buildings so there
was no constant change.
Mr. Weir stated the project was scheduled over a 9-phase process. Their first
Wuilding, a 6-story building, will be started in the spring, and the others
will be built as the demand is produced. They believe some of the buildings
will be occupied by single tenants on a "build to suit" basis.
Mr. Weir stated Woodbridge Properties was being asked by the City to commit
to certain levels of value related to the repayment of the tax increment bonds.
This involved a tremendous amount of engineering work to be able to deliver
those values which should translate into tenants being able to occupy the space.
They are extremely concerned about having to live with the current problems that
exist there today. It would not be something that would promote the best
interest of thepark or for the city.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1985 PAGE 8
Mr. Weir stated they would like to ask the HRA to encourage the City Council
to authorize staff to really do whatever is necessary relative to undertaking
the final working drawings as fast as possible.
Mr. Qureshi stated Mr. Weir was asking that the City actually employ the
engineers that he has been working with in the past so they can design the
roadway system, utilities, public improvements, etc. The City was saying it
would not expend any monies out of the GO bonds until they are both assured
the whole project is going to be approved. Mr. Weir doesn't want to wait to
do all the design work, so one mechanism would be that the City hire Wood-
bridge's engineer to do the work contingent upon proceeding with the project.
This might be a way of relieving some of Mr. Weir's concerns and accelerating
some of the needed improvements they are talking about.
Mr. Qureshi stated that if the HRA approves the development agreement, they
might want to encourage the City Council to work out some arrangement where some
of the design of public improvements could be expedited.
The HRA members felt that was something the City Council would do anyway.
Ms. Sadie Gunderston, 5707 West Moore Lake Drive, stated one of the maps of
the project she had looked at showed her driveway being cut off and the
driveway extended. She was concerned as to whether she would have to pay for
the cost of extending her driveway.
Mr. Qureshi stated that when the plans are finalized, they will be contacting
her. If there is any reason to extend her driveway, the City would pay for it.
MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HARING CLOSED AT 9:18 P.M.
4. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A
CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN THE HRA AND LAKE POINTE INVESTMENT CO. :
MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION
NO. HRA 19 - 1985, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE
DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN THE HRA AND LAKE POINTE INVESTMENT CO.
Mr. Qureshi stated this approval of this resolution provides that the HRA
enter into a development agreement with Lake Point Investment Co. , and it also
authorized staff to enter into negotiations for acquisition of the property
allowing the development.
Mr. Newman stated that because of the tight timeframe involve0, there was a
provision in the Mn. Statute that if necessary the HRA could acquire the
property within 90 days after a petition for condemnation had been served. In
order to accomplish that, he would recommend the following additional language:
• HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1985 PAGE 9
"Further, that the HRA's attorney be specifically authorized to
take possession pursuant to MSA 117.042 and to take any and all other
action necessary and desirable to carry out the purposes of this
resolution."
Mr. Newman stated that in order for him to feel comfortable about delivering
title by May 15, 1986, the HRA had to start acquisition no later than Jan. 15
and preferably earlier.
MOTION TO AMEND BY MR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO APPROVE
RESOLUTION NO. HRA 19 - 1985, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT
FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN THE HRA AND LAKE POINTE INVESTMENT CO.
FURTHER THAT THE HRA'S ATTORNEY BE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED TO TAKE POSSESSION
PURSUANT TO MSA 117.042 AND TO TAKE ANY AND ALL OTHER ACTION NECESSARY
AND DESIRABLE TO CARRY OUT THE PURPOSES OF THIS RESOLUTION.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. CONSIDEPATION OF APPROVAL OF $5.7 MILLION TAX INCREMENT LIMITED REVENUE NOTE:
MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION
NO. HRA 20 - 1985, APPROVING A $5.7 MILLION TAX INCREMENT LIMITED REVENUE NOTE.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CITY COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE THE
SALE OF TAX INCREMENT BONDS FOR THE EXISTING AND ADDITIONAL PROJECTS WITHIN
THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NO. 1 :
MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION
NO. HRA 21 - 1985, REQUESTING THE CITY COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE THE SALE OF TAX
INCREMENT BONDS FOR THE EXISTING AND ADDITIONAL PROJECTS WITHIN THE REDEVELOP-
MENT PROJECT AREA NO. 1.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
7. CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING FOR LEAGUE OF CITIES LOBBYING FOR TAX INCREMENT
LEGISLATION:
MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. RASMUSSEN, TO APPROVE FUNDING IN THE
AMOUNT OF $1,288.41 FOR THE LEAGUE OF CITIES FOR TAX INCREMENT LEGISLATION.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTING THE PROPOSED MINIMUM ASSESSED VALUE FOR COLUMBIA
PARK PROPERTIES:
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1985 PAGE 10
Mr. Qureshi stated they have had some discussions with a representative from
Columbia Park Properties. The representative has said that Columbia Park
Properties is heavily involved in their expansion in Columbia Heights and have
not been able to adequately review their development in Fridley. Columbia
Park Properties is requesting additional time to further finalize their plan.
They are going to be asking the City Council to actually authorize the sale of
$4.3 million industrial revenue bonds on Dec. 16. The City Council intends
to park those bonds and give Columbia Park Properties more time to finalize
their plan. He would suggest the HRA table this item until they get a little
more formal assurance from Columbia Park Properties.
MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO TABLE THIS ITEM.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. CLAIMS:
The HRA questioned this audit expense as the City has always paid this in
the past.
MOTION BY HR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. RASMUSSEN, TO APPROVE THE AUDIT
EXPENSES AS CONTAINED IN A LETTER DATED DEC. 3, 1985, CONTINGENT UPON HAVING
THIS CHECKED TO MAKE SURE IT IS LEGALLY REQUIRED.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
10. CHECK REGISTER:
MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE THE CHECK REGISTER.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
11 . OTHER BUSINESS:
Ms. Schnabel started that at their last meeting, the Commissioners questioned
the relocation cost to the tenants at the property being acquired at
5747 Central Ave. N.E.
Mr. Qureshi stated the HRA was legally required to provide relocation to the
tenants. The HRA has now acquired the building. He stated he would provide
the HRA with more information on why this relocation expense was legally required.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, DECEMBER 12, 1985 PAGE 11
•
ADJOURNMENT:
Chairperson Coroners declared the Dec. 12, 1985, Housing & Redevelopment Authority
meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
4t')L-
.Saba
Recording Secretary
.fig=' l•Yn.:.-.,� ......, ..
� } c
4 _
It . ,
. _. . ...f...,cz &c..e0)1..y...2.4.9,
,.
.,. ._,
_At& Ao? 9eps--- - - ..it,
, .
. ... ,,..,• , . .. ..
_ , ,
___
. ,
t0,4: ...r.,
j7 �' Y
__ _. , _
T__________
. I) ft- :lip:* ..--
tu.t....._
s L$T. .2%1 T' aft4Ii. 2,4S‘IN etak4:44
11.3 - ii)dfliht44' bLir"........ - j
j44 _c /2...eAr_ ___________ _C./.7, rte fix,o,cer?
-L ,t ti''..:,......if+J(...c_..reLeLtd.....„ S—.7Q 7iz-e4 774c-z? /a. //: '_,„-c_
n .-
frkt u- 3o y- 4 ,eezdorr /-%/,E
7,7,
s7/y W e 3 f' /hoot? hr to tri- I, *i2 -451 _ _ _
, , .....g,, /Le/at., i . H II. • f •
IA
Qb
--- _ C9'1.2 cr.. 92'00 Sfi4S'oti ncd,
. 17t,,„a _ Sc114 ”-- - - " ay. Gam.,. GK _.
axta IALUA. 1.411).49,444 arkt.4„3 _ . .
•
as :k'.' y
'' } ,. ...
' - _•
1
MEMORANDUM
CHAIRMAN COMMERS AND MEMBERS OF THE FRILLEY HOUSING AND
REDEVELOMENT AJThORTTY
FROM: NASIM M. QURESHI, HRA DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: UNIVERSITY AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY
TATE: JANUARY 4, 1985
Last July, five proposals were received in regard to a request for a University
Avenue corridor study. Three of the sutrnittals were selected by City staff for
review. These three proposals were presented to the HRA members on July 11,
1985. No action was taken on these proposals at that time. At the September 30,
1985 special meeting, the HRA instructed City staff to inform the local
businessmen of the results of the request for proposals and to schedule a
meeting in 1986 to discuss the proposals. Me consultants were to be informed
that any action in this matter was to be deferred until next year.
If the HRA desires to move forward with this matter, it will be necessary to
consider a timeframe for a meeting with those businessmen who have expressed
interest in the study; and, the amount of money and staff time the HRA is
willing to commit to this matter.
Several of those businessmen who have expressed interest in improvenents to the
University Avenue corridor have been invited to attend the HRA meeting on
January 9, 1985 to provide then with the opportunity to present their input into
the discussions regarding this matter.
�. IA
$ 111 DIRECTORATE _
o:
OFC ,� 00
PUBLIC WORKS _ _ _�=
CITYOf
FIt)DLEY MEMORANDUM
pm 8/1/85 PM85-240
air �N John Flora. Public rTiorks Director — — -1
$Odin Nasim Dureshi, City M nater _
University Avenue Corridor Study S InmanX
.
Upon the urging of a businessmen's group, proposals were submitted for improving the
University Avenue Corridor from 53rd to 85th, with primary emphasis focused on the
University/Mississippi (Center City) intersection. The group proposed that the
City contribute $5,000.00 to the study, them sharing in the additional costs.
Five proposals were received in regard to the corridor study: Staff has reviewed
these submittals and identified three for study:
Barton Aschman b Assoc. - Estimated cost $25,000.00
Short-Elliott-Hendrickson - S 17,000.00
Westwood Planning and Eng.Corp.- Not to Exceed S11,500.00
Barton Aschman's proposal focuses on planning, future development and a study
group to develop improvements, theme and development.
Short-Elliott-Hendrickson is strong in engineering, using public meetings to
obtain theme and public support. •
Westwood Planning and Engineering is heavy in landscaping and visual pollution.
Based upon these three proposals and the costs associated, it may be appropriate
for the HRA to schedule a special meeting with the business group and have the
three consultants provide a half hour presentation as a means of selecting a firm
and identifying a cost participation for the study. If the HRA is agreLable to this
let me know so that we may notify the firms accordingly, of if the HRA prefer something
different, let me know wo we can proceed with this item.
JGF:jmo
Enclosures / 5
cc:Jim Robinson _ /
cc:Mark Burch '+, C
1B
v
L
M
aC N C L O
.. � 0
C EA. V
�� ILk
C> Sc
Cr d C > C > >5
MCI C L A. 4+C -
610
in
VI CID a CL� C� H CL. - N
T rL. ICI
41)
0 O Co C O rC I- L
4. C. W A. -d t Sc i.)
E
H ^ ea Q M
r t
r >, C
D L. cu d r L L d
5- OCC L L C - E •le Lr
V1 dZ O= aW I- La ...)a
CC
8
a.•
CZ
O
L)
5.- N N N N
VI W k E z
C<
W H P7 P9 N PI
w-
Z
VI in 0 H 0'bN 0 0 ink in
H . ♦ • • • . •
O Q+ 10 P. •y N%.0 CO
I.) ..y N - .-- -CV Q
C
0
N
U Y
0 u -
N T
in L
Sc• OCi C
S I —
a 4 t
u
0vs fu toc
z c V C C
..-
4-
~ p , _k C W
N L I
N .0 O r
O m VV) a, G .t V
t.)
1C
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis.Minnesota 55454 612-332.0421
July 10, 1985
•
•
Mr. Nasim M. Oureshi
City Manager
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, Minnesota 55454
Dear Mr. Oureshi:
The University Avenue N.E. Corridor is _an "opportunity area" whose strength can be
capitalized upon to bolster the community's vitality. Fridley is a city on the move.
Already many internal changes have focused attention on Fridley's initiative. The civic
center, Columbia Arena, recreational improvements, and a number of new and
refurbished commercial and office developments attest to the City of Fridley's efforts to
create a new image.
The Corridor Stud) provides opportunities for establishing a unique identity,
strengthening Fridley's market area by intensifying land use along the corridor and
enhancing the University Avenue image. These changes are aimed at enriching Fridley's .
vitality.
Corridor and urban design elements, properly completed, can attain these goals by:
1. Developing a Fridley the that is identifiable along the University Avenue N.E.
corridor.
2. Enhancing the University Avenue N.E. corridor's image and visua:su :.! . at
intersection nodes.
3. Creating an. attractive deve�ment setting for desirable shops, stores, offices and
related land uses.
4. Strengthening and articulating the pedestrian environment by offering Lomfort and
security. •
5. Bufferin adjacent sensitive land use such as single and multi-family residentia:
dwellings along the corridor.
The University Avenue N.E. corridor offers some unique opportunities as well as co-r .le•
problems for the Cit) of Fridley. The transportation issues intrinsic to State Tru-'.
Highway 47 will place some constraints on Fridley's efforts to enhance the corridor's
visual character. Barton-Aschman's corporate expertise, consultant experience, previous
corridor and urban design studies as well as our established rapport with Mn7DT and
Anoka County are assets that can assist Fridley in accomplishing its ultimate goal.
[bi
3D
Barton•Aschman Associates, Inc.
Mr. Nasim M. Oureshi
3uly 10, 1985
Page 2
Our proposed scope of work for this project has been built around four key factors:
The opportunity to enhance the visual quality of the University Avenue N.E.
corridor and establish a unique identity which will reinforce Fridley's image as a
city on the move.
• The need to resolve the basic transportation and traffic engineering issues along
the corridor.
• The need to form a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) committee involving the
city staff, government agencies, land owners and developers to guide improvements
along University Avenue N.E.
• The need for interdisciplinary team approach to achieve the required tasks.
Barton-Aschman's extensive experience with both puhlic and private sector clients,
especially in urban design and development packaging for diverse projects such as malnr
urban streetscapes, mixed use suburban developments, and redevelopment areas, make us
uniquely qual:fied to develop aesthetically and economically viable corridor plans. This
experience allows us to serve as a link between the city, other public agencies, and
pri.ate interests to help spawn truly creative projects and plans.
We ha.e a long tradition of being at the cutting edge of community planning with
involvement in unique projects such as the Nicollet Mall, the Central A.enup
Commercia' District, the Hennepin-Lake Commercial Node Streetsrape and the Oxboro
Rede.elop meat in Bloomington. Our firm remains a national pioneer in urban desig-i,
transprtation systems, pedestrian facilities and redevelopment planning. Ba-tn---
Asrhman brings this ability to develop creative solutions for urban problems to the
University Avenue N.E. corridor planning process.
We see the University Avenue N.E. Corridor Study as a unique urban planning and des:;-,
opportunitwhich will require the coordination of a variety of disciplines, city statf and
the Technical Advisory Committee. We welcome the challenge it represents and looi,
forward to the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have any questions as
you review our proposal, do not hesitate to give us a call.
Thank you again for the opportunity to respond to your request for proposal.
Sincerely,
& arner
Senior Associate
BJW:kro
1E
I
SHORT-ELLIOTT-HENDRICKSON, INC.
art?, E CONSULTING ENGINEERS
sT ►ALR.moodisOTK• • 04IPP1b A IAlls WISCONSIN
WAL'SAL WISCONSIN
•
•
i July 10. 1985
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Fridley
6431 University Ave. N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
ATTN: Nasim M. Qureshi, City Manager
We are pleased to have the opportunity to submit this proposal
for providing you with professional services in connection
with the University Avenue Corridor Improvement. Staff
persons from SEH visited the project location on several
different days and had the opportunity to discuss with City
staff to develop a more thorough understanding of the needs of
the University Avenue area .
SEH has had the opportunity to provide aesthetic and econoric
development upgrades using a mixture of mediums including. h :_
not limited to, liohting, landscaping. art work , novelty iters
and recreation facilities. SEH foresees the use of various
combinations of these mediums to establish the there ani
highlight the four distinct featured areas of the University
Avenue Corridor. i .e. residential , commercial , city center .
recreational areas.
SEH has addressed these questions on many other similar
projects and has demonstrated the technical, project manage-
ment and communication skills to arrive at a successful
project. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to sub-it
this proposal to the City of Fridley for this work and loo'
forward to the opportunity of serving on this project.
Sincerely.
adde/61‘PWWI.ZA/2614-___ .:
buane w. Elliott,
President
kmt
1
!0 GOPHER BUILDING•222 EAST LITTLE CANADA ROAD•Si.PAIL MINNESOTA 5511-•PMOv! 412,48402'1
iF
"" WESTWOOD PLANNING i ENGINEERING COMPANY •
July 10,1985 1
Janes Robinson
Planning Coordinator
Civic Center
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, Minnesota 55432
Dear Mr . Robinson :
Westwood Planning & Engineering Company is pleased to suturlt
this proposal relating to the University Avenue corridor
improvements . We have reviewed the project description ,
have visited the corridor and discussed the project with
City officials. The information contained in this submittal
is our preliminary plan that will result on a detailed stud:
identifying the issues You have described and sClutiOr•s that
can be readily implemented. Following is on Outline that
indicates the contents 04 this proposal .
•• 6aci ground
•• Scope 04 Services
•• Team Comm. t tment
•• Experience
•• Availability
•• Cost
We believe that our approach to the University Avenue
challenge will result in a practical beaut , 4icat . or, plan
that will be accepted by the City staff , members 04 the
business communit> , the City Council , and the cOn.mur• ut • as a
whole . One item that you ma> find lacking, In tie Scope 04
Services section is community liaison . A fundamental
philosophy Of our firm is that the public Rust have an
oppurtunity 4or input or they mar not support the result .
Therefore , be assured, that as part 04 this concept stud,
the staff of Westwood will be available for meetings with
the affected public to gain their input , answer their
Questions and hear their concerns .
Our interest in this project is high and we I.Oc.k fCrwar .7 to
meeting with you for further discussion. Than* YOu for the
oppurtur.it> of making this submittal .
Sincerely,
t it,do 4,P? - e
*9e7
Richard L. Koppy, F.E.
Vice—President
r• i 'my:* * 110u-Lv•n •rw I** O•.t r.ru[uOta fMR w•s w.CIfs .
1G
July 9. 19E5 •
City of Fridley
6431 University Ave. N.E.
Fridley. MN 55432
Dear Nasim M. Qureshi :
Criteria Architects in association with Herb Baldwin, landscape architect
and Andrew Leicester, environmental sculpturist are pleased to male a
proposal to the City of Fridley for The University Ave. N.E. Corridor
Study.
We feel that our experience. creativity and methodology will lead to an
exciting and implcnental project. Andrew Leicester is a Nationally
renowned environmental designer and 1st place winner of the recent Fridley
intersection competition. Jerry Allan is an experienced architect who
has done sir. ilar projects for the U.S. Air Force in Independence, Missouri ,
St . Paul Energy Park. and finished 2nd in the Fridley lnterse:ticn compe-
tition. Herb Baldwin's sensitivity to the natural environment will
support the design team creating a new, strong but com;.assionate, street-
scope for Fridley along the Highway.
It sho„ld be further understood that we are the pee wh:, will a:loan,
do the work and not simply the principles representing the firm. he are
fully com".tted to do the work outlined on the work sched.le.
Thank you for your tine and consideration.
:.in:erely,
Gerald E. Allan
President
Criteria Architects Inc.
GEA/ak
Enclosures
1H
•
onsWt,rtp Planners One G►Ore!angl Terrace_— 1612j377 3536 _
Kan=sois 55403
Dehipr.t Shardlow. and (ban'incorporated
10 July 1985
Mr. Nasim M. Qureshi , City Manager
City of Fridley
Civic Center
6431 University Avenue, NE
Fridley, MN 55432
RE: Request for Proposal--University Avenue Northeast
Corridor Study
Dear Mr. Qureshi :
We are pleased to submit our University Avenue Corridor Study
Proposal for your consideration. Our Planning Fire is
combining forces with Strgar-Roscoe-rause;, Inc. , Traffic and
Civil Engineers , to provide a complete pallet of service:
needed to address all the possible issues pertinent to the
Ccrridcr Study.
Our Firm is in the process of preparing similar studies in both
suburban and urban areas of the Metropclitar. Area . We
presently are suitably staffed and geared up for such work . We
believe we are in a unique position to give you an excellent
product in a reasonable amount of time.
We are prepared to commit our full efforts to this project and
look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
•
C. John Uban
Vice-President
DAHLGREN, SHAf+=W, 'a^.d ['FAN, INC .
Enclosures
2
BND/fridley35
Extract of Minutes of Meeting
of the Board of Commissioners
of the Housing and, Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of
Fridley, Minnesota
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular or
special meeting of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley,
Minnesota, was held at the Fridley City Hall on the 12th day
of December, 1985, commencing at 7:00 o'clock P.M. , C.T.
The following Commissioners were present: COkrtERS, PRIEDITIS,
P AIRIE, RAS't1TSSEN AND SCi ?AEEL
and the following were absent:
NONE
*** *** ***
The following resolution was presented by Commissioner
Rasmussen , who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. HRA 21-1985
RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CITY OF FRIDLEY TO
ISSUE ITS $11,550,000 VARIABLE RATE DEMAND
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS AND
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A
TAX INCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT
IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners (The
"Board") of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and
- 1 -
2A
for the City of Fridley, Minnesota, (the "Authority") as
follows:
1. The Authority has undertaken or will undertake,
pursuant to and in conformity with Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 462.411 et seq. , the public improvements listed in
the attached Exh bit A within and for the benefit of the
Authority's Redevelopment Project No. 1.
2. It is necessary in the sound financial management
of the Authority that bonds be issued to finance the above-
mentioned improvements, and for such purposes the Authority
hereby requests the City of Fridley, Minnesota, to issue its
$11, 550,000 Variable Rate Demand General Obligation Tax
Increment Bonds (the "Bonds") .
3. The Tax Increment Pledge Agreement attached hereto
and made a part hereof is hereby approved, and the officers
of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to take
such steps as may be necessary to execute said Agreement, in
substantially the form as attached, upon approval and execu-
tion thereof by the City and upon the issuance of the Bonds
by the City, and to carry out and fulfill the provisions and
requirements of the Tax Increment Pledge Agreement.
Adopted by the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley,
Minnesota, this 12th day of December, 1985.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution
was duly seconded by Commissioner PRIEDITIS and upon
vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: CO'f±ISSIONERS CO'!IERS, RASMUSSEN, PREDITIS PRAIRIE & SCHINABEL
•
and the following voted against the same:
NONE
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
- 2 -
2B
TAX INCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT
This Tax Increment Pledge Agreement (the "Agreement" ) ,is
dated as of December 1, 1985; is by and between the City of
Fridley, Minnesota (the "City") , and the Housing and Rede-
velopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley, Minne-
sota (the "Authority") ; and provides as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a resolution (the
"Bond Resolution") awarding the sale of the City's
$11,550,000 Variable Rate Demand General Obligation Tax
Increment Bonds, dated as of the date of delivery thereof
(the "Bonds") , to provide financing for certain public
improvements (the "Improvements") made or to be made with
respect to the Authority's Redevelopment Project No. 1;
WHEREAS, to provide funds sufficient for the timely
payment of the debt service on the Bonds, it is necessary
for the Authority and the City to enter into this Agreement:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and
agreements hereof between the City and the Authority, and
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77(a) , the City
and the Authority hereby agree as follows:
1. For purposes of this Agreement, $3,915,000 of the
principal amount of the Bonds shall be deemed to be issued
for Improvements within the Authority's Tax Increment
Financing District No. 6 (the "District 6 Bonds, " which
definition shall include any obligations issued by the City
or the Authority to refund said Bonds) and shall be deemed
to mature on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
YEAR AMOUNT
1988 $ 20,000
1989 25,000
1990 35,000
1991 75,000
1992 125,000
1993 175,000
1994 215,000
1995 225,000
1996 340,000
1997 400,000
1998 565,000
1999 625,000
2000 1,090,000
2. In order to pay the principal of and interest on
the Bonds, when due, the Authority hereby pledges to the
City, for deposit in the Debt Service Account established by
1 -
2C
the Bond Resolution for the payment of the Bonds, and the
Authority shall pay to the City, tax increments derived by
the Authority from its Tax Increment Financing District Nos.
1 through 6, inclusive (except to the extent such tax incre-
ments have been heretofore pledged to other purposes,
including without limitation the Authority's $4,070,000 Tax
Increment Revenue Bonds of 1985, dated May 1, 1985, and
except to the extent that tax increments derived from the
Authority's Tax Increment Financing District No. 6 are,
pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Agreement, otherwise
pledged) , in amounts sufficient to pay such principal and
interest and, .f necessary, the Purchase Price thereof (as
defined in the Trust Indenture respecting such Bonds) , whe
due, and, to the extent such tax increments are ever insuf- Ott)
ficient for such purposes, and the City, pursuant to the
Bond Resolution, advances City funds to provide prompt and 1&!
full payment of the Bonds, the Authority agrees to reimburse �J
the City for such advances from such tax increments, when
collected by the Authority. . ' th res•ect to such tax incre-
ments received by the Authority in any calen.ar year , the
Authority shall pay the same over to the City pursuant to
this Agreement on the assumption that the Bonds bear inter-
est at the rate of 10% per annum, but to the extent that the
foregoing assumption results in excess increments for inter-
est on said Bonds in the Debt Service Account at the conclu-
sion of said calendar year, the amount of tax increments
required to be paid to the City in the following .ear pursu-
ant to this sentence shall be reduced by said amount.
3. In each calendar year, the tax increments which the
Authority shall receive in that calendar year from its Tax
Increment Financing District No. 6 shall be applied in the
following priority:
(a) First, to pay the principal and interest pay-
able in such calendar year on the District 6 Bonds, and
for this purpose, any prior redemptions of the Bonds
shall be deemed to be a redemption of the District 6
Bonds only if and to the extent that such redemption is
made with proceeds of the District 6 Bonds which were
not expended for the purposes for which the District 6
Bonds were issued;
(b) Second, to pay the amounts payable in such
calendar year on the Authority's $5,603,755.80 Limited
Revenue Capital Appreciation Tax Increment Note (the
"Capital Appreciation Note") ;
(c) Third, to prepay the District 6 Bonds, to the
extent that such Bonds are prepayable in that calendar
year;
2 -
2D
(d) Fourth, to prepay the Capital Appreciation
Note, to the extent such Note are prepayable in that
calendar year;
(e) Fifth, to compensate for any shortfall of tax
increments pledged to the Bonds pursuant to paragraph 2
hereof; and
(f) Sixth and finally, for application to any
other purpose which the Authority, in its sole discre-
tion, may determine.
4. An executed copy of this Agreement shall be filed
with the County Auditor of Anoka County, as required by Min-
nesota Statutes, Section 273.77(a) .
5. This Agreement shall become effective upon the
actual issuance and delivery of the Bonds.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Authority have
caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the day and
year first above written.
CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA
By
Its Mayor
ATTEST: By
Its City Manager
City Clerk
(SEAL)
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY
OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA
By
Its Chairman
By
Its Secretary
- / -
2E
EXHIBIT A
Re: $11,550,000 Variable Rate Demand General Obligation Tax
Increment Bonds of the City of Fridley, Minnesota
Project Expenditures:
Tax Increment Financing District No. 1
(Lundgren Project) :
Land Acquisition and Construction
of Parking Facilities $1,200,000
Tax Increment Financing District No. 6
(100 Twin Project) :
Soil corrections, street improve-
ments, walkways, drainage, lighting,
and landscaping 2,440,000
General Project Activities within
Redevelopment Project No. 1:
Street and intersection improve-
ments, walkways, lighting, soil
corrections, drainage, and
landscaping $ 3,420,000
Subtotal $ 7,060,000
Contingencies 147,799
Capitalized Interest $ 2,313, 101
Debt Service Reserve $ 1,732, 500
Credit/Liquidity Cost/
Placement Fee $121,100
Issuance Costs $60,000
Underwriter 's Discount $ 115,500
TOTAL BOND ISSUE $11,550,000
2F
Secretary's Certificate
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting
Secretary of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and
for the City of Fridley, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I
have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract
of minutes of a special or regular meeting of the Board of
Commissioners thereof, duly called and regularly held on
December 12, 1985, with the original thereof on file in my
office and I further certify the same is a full, true, and
correct copy thereof, insofar as the same relates to the
approval of a certain Tax Increment Pledge Agreement and
other matters.
WITNESS my hand as such Secretary and the corporate seal
of the Authority this day of , 1985.
Secretary
[SEAL] Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City
of Fridley, Minnesota
3
MEMORANDUM
TO: CHAIRMAN COMERS AND O)MMISS]ON ;EMBERS OF THE FIRILEY HOUSIIG
AND REI E VELD M NT AUTHORITY
FROM: NASIM M. QURESHI, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: BRA'S OPTION ON PROIFRTY MATED SCUM OF THE FRIILEY STATE BANK
ON 63RD AVE. AND THE UNIVERSITY SERVICE ROAD
HATE: JANUARY 2, 1986
In 1982 the HRA entered into a Contract for Private Developnent with the Fridley
Plaza Office Partnership for the development of the office building in Center
City. The agreenent contained a Letter of Understanding which provided that the
HRA pay up to $90,000 of the cost of thePartnership's IRB issuance plus the
tr►derwriter's discount. The actual price paid by the HRA was $90,000. In return
for this, the Partnership granted to the BRA an option to purchase the 30,200
square foot property at the SE corner of 63rd Ave and University Service Road.
This option will expire on February 1, 1986.
Should the BRA decide to exercise the option, the terms of the Letter of
Agreement stipulate that the HRA shall pay to the Partnership the sun of $10,000
plus any unpaid property taxes. If the HRA does not exercise the option by
February 1, 1986, the Partnership shall pay to the BRA the initial $90,000 plus
interest of 10% per annun fran the date the Agreement was signed. The interest
and principle anoints are:
9/28/82 $90,000, P only
12/31/82 $93,350, P & I
12/31/83 101,585, P & I
12/31/84 111,743, P & I
12/31/85 122,917, P & I
2/1/86 .123,976, P & I
The final principle and interest amount represents a per square footage cost of
$4.10 that the Partnership shall pay to the BRA if the option is not exercised.
If the option is exercised, the BRA shall pay the $10,000 combined with the
$90,000 incurredcost paid in 1982 for a total of $100,000 or $3.31 per square
foot.
According to David Newman, the BRA has until February 1, 1986 to decide to
exercise its option or allow the property to remain in the hands of the Fridley
Plaza Office Partnership. Mr. Gus Doty has presented a proposal for development
of this property in the event that the BRA does not choose to exercise its
option.
Therefore, it is necessary that the HRA consider this option and decide what
action is to be taken in this matter.
34
CITY OF FRIILEY
MEMORANDUM
TO: DAVID N WW N
FROM: NASD! M. ¢TRESHI, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: HRA'S OPTION PURCHASE PROPERTY FROM IBE
FRITLEY PLAZA OFFICE FARMERSHIP
ATE: DECEMER 27, 1985
Enclosed please find a copy of the Letter of Agreement between the Fridley
Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the Fridley Plaza Office Partnership.
The second page of the Letter of Agreement addressess the !IRA's option to
purchase the 30,200 square foot parcel of property south of the Fridley State
Bank. I intend to notify the Partnership that the HRA does not wish to exercise
its option to purchase the property. According to the Letter of Agreement, the
HRA is to notify the Partnership of its intent 30 days prior to any action.
Since the option expires on February 1, 1986, I need to know if I must notify
the Partnership by January 1, 1986 (which would be before the next HRA meeting) .
The Letter also mentions that the Partnership shall pay to the HRA up to $90,000
in the event that the option to purchase is not exercised. I would like to know
the exact amount the Partnership would owe the BRA if the option is not
exercised.
Please review the enclosed material and advise me by Monday, December 30, 1985
as to the necessary action to be taken regarding the aforementioned items.
3B
MEMO
TO: Nasim M. Qureshi, •
Executive Director HRA
FROM: David P. Newman ,?'_
RE: HRA's Option to Purchase Property from the
Fridley Plaza Office Partnership
DATE: December 30, 1985
At your request I have reviewed the Contract for pri-
vate redevelopment between the Fridley HRA and the Fridley
Plaza Office Building Partnership Dated September 28 , 1982 .
In particular you have asked for my interpretation of
paragraph 3 contained in the Letter of Agreement which is
attached as Schedule G to the Redevelopment Contract. In
reviewing the Contract for redevelopment I have not been
able to locate any reference to Schedule G in either the
body of the Contract or in any of the other Schedules
attached to it. As a result, my interpretation is based
solely upon the contents of the "Letter of Agreement" .
It is my opinion that the HRA has until February 1, 1986
in which to decide whether or not to exercise the Option.
Upon making that determination it must then advise the rede-
veloper within thirty ( 30 ) days. This interpretation is
based upon the fact that the Agreement provides that the HRA
must notify the redeveloper "within thirty ( 30 ) days of that
action" . It is my interpretation that the language "that
action" refers to the HRA' s exercising its option. In other
words, the Agreement requires the HRA to decide whether or
not it is going to exercise this option on or before
February 1, 1986 . This constitutes exercising the option.
The actual closing, if required, would take place at a
future date. Once the option has been exercised the HRA
must then give notice within thirty ( 30 ) days of exercising
the same.
In the event that the HRA does not exercise the option
then the redeveloper must pay to the Agency "the sum up to
$90 ,000. 00 plus the accrued interest at ten percent per
annum as conditioned in paragraph 2 of this Agreement on
February 1, 1986 . " Although this was not very well written
it appears that the intent is for the redeveloper to pay to
the HRA that sum up to $90 ,000.00 which the HRA advanced to
the redeveloper for reimbursement of costs incurred in
issuing an industrial revenue bond and related underwriters
fees. In other words, the amount which the HRA paid to the
redeveloper under paragraph 2 is the amount which the rede-
veloper must now repay to the HRA plus interest at ten per-
cent per annum.
eery f a 7i4elevFRtat,EY a!OUS!NG At4i,
f REHABILITATION AUT1 i0iZITY
n " ,..,,-, , -.
$43t upimorsin, AVENUE PIE FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 AREA CODE 612 PHONE 571-3450
is
_ :, ILI . 21611 rOtt► r tc. 1 2 wRCNASE
bag OWES
ORIGINAL
Sir end Ovum Ackner 4edg• PURCHASE ORDER ?hes Number Must Appear on
ewe Ceps and Advise Shipping ',.-P• -c.:'. Al! Correspondence, Invoices,
o..Ilw�nedwNil. Shipping Papers and Packages.
W) Fri•iley Plaza Office Bldg Partnersh
f5'.•4 .. a `.I•:f
ors:..••..A..as DEPT. HRA REa.NO. 26127
e+'7 as01rota otuvorrs o. 0 SNIPPING POINT CA coesnue I NG Do NOT DueuciTE TERMS:
0 DESTINATION 0 NON-CONFQMING _%10 DAYS NET 30 DAYS
PA
mew •vasirrrr, NUARR ��lernom
UNIT� EXTENSION
1 Partial payment of the Industrial Revenue Bond
Cost of issuance and underwriters discount for
vlace,-,ent as per schedule 6 of the contract for
private redevelopment 971,OYI.01
{
•
P.O. No.
h: .k•, c.rt:`y that the
c _''.. c, sl:rv:: s 'is:ed hereon , •. •
f.-..t Leta re:..:cd, inspected. .
1:..: Nati �3'•_r::cto
r•!'e rc "....:d ii 149Z—
Ara:uat ckfd for F01 $ -0 .d
Authorized sign3 „-- - _ -
fRIDLEY HOUSING AND REQ LABBUTATION AUTHOR
" 1
I EXEMPTtiloml SALES TAX AS A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF FRIDLEY NO.8036361
_;fit” AFFIRMATIVE ACTION/EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 1 J
Sen Collations con im se gid• COMPUTER PROGRAMMING ,
Ata4 _ ,IICCT PROGRAM DIVISION AMOMR rump j mar
. rROGRAy i'. DIVISION AMOUNT
75 ,y . a 751 . . 75 $90.000. ; - • • —`
• •'1
7 +M[��e�r'Jf s
. zI` -- - -
I,. . alP 11"..._11""7"7"111,-- • Y'�PMtiiGREEN— CCOIm-NO
•PINK--*ECEIVING • GOLDEN ROD PURCi1ASNOG
ar3s
FRIDLEY 1'Oi'3t2ti"�i111,'_nal:LOP:'1:i:i' • • ERIDLSY T S` !!/CHs ii.s'4
.asi v4tcs�rrr w :•vZ z:. E. �..c77-' r ,' ._; ;..�; c
!:IDIXT. AM 5613= ytrCsL�tYtttl,-:.;TA 1 las ���+ Lra,
—.1101e_l_______.Ian "Esq
0
:,•� <, 90,000.0PA s******$90000**DOLLARS**AND**00**CENTStt*s ,_ r�:,r
FRIDLEY PLAZA OFFICE BUILDING PARTNERSHIP
gra
' NOT NEGOTIABLE
re-_ , : 1 4 I:ar: LO Lit? L Z.
r,a`- Er
r-
P1t201l=1 140.tw11110 -
RT.lRYs!_t).-2:it.4T A1UTN2Dr21TY
rnlD:.CY.NH saw=a
0o trots•IPS::2 WY:::-:..1' :;
•ATC 1 tttllCAl►TtOM I eliTsteu+�••�• •
AMCYNT
11-3-82 PARTIAL PAYMENT OF THE INDUSTRIAL 90,000.00
C REVENUE BOND COST OF ISSUANCE AND
UNDERWRITERS DISCOUNT FOR PLACEMENT ENT 75-4300-751-75
AND PER SCHEDULE G OF THE CONTRACT
FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPYEkT
IttitPt.WWI t
/ce/02 _ r O • e
twe,t.O f.c,tt14Oe 4,1StIV,,t r•,T«wcio,.:a
fl�LT► yt r..i Yea. ?O tA, Ni? PAY
•socoucTrow•
• • 1
- P... ...
, mn
atel stews.retlatets.or nation&ode n hos _ _.-__..._
weed to toss•tt+r.nstivs ectton to recast minorities ,
• : 4 n S _ and+ non into Ortrotovrtrent k encovr fume
' aand offset twenties erIth Thom It pr re as.s Ptselrrob t
Or services to cto IKessisa
. . 1
.. + ..
"" • i
tr trey. ..''s tilts 5 4....4_4111'1.s : #
► i.''sa4S1 : .. a:- ..,*' w *
i : . ,
•
I.: •, . `+eras .c..�+.wire-r....._..-.. —:r. •. •..,.- ." fi•:►. . r.•--r �._ ,s
»..R. ..-+.rr+.. i...
•
___.1
, . ...1::-...:-__......._
-}+ .� „ . 3'-....._.., .... . . . _ _ . .
. _
.`' -• S. -.- ` . ''V S s.' _ . .- .
'-+'7''F,7-:',4 -44. _ x 4 S,Z - .tea_ y.
3E
SCEOMaliG
•
OF AGREEKEHT.
This Agreement, Dated as of this 28*, day of Septer•+ber7, 1982, by and
between the Rousing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
hridley (hereinafter called the 'Agency') and Fridley Plaza Office Building
Partnership (hereinafter called the 'Redeveloper')
Witnesseth, that
WMEAEAS, an or before the date hereof the Agency and the Redeveloper have
entered into a 'Contract for Private Redeveopment' regarding certain real
property located in the Center City Redevelopment Project in the City of
Fridley, pursuant to whidh the Authority is to acquire certain property as
conditioned said 'Contract for Private Redevelopment' (hereinafter referred
to as 'the Contract').
WHEREAS, it is contemplated that pursuant to said 'Contract' the Redeveloper
will construct an office-building containing approximately 35,000 square
feet upon the redevelopment property.
I() , THEREFORE, the parties to this agreement, in consideration of the
pra-..ises, convenants and agreements made by each to the other, do hereby
agree as follows:
1. That the ARA agrees to purchase the Madsen Building legally described
as:
All of Lot 20 and South 23.7 feet of Lot 21, Block 3, Rees'
Addition along with West one half of vacated alley in said
Block 3 whidh adjoins said Lot 20 and South 23.6 feet of Lot
21, also following described parcel starting at center of
vacated alley in Block 3 at a point represented by an
extension of South line of said Lot 20 , Block 3 , then
easterly for distance of 30 feet, then northerly at right
angles for a distance of 30 feet, then westerly parallel to
extended South line of said Lot 20 for a distance of 30 feet
to centerline of said vacated alley, then southerly a
distance of 30 feet to point of begining and there
terminated. All of said parcel being a point of East one
half of vacated alley and Lot 7, Block 3, Rees' Addition to
Fridley Park.
This purchase would be for $115,614.00. The Redeveloper would
continue to master lease the property from the Agency for 6560.00 per
month until such time as the Redeveloper shall be located in the
35,000 square feet Office building being developed by the Redeveloper
on the Redevelopment Property. The Redeveloper will take full
responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the property with
no liability to the Agency.
3F
In addition, the Redeveloper shall provide to the Agency written
waivers of relocation from all subleases being held by the Redeveloper
waiving the Agency's obligation tb relocate under the laws of the
• State of Minnesota. In return, the Agency shall provide 619,386.00 in
relocation assistance to the Redeveloper to assist in the
Redeveloper's obligation to the subleases.
3. The Agency shall pay to the Redeveloper up-to 1904.000 of the
Industrial Revenue Bond cost of issuance and the underwiters discount
for their placement. The Redeveloper shall, in writing, sutrnitt proof,
of said cost to the Agency prior to said payment.
3. Tne Redeveloper shall give to the Agency for ore dollar and other good
and valuable consideration the option to purchase the following
described real property:
The North 100 feet of South 259 feet of North 1,507.5 feet
of West one half of West one half of East one half of
Southwest one quarter of Section 14-30-24 being a part of
moots 2_and 3 of Auditor's Subdivision 159-except the_part
taken for road.
The o tion shall continue until February 1, 1986. Ifthe Agency ;
•
3G
shall not convey the subject Property, or any part thereof, without
the consent of the Agency until a certificate of completion releasing
the Redeveloper from the obligations of said Agreement as to said
Property or such part thereof then to be conveyed, has been placed of
record. This provision, however , shall in no way prevent the
Redeveloper from mortgaging said Property in order to obtain funds for
the purchase of Property hereby conveyed and for erecting improvements
thereon in conformity with the Agreement, any applicable redevelopment
plan and applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of
Fridley, Minnesota.
It is specifically agreed that the Redeveloper shall promptly begin
and diligently .prosecute to completion the redevelopment of the
Property through the construction of the improvements thereon, as
provided in the Agreement.
Prarptly after completion of the improvements in accordance with the
provisions of the Agreement, the Agency will furnish the Redeveloper
with an appropriate instrument so certifying. Such certification by
the Agency shall be (and it shall be so provided in the certification
itself) a conclusive determination of satisfaction and termination of
the agreements and covenants of the Agreement with respect to the
obligation of. the Redeveloper and its successors and assigns, to
construct the improvements and the dates for the beginning and
completion thereof. Such certification and such determination shall
not constitute evidence of compliance with or satisfaction of any
obligation of the Redeveloper to any holder of a mortgage, or any
insurer of a mortgage, securing money loaned to finance the purchase
of the Property hereby conveyed or the improvements, or any part
thereof.
All certifications provided for herein shall be in such form as will
enable them to be recorded with the County Recorder or Registrar of
Titles, Anoka County, Minnesota. If the Agency shall refuse or fail
to provide any such certification in accordance with the provisions of
the Agreement and this Agreement, the Agency shall, within thirty (30)
days after written request by the Redeveloper, provide the Redeveloper
with a written statement indicating in adequate detail in what
respects the Redeveloper has failed to complete the improvements in
accordance with the provisions of the Agreerent or is otherwise in
default, and what measures or acts will be necessary, in the opinion
of the Agency, for the Redeveloper to take or perform in order to
obtain such certification.
S. In the event the Redeveloper herein (or any successor or assign)
shall, prior to the recording of the certificate of completion
hereinabove referred to:
(a) Subject to any unavoidable delay, as defined in the Agreement,
default in or violate its obligations with respect to the
construction of the improvements provided for in this Agreement
and the Agreement, or abandon or substantially suspend
construction work, and any default or violation, abandonment or
suspension shall not be aced, ended or remedied within thirty
3H
(30) days after written demand by the Agency to do so; or
(b) Pail to Fey real estate taxes or assessments on the Property or
any pert thereof when due, or shall place thereon any encumbrance
rance
or lien unauthorized by the Agreement with the Agency, or shall
suffer any levy or attachment to be made, or any materialmen's or
nectanic's liens, or any other unauthorized encumbrances or liens
to attach, and such taxes or assessments shall not have been paid
or the encumbrance ante or lien removed or discharged, or provisions
satisfactory to the Agency made for such payments, removal or
discharge, within thirty (30) days after written demand by the
Agency to do so; provided, that if the Redeveloper shall first
notify the Agency of its intention to do so, it may in good faith
contest any mechanics' or other lien filed or established and in
such event the Agency shall permit such mechanics' or other lien
to remain undischarged and unsatisfied during the period of such
contest and any appeal, but only if the Redeveloper provides the
Agency with a bank letter of credit in the a-ount of the lien, in
a form satisfactory to the Agency pursuant to which the bank will
Fey to the Agency the amount of any lien in the event that the
lien is finally determined to be valid and during the course of
such contest Redeveloper shall keep the Agency informed
respecting the status of such defense; or
(c) Transfer, in violation of the Agreement or this Agreer.ent, the
Property or any part thereof, and such violation shall not be
cured within sixty (60) days after written demand by the Agency
to the Redeveloper; or
(d) Default under the terms of a mortgage loan authorized by Article
VII of the Agreerent and the mortgagee under such mortgage loan
has orr iiced exercising any reredy due to such default or has
given notice of its intent to do so;
then the Agency shall have the right to re-enter and take possession
of the Property and to terminate and revest in the Agency the estate
conveyed to the Redeveloper, its assigns or successors in interest,
but subject to any mortgage authorized by Article VII of the Agreement
and to the rights of the mortgagee thereunder pursuant to the
Agreement.
9. The Redeveloper agrees for itself and its successors and assigns to or
of the Property or any pert thereof, that the Redeveloper and such
successors and assigns shall:
(a) Devote the Property to, and only to, office building and related
uses;
(b) Not discrirrinate on the basis of race, color, creed, national
origin, or sex in the sale, lease, rental, or in the use or
occupancy of the Property or any improvements erected or to be
erected thereon, cc any part thereof;
(c) Not cause the Property to be removed from the public tax rolls or
3I
to became exempt from assessment for general real estate taxes by
reason of any conveyance, lease, abatement, or other action so
long as the tax increment generated by the Property is pledged to
the payment of principal of and interest due outstanding bonds or
other obligations; and
(d) Assume and comply with the provisions of Section 6.3 of the
Agreement which provides in part that the Redeveloper shall not
apply for cc seek through achinistrative oc judicial proceedings
a rect,ction in the pccperty tax below $72,986. 1, 5/ 3, aoo
10. It is understood and agreed that the RedevelcQer shall capensate the
Agency for any costs incurred for the sale of Tax Increment General
Obligation Bonds for this Project due to the failure of the
Redeveloer to perform under this Contract.
It is intended and agreed that the above and foregoing agreements and
covenants shall be covenants running with the land, and that they shall, in
any event, and without regard to technical classification or designation,
legal or otherwise, and except only as otherwise specifically provided be
binding, to the fullest extent permitted by law and equity for the benefit
and in favor of, and enforceable by, the Agency its successors and assigns,
and any successor in interest to the Property, or any part thereof against
the Redeveloper, its successors and assigns, and every successor in interest
to the Property, or any part thereof or any interest therein, and any party
in possession or occupancy of the Property or any part thereof.
In amplification, and not in restriction of , the provisions of the
preceeding section, it is intended and agreed that the Agency and its
successors and assigns shall be deemed beneficiaries of the agreements and
covenants provided herein, both for and in their own right, and also for the
purposcs of protecting the interest of the ccrtuhity and the other parties,
public or private, in whose favor or for whose benefit these agreements and
covenants have been provided. Such agreements and covenants shall run in
favor of the Agency without regard to whether the Agency has at any time
been, remains, or is an owner of any land or interest therein to, or in
favor of, which such agreements and covenants relate. Tne Agency shall have
the right, in the event of any breach of such agreement or covenant to
exercise all the rights and reredies, and to maintain any actions or suits
at law or in equity or other proper proceedings to enforce the curing of
such breach of agreement or covenant, to which it or any other beneficiaries
of such agreement or covenant may be entitled.
A.
f. i • •i• •& I /fm. ,j ItW �, y - /rr yr r rw-a. .
I .0A•4444 t i 111 14 2___,. . ..1
*i
. 1'` I ''�l j it1.0.1s l d -
*' Ia11° , N a i . ' a,
.7)2. • 1 . 1,, „...--„,„ , 4°— . . .
I. - : 4. 0 3 a
6450 Is '
1)440 # —0 , A—
_ •
. 1 :.� �� ,• �� AL/CE I W I 6
tm• .4 0 . li
64 TM {a N.E. ►; 6151 •
•r� 4150 .
i .-r,., D "I :
1 • • I, �� /O� 4 0
• ADD ,J
ll /y J
.:• j ,..4., I " O - 1 �......,
11'' fE , l• I • : . ', , ar7 i e e •ter a� i.�✓ /I
+ � " ' ►'.. 310
:1,..r, 1 • / e. - ar W.111°,.'r . 1Yy4, r.. N
•
3 46at x� C.q.aaay 11401 j ..
)11 u 1 £' Qrriai a r !lJ ll t/ 11� h b �o
ii
B n> • t: �waaar,,.•,1/ 1 P . ,4f5 431 14 4t 9 415 w4 0
t '291 il IgrAUDTORS
, �' i �. + t
g1 !!..• W R• `• � r•r �In `0 " ''`j'1r.v 9 .
6
Ve �.a
ANE ; '.2 t (_`_ (.w) —= 3—= 6 1.1W ' .b„ 42_70` . 271 0 -
= g• • b Q .62jI 6L o t .r ., t b260
Vit° r / z19 3 1 oi.) i.Are ? {�..i .1 I ID.•. t, r_`�
30 •`� N ' • �i►J_ _ — �'� ` �b251 6ZS0 s S 4211 — 250.
,.:• i ..:` —627 SUBDfVISIO jam-" .% . Asia •i _ _ ► -,
LZLl1 I la..a-twt 1ia.: aL 2�24?4 !6241 62�p Z. (it�l b2`� j
So 1 6275 .reg_ --{ �� --
♦ 1 (150) f �32� kb y1 6,30 61 . �,
AVE _ !!ti
arr b
I I 1S • '" Ma-7 .6221 _ '� •4 11
s I 6t R ' 44ik Q
i N0. 59 _ r
• - �•Z �"'� •,j!w ; el .6211 4210 61J 1izo —,
. , + ` W 16201
' °°���' �/` Q M s' 6•.o 3 6200
at �..� (,190 N,_mill
/ ►fie e
iel
IVE- 1 r/ , 2l( VE,, • : v • . oc y„ 1
•1 - !� i 2 bat7/ �.6►70 _\ � •lc%�
•
= �. 1
' : r r� ; . a1 e ! • •, � Q .6160 .• i i
i.
•
'`.. -, ♦ . Y� .'• �'' i[•`3:' t•y1�t F `"•rt.'. f �'F',.Jw '� ``�Jw' . iR
L•tF •• •~'+ c' .^� .r `+t. .ar: ! 3i..r k't+.•tYa• �� �., s :. � ' �
`r 7�j ,i1 $•ae.1. V �. y t. 1 ; y
F • 7.t . `•• r 7 i--'-•
•.• •\ • • mac. • _ --•••• .; ` '.Y I♦.• 4
•
'Ir
• :� ati v44,4Ilk ...064yt� 2 , :. ., .11. r an, : , ►_ 3 : ,•,•,,r .4 , Vit.-_
•....i.it:t.. ,„. „• ,,..1 , ,
^ > tom• � .;' .a °* 1�• •pp S 4.
likti
;4 1--' '1,," 'A rs-''''. c,..t..:-.q r;.„ .,....,.. - .• :-.4..., _." 1.
404.44‘
ir
I.
%
SVIr
. �i♦,," • *�' # r► . } ;
• .04• � it't„ 1. t � a }a:• + itet ys, i '-. 1e...../!l , .. .4.... ,.tt , y 'yw tel .��tSrM ' , . Rt Kr ' • 'J�.t 'at w )0•21,...-1,1--4.I...._ .is ,,.yi •• Z 't'•` }' } .- t ♦•' :• • ! 1V : J� d r • r
• •
•
•
, ,. 4-.• L ,fit- ,•7-• . .. r. �i. - LS. ., A l •.1.'.4i.4• '•4, fit' �'_•� �
.-' • '! '1*. .i !•+i i1 .• •♦'3 _ 1 or.x•••.- _s- "%.,�'��y \ + i .- , * �. ! % *
..r. '‘• �•+/••:44..'...
�4 • '...1.---•a - "fes-i ,�t•' wt v ♦ s.A."3''/ s t i e. ' ,►Y � t.j ..�,} 'i�:•'✓"
•1, t ti .i 1. A 4-4 n • r • ' • �1* n+•d ''•• .-I-' 1 •:.i•_ . t'w'•�: '‘144.pj'
y 'i; �°ra `p. • �.±...t -.•••• ;., ... • tom' •?♦ , -rte V t 1 y »: * � ' �� `�,:
S• - w -.J! '1.1.-.;4',•;.; •ilk "•' ur • 'F'. tat "h • i. s:, .. f.a �77��II���2 Y' '�,j ''." i
i ♦ 4c• - k •' �,-t• y * ♦x+44 • CJI--•• j`�' • �' ��`: .
,•....•, t• •t _ • YY- : •4I Ij . F •Y ` ♦ lT RM ;
1•. mf} , ; • ••‘• y4y. C ! . ' is. I-! .. i
3.
•
1.
-> % s.' t '&75 ;6.41444.'71/ .1 t 5',It T '.t'' - •• :a. 1•_`w L• ••'. Ay'•j„1•atk
•
."4'.:•* -'L. J't',��,, -.....k-
- •r ty1,,,A,�•.i - -�`,a�;4��:+ft.'� _--#.'4 '..r•-..t, 1 �• �� 1��1. ♦�;�_0• �'�,;
- • .A ♦••••0••4•-•. .N),,
f�'.,• !x4..--4.:•,, _.'-' ' e.. • i y''1� +� •
A".C.,1 '`.• ..►-.. r: *t *
,aal
-,• y . rL
.- • ,:. '-. - .4.. ;I::••-i_4*„.;,...-,:,...: • .• ... *;;;;‘, li,-- . ,4;i•-t;0.-iti,• 1,-,,..-.,..‘..,:-, ,,c ,.11f.i.r..ti.,,
i. .1-• ' ' ,4 ••Akit• ?Att. "Z- --"jekhe..: - . .. 1 •--.749;:, '''1‘47,1 I it rt..t.. „: t..101 --ir::.,-.1-, ?v.. 4
T ~ -`ysa...2%h• • ...i- '`‘1•,,,,r''.• 1: •�:. i•. ,,,,•%, :Willa �.�3 4 .t „ Y�• '�i -ti• r••
•
•
•
"� el! +.f�• � !'�� - fi . }''fir"1.'4s•! 44-, ... ,� „ :}r •,�'el_ ,.' .,.-
-::.*-,, . - ..: .,..... .4z,v , ".., -,,-- 4..4"........,,,„ ,
.. ,.t/▪ .. 4., .. - w,..,..hl urp..-
•
,• -.4 -4. .-,t -- •• giii •44.A • , ``**.t?",a41&/1.,, `i ..;10,,,,..t:„. __. 1.•A "4 4 4 • '-,••• *
y+ •4• .1 : ` air r- JL. - I ;«•1
• • - ;. I A.- "i'-.r.°-.:,..•*"%cli'i*,..,...".."-iii,w- a. t tt.,
•
•
. kr,4 S..3r4 'PR :' 'Qti+,`= • a r.-l.sA•../N4....Act
•'1.' •?-1.,N,,t-' *. ...1,,,,4r.. ,;:. •�.++. •i-:..,• ;l-
4.- •�+ ♦ ♦t jyr -# ..�♦�. L. s..4rr t t.. S�•• .C`' i �•t .4 #,....k.‘„51.0N � .1„,.....,
• ,r r- '••♦�`- t- '• : s • ,.21'1::..
' iyi}+, •'' ,. , . S�'�" R1^. s ��•i'1 f �`.- „el. •4.1,
•r d-! f, ,lr ,. • - f. •• A. - t ttt 1� 'IIF •.� ♦ ,a
•l•` - _.r i. a Y:,-a • l !• , 6, `' ••F • i 144
'w.' [ ••• '.)'+, '0.j'�.
7 `. *'., r. :,-
........,.-.1.74,.. r j` . ,1%,.,..s. + i'' _i ;sir .It. • �7f`• = •f �.. 'j� t ,
«tel _ea:.
...A ....
••S •,*''\j �` i T, i"R ,48� . R a�•:� .;..
7.4•4 4- -'1:"!•4441•4•: . ..... •••€-W '41 !J.i• -1•"dt. . At' `. ...""--- -•••r ."'".-"AC • ",, - _ark• . .4 , _-.,‘,...,
•
.. •;.,-• -..r. .%,/,_ -.,''.`r^'+t.y ai.t .• �.. ••"r.- -t;, �'Ze•cs • '-... .xa• ••. '. -s,•.1%. +��i• 'S r h1 •-•-,,,t,:'J
4.:
art' , :' •-:`" �.�� .� 11 :-.4&r Ta '•�v if y'' r. �..`,, -S.,:a44":••. :r 1 •. •411,44:,? ��... ...
• j+ mi.•' r•i. ,+...- .- r.-1 `^ �' �♦Y� • s-r -;t .°- a• •� 4 . e i e•4t 7 ••*
•,..5..-••••-,....../....16,„g..._1.8.--- w:,=:, .r♦,.4.-er,a‘4....,•01,..-:. .y v ♦,.+''_ .3•` �•- x i s .17 a t4.,*
4. +.' •, •j 1i � N •-•--
•
�•-
- - -„,...' • .. , - -.-.7.„-;,-..-• - i j #. -••,„ "5 t ` '-,Y'a"r -_•-,,,,,y.r , •s
'F j •S I. rl�.t-\ �iil'�.•1••• J • [ • _ i Se •� • s L. wt` Y4
,' .4_ %' - " ....'2.' 1i►• a .�:•4 �'• .;a441.r •.A.•4 r `n'.`Y.:S� +4'. ' ' ;*fir 4•. 'ILO.
-'ad"`ibr.a.„ • - - _'. .„ _t.'" j-- ''''..t'• a' "- , 2.'3" • • -
4
CITY OF FRIDLEY
MEMORANDUM
MEMO TO: Planning Commission and City Council
MEMO FROM: Housing & Redevelopment Authority
MEMO DATE: January 9, 1986
REGARDING: Support of S-2 Zoning for Lake Pointe Corporate Center
Purpose
This correspondence is intended to express the Housing & Redevelopment
Authority's support for the applications for S-2 "Redevelopment District"
zoning, special use permit and plat for Lake Pointe Corporate Center. The
S-2 zoning will help to streamline the zoning approval process while tying
the rezoning to the proposed master plan.
intent
The Housing & Redevelopment Authority endorses the rezoning to S-2 of the
majority of the site as outlined in the attached public hearing notice
(Attachment A). The existing most northerly parcel of the drive-in site,
approximately 128 feet, described as Lot 22, Block 10, Donnay's Lakeview
Manor Addition, will retain it's present R-1 "Single Family" zoning. This
area will be reserved for use as a buffer to the residential area as well as
pathway, driveway and surface parking uses. Approval of the special use
permit for parking on R-1 will satisfy the existing R-1 zoning requirement
for this area. The westerly portion of the Johnson property will also retain
it's existing R-1 zoning and will be platted as an outlot to be reserved as a
green buffer area. The present and proposed zoning classifications for the
entire project are illustrated in Attachment B.
Background
The Lake Pointe Corporate Center, when complete, will consist of seven office
buildings, a hotel with convention facilities and a restaurant. Parking
facilities include low profile parking ramps, underground parking and surface
parking lots. The total construction will include close to 750,000 square
feet of new development, excluding parking ramps. The entire nine phases of
the project have been designed as part of a comprehensive master plan which
is directly tied to the now executed development agreement.
The development is layed out in a creative campus like fashion which inter-
relates buildings through proximity, orientation and structural components,
as shown on Attachment C. A consistent landscape motif complete with plazas,
fountain, abundant plant materials and pathways will also add to the creation
of a harmonious relationship between buildings and open spaces.
AA
Planning Commission and City Council
January 2, 1986
Page 2
Zoni11g
•
The majority of the site is now zoned C-3, "General Shopping Center", which
is the City's highest zoning. The development as proposed could proceed on
the drive-in portion of the site without any change in zoning classification.
However staff informs us there would be requirements for special use permits,
setback waivers and rezoning for commercial use on the Johnson portion of the
site.
The S-2 "Redevelopment District" zoning will provide for a streamlined review
process, allowing for the campus like layout while incorporating most of the
zoning needs under one action. In addition once approved under S-2, the
Woodbridge master plan would be locked into the rezoned site. This feature
of the 8-2 code provides additional security as to the future land use of
this site in the unlikely event that the Woodbridge development is not
realized.
Future Controls
Each set of building plans will require review and approval by the Housing &
Redevelopment Authority prior to issuance of a building permit. In the event
of any substantial changes to the master plan, S-2 zoning calls for
additional review by the Planning Commission and City Council. The Housing &
Redevelopment Authority suggests that some flexibility be agreed upon from
the onset, to allow for reasonable modifications to the plan. The following
framework will serve as a guide for determining reasonable versus substantial
change.
Reasonable Change; Housing & Redevelopment Authority/Staff Approved.
1 . Building location modifications which do not place buildings any more
than thirty feet closer to R-1 zoned land, not including parking ramps.
2. Parking ramp location modifications which do not locate ramps in R-1
zoned land.
3. Parking lot or ramp modifications which do not involve expansion into or
decrease of any of the outlots as proposed in the preliminary plat
(Attachment D).
4. Simple material changes to architectural and site elements, which do not
alter the overall quality of the development such as changes to exterior
building and ramp facade materials, landscape elements, signage and
lighting components.
Changes which will be considered substantial and will necessitate further
review by the Planning Commission and City Council shall include, but not be
limited to, the following:
Substantial Changes; Planning Commission/City Council Review.
1. Any changes which do not meet the intent of the aforementioned Housing &
Redevelopment/Staff approved conditions.
2. Any increase in the number of stories for any of the proposed principle
buildings or parking ramps.
Planning Commission and City Council LIP
January 2, 1986
Page 3
3. Any changes in the proposed building usage which is not consistent with a
quality office park, hotel, convention facility and restaurant.
4. Additions to the square footage of any of the principle buildings
involved which exceed 115% of the original proposal or that which creates
a footprint in excess of that allowed by C-3 Code, whichever is less.
Lot coverage is defined in the enclosed computation sheet (Attachment D).
5. Additions to the square footage of parking ramps or parking lots which
exceed 115% of the original proposal.
,Stipulations
Prior to issuance of the first building permit and also as a condition of the
rezoning it would be reasonable to require that the following submittals be
approved by staff and the Housing & Redevelopment Authority:
1. Storm drainage plan.
2. Landscape plan.
3. Lighting plan.
4. Signage plan.
5. Architectural facade material plan including ramps.
All of the above referenced plans should be comprehensive in nature taking
into account the entire development. A phasing plan for each of the elements
should be addressed to the extent which is reasonably possible at the time of
submittal.
Conclusion
The Housing & Redevelopment Authority is confident that the Lake Pointe
Corporate Center will be a tremendous asset to the community. We appreciate
the assistance of the Planning Commission and City Council in their support
of the zoning and future review programs as outlined.
JLR/dm
M-86-1
ATTACHMENT A 4C
PUBLIC HEARING •
BEFORE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing of the Planning
Commission of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue
Northeast on Wednesday, January 22, 1986 , in the Council Chamber at 7:30
p.m. for the purpose of:
Consideration of a Rezoning request, ZOA #85-05,
by the Fridley Housing & Redevelopment Authority
in cooperation with Woodbridge Properties, Inc. ,
to rezone from C-3 (General Shopping Center), C-1
(Local Business) , R-1 (One Family Dwelling) and
R-3 (General Multiple Dwelling) to S-2 (Redevelop-
ment District) on Lot 4, Auditor's Subdivision No.
155, except that part taken for Highway, and Lot 5,
Auditor's Subdivision No. 155, except that part
taken for Highway, and the south two hundred feet
of the north half of the north half of the south-
east quarter of Section 23, T-30, R-24 west, except
that part taken for Highway, and a portion of Lot
5, Block 5, Donnay's Lakeview Manor Addition,
according to the preliminary plat thereof on file
in the City Manager's Office, in and for Fridley,
Minnesota, all located in the south half of Section
23, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka,
Minnesota.
Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the
above stated time and place,
PATRICIA GABEL
CHAIRWOMAN
PLANNING COMMISSION
Publish: January 6, 1986
January 13, 1986
I ACHMENjB. ,.,K. -
�� — • ,\ . ' —• , • % yD
a 14
•
f: ,s • ... i ii.1.4 ..... • 446 ''..i.•.•>... •• .•:::....... .
+,4•,V •.;•.
•
ill
__r). ,. - , d r t.
k ..
; • .. ... ......,
• \\ am al pa Z:.-.:-..: ............ ....... '.:.:.:.............§N,.
vor
..:o p . .... `-4/ •-I. -; - •• .2. --7 \MI. WN, :. i et ,:‘,:::.: :::::::•:::•:.::.,.....:::: :::::...t.:N„ .....:. k
in
ani
, .10,4,:J.:. ,: _iv„ •:ii ......:.: •:- b'• '.....• '•:•'. :•:.:••••
Wvll,.11 'i,' ‘ ,, ' 4:. so,N ‘ sr x '
j .1 1 , 1 st.4. e
o • • i/ :,u4 1 .•. • .i•••
��� 9/04.,,, .F j/ 5I lig,
"$ �1 •ossatt�`
\- :. '• r •Tr,
tc,- td. ! o; " / I
21 :/..:jt t
0 '1,:. 4.4 i . \• ,0 \ ,,', . •.: 4 • .10
m ,Q,:. . _ tin
'll''''r^.;-' --' .\---:" n , \L, 1 N. .%.- "Z.**‘..4 : . :
•• :IN "c + 1'
N '
t'
N
Z N � '• . 0
Y
0 STATE 7 UVK H/h7�W,41' NO 65 (CENTRAL AVDK/£1
•
Sg
S
IlE —
ATTACHMENT C
Iii
' I
hi if
# i I 11111111 I I iiiitioitm.', 1) — Il
r i , / / ---- •• 7, ' \
4a 2 t -2.kliii
;1 g ' 31. i
rn 1 I Will I 4 1 1
A Iiiiiiii 1 1 11111{11 ih ' I i 1 Atiii?kit% : .
: 1 1 _
' 'I 1* .
ifigia Heim! i WHIN' e;•1E ; ' r'.. '•. 41:::,,,,
I L• .• 1
,ierls, • ,,, .
: 1 : 4,,.w if _.T.
•
f ,
1,4 , 1 I.
. •t:, \ / 'a
\//I ...,4.
••
i'l rJ 1 e01
..'i!!! tt,
iiifrO:
., . • . 1., •
ii 1/1 ! e 5,jip . ., i
!i ' ' 'iv. 4it -/,
OUPICY Tate--
.
lN
• ... ,,,,. .g
JACKSON STREET _
: . ••1 ' //
V\ \,, 'i
4... ........ ............ MMIP••al..M.,...t
•
, • ‘ 1.4
'..-- -------X oil
.,01----
•,\\ e\ ! t------es/ K 030--
.. • 41
' %."Nehh• \V
r 411I
. j
s.......„
.........4:1:
STATE j:----Tgr-----NuNK ANIGHW -----....-- .
.------..----..
ATTACHMENT D - - -_ 77+_'•` : - , STREET
+_ r----_ , _ . 1 LIP
�N '
, it <-__ ‘l_.--,...„ _ _" ��
' ,Qi R.,, ,„. •_ ► tic \
e ,. _..1,,\ _41111)- - 0
\ - " ........., Z
•
i kt'�. 4 \
m
I 0 z
I �� \ 4 \ ..R 3) a
°./ _fit \ ,I„ i 0
1
7^
,\ ".--- ---- - . L. .... - m
•
4-1--N -1' '- Z
aI rF as / j1, I; i
‘ Is *C., G
:,
,`'v. ,t • ? 1 j l ' woo_sr
\oi.ire 'AOikj.,;-- , e} . F71 %"p
,ty \Ca 1 �;}'
•\8ti" a \ ' t 7 /,M \ ----
ti rte' \ , �, i , p ...
f\ / ` %.w
I ;' /C/
\.
►� K°.rE 'o r'
o p�
\ f••....-.04
� , - / \`
Y
_\ ♦ �o• J' "-ran '_ _ __i
��(CENTRAL: AVEM/EI
STATE TRCA'VK H/GMW,4Y NO 65 (CE ��^�wa
c
E
ATTACHMENT E ,IG
LOT AREA - BUILDING COVERAGE ANALYSIS
BLDG/LOT I HEIGHT 1 SQUARE FEET I FOOT PRINT 1 LOT AREA { % COVER ALLOW I % COVER ACTUAL I_
1 A 1 { 1 { 1 I I
I Lot 3 I 2 I 32,000 I 16,000 I 119,690 I 35% I 13.3% 1
1 Blk 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1
1 B 1 1 I { I I 1
41 Lot 6 1 3 I 48,000 1 16,000 I 143,796 I 30% I 11.1%
1 Blk 2 1 1 I 1 I I {
1 C I 1 I 1 I I {
1 Lot 5 I 6 1 128,232 I 21,372 I 174,116 1 15% I 12.3% I
1 Blk 2 I I I 1 I I I
I D I 1 I 1 I I 1
I Lot 4 1 8 1 160,000 I 20,000 I 165,736 1 Not addressed I 12.0% 1
1 Blk 2 I I I 1 I in Code I I
1 E I 1 1 1 1 1 I
1 Lot 3 8 1 160,000 I 20,000 1 162,151 1 Not addressed 1 12.2% I
1 Blk 2 I 1 I 1 1 in Code 1 I
1 F { 1 I I I 1 I
1 Lot 2 1 4 1 70,000 I 17,500 1 142,196 I 25% I 12.3% I
I Blk 2 I I I I I I I
1 G I I I I 1 I 1
1 Lot 1 I 3 I 48,000 1 16,000 I 104,106 1 30% I 15.4% I
1 Blk 2 I I I 1 I I 1
1 I 1 I 1 { 1 1
1 Rest. I• 1 I 10,000 I 10,000 I 84,534 I 40% 1 11 .8% 1
I I I I I 1 I I
I I I I I I I I
1 Hotel/ { 6 1 90,000/3,500 I 18,500 1 131 ,706 1 15% 1 14.0% I
{ Conv. I 1 I I I I I
Total Foot Print: 155,372 Square Feet
Total Lot Area: 1,227,981 Square Feet _
Total Outlot Area: 158,548 Square Feet
Total Site Area
With Outlots: 1,386,529 Square Feet
Total Lot Coverage
With Outlots: 11 .2%
Note: Lot areas and percent coverage are subject to change with final plat
5
MEMO TO: Nasim Qureshi
MEMO FROM: Jim Robinson
MEMO DATE: January 3, 1986
REGARDING: Relocation Expenses for 5747 Central Ave. NE.
As of December 6, 1985, the HRA is the owner of the property at 5747 Central
Ave. NE. The owner was paid in full for acquisition at a cost of $71 ,000 and
relocation at a cost of $4,323.50. The HRA is now landlord of the property
and will be responsible for relocation payments to the tennants when they are
required to move.
Since the time that we first informed the HRA of the preliminary costs
associated with this project, we have learned that a sub-tenant also resides
at the property. The owner was apparently unaware of the additional
co-tenant. Based upon our relocation consultant's findings, this individual
is also eligible for a relocation adjustment payment of up to $4,000 and a
fixed payment for moving expenses of $500, or actual moving expenses, if
applicable. Mr. Bagley's correspondance regarding this additional liability
is enclosed for your review. Please note additional consulting fees of $1,400
are also involved with this additional claimant.
As to the computation of relocation benefits to displaced tenants, the
following is a summary of a section from the HUD handbook, "Relocation
Assistance To Displaced Tenants".
1. Moving Expense Payments. Every displaced person is entitled to a
relocation payment to cover the reasonable cost of their move. They may
choose either:
a A payment for actual moving expenses, or
a A fixed payment.
2. Replacement Housing Expenses. Eligible displaced people will receive a
replacement housing payment to assist in paying for the decent, safe, and
sanitary replacement housing to which they move. If they occupied their home
for at least 90 days before the effective date of the public agency's "Notice
of Displacement," they may be eligible to receive either:
• A rental assistance payment in an amount up to $4,000; or
• A downpayment assistance payment in an amount up to $4,000.
3. Rental Assistance Payments. The maximum payment is $4,000 and is
determined by subtracting the displaced tenants' base monthly housing cost at
the existing residence from the replacement home rent (or a comparable
replacement home if that rent is lower). That monthly assistance, if any, is
multiplied by 48, and the total amount, not to exceed $4,000 , is the
prescribed payment. The base monthly housing cost is either:
Nasim Quresni
January 3, 1986 c
Page 2
* The current rent, including utilities, or
• 25% of the monthly gross income, whichever is less.
In the case of the tenants at 5747 Central Ave. NE, the base rent of
$560/month is lower than comparable rental homes in the metropolitan area
which are currently estimated at $650/month. The difference in rents of
$90/month when multiplied by 48 months is $4,320. If the tenants rented at
$650/month or higher, they would be eligible for the maximum rental
assistance payment of $4,000. However, if they rented for an amount which
when computed, as above, yielded a number less than $4,000, they would only
receive that lesser amount.
4. Downpayment Assistance Payments. If the displaced tenants opt to purchase
a home rather than rent, they may be eligible for up to $4,000 in down
payment assistance. If they select a DOWNPAYMENT ASSISTANCE PAYMENT, there is
a matching requirement when the costs exceed $2, 000. If the needed
downpayment and incidental expenses are in excess of $2,000, they will
receive $2,000 plus 50% of any amount over $2,000 that is required as a
downpayment. The maximum payment is $4,000.
Exact relocation benefits for the remaining tenants will not be fully
determined until such time as replacement housing is found. At that time, a
complete relocation claim will be provided for your review. Although
possesion of the property is possible on March 6, 1986, our preference would
be to allow the tenants to remain until we need the property for road
construction.
JLR/mg
Attach.
M-86-2
INDUSTRIAL
RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL 5B
FEDERAL - STATE
RELOCATION CONSULTING SERVICE INC.
299 North Snetlins Avenue
St. Paul. Minnesota 55104
Phone: Area Code - 612-645-7329, 645-9171
December 6, 1985
Mr. Jim Robinson
Planning Coordinator
City of Fridley
Civic Center
6431 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
RE: 5747 Central Avenue N.E.
Dear Jim,
Please be advised that the referenced address has an additional
tenant in occupancy.
Originally the owner , Mr. Stewart advised the City that the
dwelling was occupied by Steven Rukes and Robin Trobley. They indeed
occupy the house.
In November of 1984 , Steven Rukes and Robin Trombley entered into
a month to month lease arrangement with Peter Rukes as a sub-tenant .
At first he occupied space in the main household but now is residing •
in the lower level of the house.
Peter Rukes is the additional tenant residing in this dwelling
and is eligible for relocation benefits. See enclosed information.
In addition to the relocation benefit expense there will also be an
additional fee for consulting services of approximately $1 , 400. 00.
If you have any questions, please give me a call .
Sincerely yours,
t*.
HaJack B gley
Relo a ion Consultant
JB/pp - i
Enclosure: Memo regarding additional occupants of single
family dwellings
5C
TO: Jim Robinson December 6, 1985
FROM: Jack Bagle4P
SUBJECT: Rental Adjustment Payment
Co-Tenants Single Family Dwelling
5747 Central Avenue N.E.
The area office of HUD addressed the policy of determining the level
of relocation benefits to multiple occupants displaced from a single
dwelling .
The purpose was to enable fair and equitable treatment to those being
displaced and provide them with the opportunity to afford comparable
decent housing .
The characteristics followed to determine the catagory the tenants fit
into is attached.
Based upon these characteristics and without any additional
information to the contrary the additional occupant of the subject
address could be eligible for a relocation adjustment payment of up to
$4 , 000. 00 and a fixed payment for moving expenses of $500. 00, or
actual moving expenses if applicable.
While we try to avoid this type of surprise, they do occur .
The situation of multiple occupants of a single family dwelling is an
additional relocation expense which cannot be determined , usually,
until after acquisition occurs. More often then not the dwelling
owner is unaware of sub tenants to the prime, consequently the occup-
ancy is not noted until actual contact with the occupants is made.
Most property owners do not want their tenants contacted until after
they have accepted the citys offer . A Notice of Displacement and 90
Day Notice to Vacate have been sent by Certified Mail to all
occupants , (copies have been sent to you) .
FEDERAL- STATE RELOCATION CONSULTING SERVICE 299 No.Snelling Ave. St.Paul Minn. 55104 1612)645-7329 or 645.9171
5D
TO: Jim Robinson December 6, 1985
FROM: Jack Bagley •
SUBJECT: Multiple Occupants of an Acquired Dwelling
The following characteristics are going to be followed to determine if
the occupants residing in 5747 Central Avenue N.E. are:
a) . Separate leasehold tenants
b) . Co-tenants
c) . Prime tenant/sub tenant
A guideline to these characteristics is as follows:
COMMON TENANCY CHARACTERISTICS
A GUIDELINE
I . Separate Leasehold Tenants Have:
1 . An individual oral or written lease arrangement with the
landlord;
2. Separate checks , receipts , and contracts with the landlord ;
3. No rent increase if other tenants move out;
4 . No rent decrease if others move in;
5. Exclusive use of an identifiable portion of the unit
although there may be also shared space.
II . Co-tenants have:
1. Rent based upon the total dwelling ;
2. Their portion of rent divided among them;
3. Variable rents depending on move-ins and move-outs ;
4. Landlord collections from any or all of the group, but each
paying the landlord directly does not establish a separate
leasehold interest;
5. No one person held responsible for the group's behavior ;
6. Equal rights and responsibilities to the landlord.
FEDERAL- STATE RELOCATION CONSULTING SERVICE 299 No.Snelling Ave. St. Paul,Minn. 55104 1612)645.7329 or 645-9171
5E
III . Prime-tenants/Sub-tenants have:
1. The prime tenant fully accoutable for the units ' rent and
all the tenants ' conduct;
2. Usually the prime tenant in occupancy first;
3. Rent paid by the sub-tenant to the prime tenant and
complaints directed in the same manner ;
4. Unit rent set by the landlord, but the sub-tenant' s share
set by the prime tenant;
5. Eviction of the sub-tenant by the prime tenant and it may
not necessarily follow legal proecesses;
6. Lease arrangements are between landlord and prime tenant ,
prime tenant and sub-,tenant, receipts issued in the same
way;
7. Full use of the unit for the prime tenant and possible use
of the kitchen or other facilities for sub-tenant.
Categories I and III tenants each eligible for up to $4 , 000. 00.
Category II tenants must divide $4 ,000. 00 between them, (prorated) .
FEDERAL- STATE RELOCATION CONSULTING SERVICE 299 No.Snelling Ave. St.Paul. Minn. 55104 1612)645-7329 or 645-9171
PLANNING DIVISION
clnroF
MEMORANDUM
FRIDLEY
MEMO TO: Nasim Qureshi , City Manager
MEMO FROM: Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator QQ,
MEMO DATE: December 6, 1985
REGARDING: Execution of Quit Claim Deed
The attached document is a quit claim deed assigning transfer of ownership
of Lot 6, Block 1, Fridley Plaza Addition from the Housing & Redevelopment
Authority to the City of Fridley.
This document needs to be executed and filed at Anoka County. Both you and
Larry Commers will need to sign as indicated. It would be timely to obtain
Mr. Conners' signature at the December 12, 1985 Housing & Redevelopment
Authority meeting. Please return at your earliest convenience.
Attached is a map showing the area in question.
JLR/dm
M-85-156
611
RFSCLITPICN NO. St 1985
A RmaznaN AiT HORIZDG THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY (FCLICE GARAAGE)
WHEREAS, the City of Fridley and the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment •
Authority have jointly constructed a Police Garage and walkway systun, and
WHEREAS, part of the City of Fridley Police Garage currently sits on land
owned by the Housing and Redeveloprent Authority, and
WHI.:F1S, it was agreed uppn that the City of Fridley would purchase that land
f ram the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, and
WHEREAS, the garage is new completed.
NCW, 'HEREFORE, BE IT RFSCLVED, the City of Fridley agrees to purchase from
the Housing and Rekvelop-•ent Authority 9,029 square feet of area for $35,000.
PASSED AM) ALOFT ED BY IHE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS / _ DAY
OFJ cc 11 , 19115.
WILLIAM J. NEE - P7ACR
A'l Lt51 :
SIDNEY. C. INA. - CITY CLEP.K
1
RESOLUTION NO. BRA 10 - 1985
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TUE SALE OF PROPERTY
WHEREAS, the City of Fridley and the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment
Authority have jointly constructed a Police Garage and walkway system, and
WHEREAS, part of the City of Fridley Police Garage currently sits on land
owned try the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, and
4HH a• , it was agreed upon that the City of Fridley would purchase that land
from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, and
WHEREAS, the garage is now canpleted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESCLVED, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority does
agree to sell to the City of Fridley 9,029 square feet of area for $35,000.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE HCOSIM AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF
FRIELEY THIS 13TH DAY OFJUNE, 1985.
(7,ZL.4
LAWRENCE R. U ERS — CHAIRMAN ---
ATT:
P 64s-z
NAS IHSS M. QURESHI — DIRECTOR
are mt. d Fore Ma 31-11/. M�nnc.wa Uniform(:oo.eMJln-D.rn Co..Mroeyol»
,rocy Mn►,(Rernaol 1171)
rfjig 3nbenturt, Xad.this day o/ 19._8S-, 6C
between tilt' City of FridleyHousing and Redevelopmenthithority.
Public
alcorporation under the laws of the Stats of Minnesota-�__--_- _--_-_...........__..,party of the first part,and
the City of Fridley
a/�r�ilailtR Retnder the laws of the State of.-....141H.Ii.e-aO.Ls.___._..____.___. •__._._... _.._._................__ _........
party of the second part,
WitntSsttb, That the said party of the first part, in consideration of the sum of
One ($1.00) and no/100 "' DOLL4RS,
to it in hand paid by the said party of the second part,the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,
do.s hereby Grant, Bargain, Quitclaim, and Convey unto the said party of the second part,its successors
and assigns, Forever,all the tract. .. or parcel........-of Land lying and being In the County of
Anoka and State of.Minnesota, described as follows, to-wit:
Lot 6, Block 1, Fridley Plaza Addition
Subject to reservations, restrictions and easements of record, if any, i
I �
F
To Ittatte sub to jf,toRt the Same, Together with all the hereditaments and appurtenances there
unto belonging or in anywise appertaining,to the said party of the second part,its successors and assigns,
Forever.
3n Ittitimonp crot
, The said first party has caused thus
presents to be executed in its corporate name by Its.......
President and its _.---_ ___..._.._.............and Its corporate seal to
be hereunto affixed the day and year first abar,written.
By — ....
us Chairman
its Di rector
`Cc II� sc
V by y ~s rn
!; R � ar
_- 8 aD., c$ 1' I Io C g
�� i� •a I.Z t- s �, l I. y o is
I; 1 s _
ti
I y I G h hi!
.1 r '� !. ! 8C `s
i b e
t =; ,Ys 0 i
•1
Iz£e� c a3osauuTw `6aIPT13
•3.N aAuanyAlTslanTufl 6LZ9
•V•d `NVHM3N 4 )10111113H
A9 0311V8O SVM 1N3Wf1111SNI S941
•aonnfodin.,.t 7 fn fJni q WI
uo•ifnfodloa/.AlTio47nV 3uawdolanapag pus.* SuTsnoH 4CaTPT13 JO A TO a41 0aTignd -r_ fig ' Sg Cl • Jo trop
xiyj ant,iofaq pay'p..j.noit.y.)n xn.rt ju.,unupeui PujoPaJof au ,
( V IONV �°moa '
4glOg3UUIO 10 311214§
1
1 II WWI Anr am ..... 6.. ..0
i mama, .' . SO .431 11- Sp...• To % % %I ; ls.,
i /
.,.-
Ill • 1 * 11 1 til j * I * 1 6%
. S SIP
.J 1%1 16 . ...... ....... . _f•A.• 'NIL *Ad .i• um I, rail ;
-• I
- I I •list
' % S
pop ipt sub Jr:..
-- • . • v• .
%71.-,
I, • I I .1. •Nlit %
.. p
'110i-i NO
'"%!...\\12
- - • r....,...., di ..,........A., • .
.-.r.
; a •• .1 ir 4
2 k, .. ., ,,..% .......,......
i ., .., •
a .
dtr— k P S......••••
•... 141\‘ , N.A,i A •
I N
444( PI71. 11C-SN\-. , JP
i /Mee
i1/211)*PPIIIIIIIII . .
, 1 II
allgrzim 1 Anvil Y
1.. sit, 4I,••..,
41"1 * /--111 •-•1 ' A A !
i• -
gq, ito IP)11 t4
t k 04 Al4
(4118•1
W N si,a,.Ar.,2,1111:evihof 4199 M.). . ; . iif C" i . •Ai OW rust oillf 1 5
& I.:or-. A
rare, Mr
4it. .... - .. ....4•1[4111•VdiL;:dirift, " 4•No7" - "-.. 11 .11.7D
,... ,, SEW. _wit W OW WM,' -•. 4,111Ir ''''
aria "VIZ
e.1 •i
rw . !t4?' ••S ii. Ctr./1k7tA
' . " "- - 72
w4, L" * • ti , gArt1
ce
• ...S S.
r••did fig N.:, W...., it i
. , ....., • WWI
•
•
,
/El 14 u,
_.......:, , .
U,,...... . ..... u).
1..,
110;
k t44 t '' it jL i • .. 0 j
.
•7-.4% >
• , -1 — le _ .
•••• 4IP ,• .4.• :,..7 IIII.I. II '4 -,N 4
It -1. .-c ...ar I. : .4111r--1 gill ..• ,..
i ' t -IP CI
*grid• VII
" Dad • } 2E. • • •44 ,:, % s:
Lotei. at U.1 lit 4 51, , ._.
D tez-4 . 1,, ,.., ,, n 4 --' 11 I MI •i
_
_ U. ., ye
, ill
V ‘ (1)
.---•
0 -: t
_ „....
Fti
- • . ... ! . yew, le VP.. ) po
- • Ill
I * * t 4 i Iql
. • ' ALAI li o k , I • ....,
•
...., ....;
• tfk. ";.. • 1145 . t1/2. - . .. 1 Tbikt 1 •
N.14 a4'
1 .-. - - , .:-..-- • k - op '' "T.'", U" ! 14 4: ' '
I . a
*al* • •••• II
„Or• •••• -. A' ' •• .5 • I.
p. . _ _- ---- -- -jsrioriii- -111•5- "'""*".1,-4-Kir,' Air, :1--••• ..--.1.04•-• on 1, , _ sae 10
?.sir4 ...• ..1~ fee
i _ 4 S 4,0
---. ... 7,.....Y.....1r.-,----r-• - .1
• AV 1491111
i , T ,-3,ntiam
J:... , . ----. 1 I Jr—
r .., ••--le - I -.', • . N: `.. 1r. : .j ". . :. !kli r:tt; k
1 4 e.• e- • I, : •110 .•• •••• Nows.dem.••dffoodddd•
r- . : 1 i : i : 1 1 i: 'a • •
.•A ,,as 71%0<r- A
. -MEI • a a 4- , -. 1-
. 7 a
A . 4 ". !, . id, o p.
at i
! '0'
..'''''' - % ' i
a
• .. ,G.
• , • • .-. 40 b
JP'
1. V enir WI "
'
i,. =Fa , 1 d S, r s . •••
c" • .
• .....?: 4&4111 % ik.Vih,' 1 islik*4
.......
1"—T -•-7—T Z " • Az_si *id
......1
I • -S -• i I 4 I 17 % VG
• I .•• g I 4 AI 41. a SP . s I oa.
ft•
Qr I CrIS) 11 lt : I' e ''' A
St
•
I • •4, ii% sts . .
, .. ,„.....,
,..., _...,,,„
‘ -- Okii f I • 410 s' § MI. 16 ,..•
. 1 ...
, • 3 il• 3 t•• .
S
ii, .4, __••• . in •. --.
,, 4 441,• Jo - '-• ...
a ra it : - t ,
:
i •‘iiiI • i 111 lit . V
,,t •i - -
.s. ,
E i n Ir. -413e -J t .."/ . . • ,
i 4 v
k
ir,,, ...„,
. ....., •o
(1)
a•.- .. il 441116 "Ellti4.. . '. ‘' Iht . . 11
- ... "e•
0 l> • -XI -A 4 E;',. .- • IL
..f.,7/4"." 'IV ql •l
'Cr)
mol 411. .,,, •• dat.‘ a,70 se -
• Ce. . • Id \* A , IV a t•41
i'1
2 ,..' , . 4 -- . .-. ' 411 • :` •
.711,6 al•:J.!: .....• • ...it. s * .
41% / • a::Is
As 11, SO
... %. .3ir
• •• 1 b ' 41 e_ ..--•• T E' _ • A I,.i i r A
" .
; •' Fan. e4P •, - -16, . s•4_21 . 4 . I
7
CLAIMS
1445 - 1452