Loading...
HRA 05/10/1984 • HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING THURSDAY, MAY 10, 1984 7:00 P.M. City of Fridley AGENDA HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING THURSDAY, MAY 10, 19.84 7:00 P.M. Location: Council Chambers (upper level ) CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Housing & Redevelopment Authority Minutes: April 19, 1984 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED SALE, LEASE OR OTHER DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY LOCATED IN UNIVERSITY INDUSTRIAL PARK WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NO. 1 1 - lA RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH GERALD W. PASCHKE AND MODIFYING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 3 AND HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MODIFIED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 2 This will be available at meeting APPROVAL OF ASSIGNMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT FOR DAYTON HUDSON D/B/A TARGET STORES 3 - 3C FINANCIAL REPORT 4 (at meeting) CHECK REGISTER 5 (at meeting) ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING APRIL 19, 1984 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Commers called the April 19, 1984, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Larry Commers, Elmars Prieditis, Duane Prairie Members Absent: Carolyn Svendsen, Walter Rasmussen Others Present: Sid Inman, City Finance Director Nasim Qureshi, Dave Newman, City Attorney Michael Warren, Ritter, Suppes, Plautz Architects Michael Moormann, Project Architect, Target Stores APPROVAL OF MARCH 8, 1984, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE THE MARCH 8, 1984, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY: MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:14 P.M. Mr. Inman stated this is a public hearing on the sale, lease, and disposition of the property located north of City Hall , bounded on the west by University, on the north by Mississippi St., on the east by 5th Street, and on the south by City Hall (legal description included in agenda packet). He stated that at the current time, the property is in the ownership of the HRA with the exception of the piece on which the Brunkow Music building sits which they have a contract for deed on. He stated they have negotiated with the contract holder, and they are ready to complete purchase at the time of .execution of the contract documents. • HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 2 Mr, Inman stated that in the past, it has been the practice of the HRA to hold a public hearing; then approve the sale, disposition, and lease of the property in conjunction with executing or authorizing the contract with the developer,which is shown as Item 3-3A in the agenda. Mr. Inman stated specific purpose of the property was for the development by Dayton Hudson Corp. , D/B/A Target Stores. He stated that Mr. Qureshi was at the meeting to make a presentation. Members of the Target Corp. were also in the audience. Mr. Qureshi stated he came before the HRA at their last meeting and gave some of the background on the proposal made to the HRA by Target Stores to develop an office facility north of City Hall . The City was in negotiations with Target for over six months, plus three months when they did not know what company they were dealing with as they were dealing through a real estate agent. He stated Target had been searching all over the northern suburbs for a site for their administrative offices. When they became serious about the site north of City Hall , he met with them in January 1984. Mr. Qureshi stated originally Target had some strict internal company require- ments for space and actually wanted a two-story building on the site, which would have almost covered the entire site with blacktop and building. That was not acceptable to the City, and they encouraged Target to look at the existing terrain of the property and go to a two story building and provide some landscaping and green area around the building. Fortunately, Target found it feasible for a three-story building, so they came back with the current proposal . Mr. Qureshi stated that, since then, the City has been working almost daily with Target trying to define the plan to make the impact of this construction more compatible with the existing facility. One of the things they did work out together was some green space and separation between City Hall and the proposed building. The original plan submitted for the parking lot did meet the parking and size requirements, but they compromised a little bit to provide some green area within the parking lot. They were able to save some of the existing mature trees along Mississippi St. and within the parking lot. Mr. Qureshi stated the City's agreement with Target is to make the property available to them so they can go in and start construction. That necessitates the removing of all the structures, compacting the soil , and reshaping the land and leveling it west of the proposed building so they can provide the parking. Mr. Qureshi stated Fir. Michael Moormann, representative from Target, and an architect, Mr. Michael Warren, were at the meeting to make statements or answer any questions the HRA might have. Mr. Comers asked about the number of parking spaces that will be provided. Mr. Qureshi stated there will be about 300 parking spaces. That meets the parking requirements for an office building. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 3 Mr. Prairie asked if the cars traveling on Mississippi St. would be able to see the cars in the parking lot. Mr. Qureshi stated they did compromise a little bit on the size and aisle space in order to provide some berming and landscaping to minimize the visual impact of the parking lot. Mr. Qureshi stated the City also commissioned a traffic study that especially addressed how they could minimize the traffic impact for a section of this property. Some suggestions were made, and those suggestions have been dis- cussed with Target. Target is willing to incorporate those suggestions. Essentially, there will a right in and right out on Mississippi St. Presently, there are two lanes going out onto 5th St. , and they are going to expand that to three lanes to accommodate more traffic. In answer to Mr. Prieditis' question concerning surface water drainage, Mr. Qureshi explained the surface drainage plan for the property. The Commission members viewed the model of the new Target building. Mr. Qureshi showed the overall concept of the clinic, future expansion of the clinic, office building, bank, City Hall , and 5th St. He stated that on 5th St. , they put in a divider with trees. They hope to eventually work with the County to carry the same divider theme on Mississippi St. That would block the entrance on Mississippi St. for a right in and right out only. Mr. Qureshi stated they plan to carry the same theme for the walkway system with the same cement, brick, trees all the way through the Target develop- ment to the intersection. Mr. Moorman stated they have their distribution center and one of their regional offices in Fridley. They have quite an investment in Fridley, and it has been a very pleasant relationship with the City. He stated they are looking forward to locating their Northern Operations Center here. Mr. Moormann stated he felt they were going to create a facility that was very comparable in character and quality to the facility they have in the City Center in downtown Minneapolis. Right now they plan to move into the building in May 1985. They have scheduled for the present size with certain built-in expansions projected for 5-10 years. Mr. Coroners stated that as long as there was no one else at the meeting to make any comments, he would entertain a motion to close the public hearing. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:40 P.M. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 4 2. RECEIVE LETTER FROM JERRY PASCHKE: Mr. Commers stated this item would be continued at the end of the agenda. 3. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. HRA 5-1984 APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT WITH TARGET: Mr. Commers asked Mr. Qureshi to give the Commissioners a brief summary of the general terms of the contract. Mr. Qureshi stated the members of the HRA had a copy of the sheet that out- lined the parcels that will be designated on this property (handed out at meeting). The basic agreement they have with Target is that the HRA will prepare the property just like any other property that is ready for develop- ment so Target can move in and start development. This will necessitate the HRA moving all the structures, doing the grading, and providing some retaining walls. Mr. Qureshi stated the proposal is to sell Target the building footprint (parcel A) at $2/sq. ft. The rest of the property will be leased by Target for 30 years and then sold at an amount of $300,000. During the lease period, Target will pay $15,000 per year. They will provide the maintenance on the property and will pay taxes on all of the property. Mr. Qureshi stated there are two other properties that Target has the option to buy. If they wish to buy those two parcels before the lease is over, they can buy them at $2/ sq. ft. Target's potential expansion, if needed, is to 90,000 sq. ft. One proposed expansion (parcel B-1 ) is in the northwest corner of the building and is about 3,000 sq. ft. per floor. The other pro- posed expansion is on the east side of the building (parcel B-2) and is about 2,700 sq. ft. per floor. Mr. Qureshi stated that parcel B-4 was the property where Target will provide parking over it, but the City has retained the right of that property so they can provide cold storage under it and the walkway system could go over it. Parcel B-4 is 2,400 sq. ft. Mr. Qureshi stated that in the southeastern corner of the parking lot (Parcel B-3), there is a parcel that the City wanted to retain the option on in order to be able to provide a parking ramp in the future to be used by HRA and the City and Target. They have provided for a joint kind of relationship for this space. The City has the right on that property for 30 years. Mr. Commers asked if Staff had made an analysis of the parking that may be needed in this area, taking into consideration the expansion of the clinic, and if the Target building is expanded to 90,000 sq. ft. Mr. Qureshi stated they have. If Target expands to 90,000 sq. ft. , they would need additional space. As far as the expansion of the clinic, it has enough parking expansion on site. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 5 Mr. Commers stated that with respect to the sale price, he would like some background information from previous appraisals and previous sales of property, and something from Leon Madsen with respect to the square footage price of the land. He felt they should have some information in the record with respect to what they have done in the past to support the HRA's action. Mr. Qureshi stated Staff would provide that information for the next meeting. He stated this proposal was in line with what the HRA did for the office building and was a better proposal than what the HRA did for the clinic. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 5-1984, "RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PITH TARGET". UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. HRA 6-1984 APPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS OF THE TARGET BUILDING AS SUBMITTED BY THE TARGET CORPORATION: Mr. Qureshi stated they have fairly detailed plans available from Target. Target is required per the development agreement to submit plans for the HRA's approval . Mr. Commers stated this was mainly for control with respect to the compatibility with the other structures, and this building obviously seems to be in con- formance. He stated this has been discussed in past meetings, and everything seemed to be all right. He stated that if the Staff has looked at the plans and are in agreement that the plans are in conformance and compatible with City Hall , he did not think the HRA had any problem with approving the con- struction plans. Mr. Qureshi stated City Staff has made a great attempt to see that everything in the building is in conformance; and, as the HRA members can see from the model , it certainly fits the scheme. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 6-1984,"A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS OF THE TARGET BUILDING AS SUBMITTED BY THE TARGET CORPORATION". UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. HRA 7-1984 APPROVING THE PLANNED LAYOUT OF TARGET PROJECT VITTHIN THE CENTER CITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT: Mr. Qureshi stated this is essentially saying that the HRA has reviewed the plan, has entered into a contract, and is now approving for implementation the final plan layout, and authorizing the staff to proceed with the reloca- tion of the tenants in the project area. Mr. Corners stated that as he understood it with regard to relocation, they do have an obligation to a couple of the tenants. It was his original HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 6 understanding that when the HRA acquired the property, they were going to lease the property on the basis that the tenants would be able to remain on the property without any problem with relocation when the property was needed by the HRA. Mr. Inman stated that was correct; however, they have since found out that particular property owners can waive their rights to relocation, but regular tenants cannot waive their rights because they are not subsequent to the sale of the property. He stated Lifestyle Music and Northwestern Bell did waive their rights to relocation,because they were the property owners. He stated they have reviewed this with their relocation consultant and with Dave Newman, and it is very clear that the tenants cannot waive those rights when they had no rights in the first place. He stated that as far as relocation, the HRA has an obligation to the following tenants: Gary's Automotive $10,000 (estimate) Ms. Douthitt 5,500 (estimate) Royal Electric 15,000 (estimate) Mr. Inman stated Gary's Automotive intends to move at the end of May. Royal Electric has found a place and intends to move in May. Northwestern Bell will be out the end of April . They have qualified Ms. Douthitt for Section 8 housing and are currently looking for an apartment for her. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 7-1984, "A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED LAYOUT OF TARGET PROJECT WITHIN THE CENTER CITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT". UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. HRA 8-1984 REQUESTING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY APPROVE AND AWARD BIDS FOR THE DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL OF CERTAIN STRUCTURES: Mr. Qureshi stated that page 6E of the agenda documented the buildings on site that needed to be removed. The proposals are such that there is a bid on each separate building. They reason they did that was because there are certain people who deal more with salvaging and moving, and other people who deal just with demolition. So, in some cases the City will be getting money back for salvage. He stated the list on agenda page 6B showed the buildings and the bids. The low bid was chosen for each of the buildings, except for the high bid on Building #1 , Madsen Building. The project, if awarded as indicated on the list, will be $18,805. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR• COMMERS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 8-1984, "A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY APPROVE .AND AWARD BIDS FOR THE DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL OF CERTAIN STRUCTURES". UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION Carried UNANIMOUSLY. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 7 At this time, Mr. Coroners thanked Mr. Moormann and Mr. Warren for coming to the meeting. He stated the HRA was looking forward to working with them. He stated the HRA felt it was going to be a terrific project and will certainly contribute to the City of Fridley in a nice way. Mr. Moormann thanked the Staff and the HRA for their time. He stated the people he is working with in the corporation are very excited about this project. Chairperson Coroners declared a ten-minute recess at 8:30 p.m. 7. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. HRA 9-1984 AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF TO OBTAIN A PLAT OF THE CENTER CITY AREA SOUTH OF MISSISSIPPI STREET AND EAST OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE: Mr. Commers asked how the numbers, as far as costs, were arrived at in the next resolutions. Mr. Qureshi stated they were strictly engineers' estimates in order to get an idea of what numbers they are talking about. Mr. Qureshi stated it is the City's proposal to plat all the property from 63rd to Mississippi St. and University to 5th St. This will then complete all the property in this quadrant in order to describe who owns what and have it all legally tied down. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 9-1984, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF TO OBTAIN A PLAT OF THE CENTER CITY AREA SOUTH OF MISSISSIPPI STREET AND EAST OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE". UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO.HRA 10-1984 AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF TO OBTAIN A TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THE 5TH STREET AREA- OF CENTER CITY: Mr. Qureshi stated this study has been completed. It was requested because they wanted to know the impact the Target building would have with over 300 employees and because of its location . MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 10-1984, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF TO OBTAIN A TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THE 5TH STREET AREA OF CENTER CITY". UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 8 9. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. HRA 11-1984 AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF TO CONTRACT FOR SITE PREPARATION OF THE LAND NORTH OF CITY HALL: Mr. Qureshi stated it is the HRA's responsibility to provide a clear site for construction and remove all the existing structures. After the structures are removed, they have to fill in where the structures were, compact the soil , clear and grub, remove any bad material , grade the property and do the storm water control so it is prepared for Target to begin construction. Mr. Commers asked why the HRA had 10 give authorization to the City for all this right now. Why can't they put the bids out when the time comes and then give approval? Mr. Qureshi stated the HRA would be giving the City the authorization to do all this work. An estimated figure of $144,000 was given. He stated the City Council meets frequently and the HRA does not. This is just a vehicle to get the process going. He stated the HRA will have actual bids and numbers on this like they did for the demolition and removal of the structures. Mr. Commers stated that, in terms of what the HRA's responsibility is and when it comes down to the ultimate decision, he felt it was a problem always appointing the City to be its agent. Mr. Qureshi stated there are some time restraints. Normally, the process they are trying to squeeze into two months probably should take ten months. Target plans to start building June 1 , and he did not think all the legal things will be done by then. That is the reason the City felt that, since the work is necessary, the HRA should make the City Council its agent. The HRA has the estimated numbers, and if the numbers are different, they will come back to the HRA. The HRA will also have the documentation available when the actual bids are taken. Mr. Commers stated he really had a problem with this and asked if there was some way to resolve the time restraints. Mr. Qureshi stated maybe the HRA could hold special meetings. Mr. Prieditis stated he agreed with Mr. Commers. Mr. Commers stated the next few resolutions involve a substantial amount of money. Mr. Qureshi stated these were all estimated outside numbers and all of them, other than the NSP work, will be public bids. Mr. Commers stated that was fine, but maybe there should be some input from the HRA as to what is being done and some input back as to exactly how the projecris going to go and what is going to be involved. He stated maybe HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 9 Staff could give the HRA a schedule with a timetable of when these things are contemplated to be done and when they need to be done. Mr. Commers stated he basically had the following two questions: (1 ) Is this a proper procedure for the HRA to follow? It may be legally permissible, but is it proper? (2) What about input into the project itself? The HRA does not want to get involved in the day-to-day things, but he felt the HRA should know more about the project when these things are talked about in a general way. The HRA should get a little more background information and see some information that tells what is being proposed. Mr. Qureshi stated he thought they were providing this information. Mr. Prieditis stated that what concerned him was the HRA would be authorizing monies which amounted to $600-700,000. There are a lot of unknowns. Is the HRA in the position to do this? He would like to look at the budget and see where they stand. Maybe the HRA could approve some of the more urgent matters and wait on the others. Mr. Commers stated it was his personal opinion that he was uncomfortable with delegating this kind of authority to the City. Mr. Qureshi stated that if the HRA was willing to meet every two weeks, he would have no problem with that. Staff would be willing to be available for those meetings. Mr. Prairie stated that, if extra meetings would help, he would be willing to meet every week or every other week. Mr. Commers asked the Staff to put together a schedule which would include a bid schedule, a bid opening schedule, and an awarding schedule. He asked that this be provided to the HRA so they can decide, from their point of view, what the best way is to handle these. Mr. Qureshi stated Staff would provide the HRA with this information. Mr. Inman stated the most critical resolutions as far as timing were Resolution No. HRA 12-1984 and Resolution No. HRA 13-1984. 10. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. HRA 12-1984 AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF CONTRACT WITH NORTHERN STATES POWER FOR TRE 'REMOVAL OF CERTAIN 'POWER LINES MND FOR THE PLACING OF THOSE POWER'LINfS'UNDERGROUND: MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 12-1984 "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF CONTRACT WITH NORTHERN STATES POWER FOR THE REMOVAL OF CERTAIN POWER LINES AND FOR THE PLACING OF THOSE POWER LINES UNDERGROUND". UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 10 11 . CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. HRA 13-1984 AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF TO WORK WITH R.S.P. ARCHITECTS: Mr. Commers stated that part of this design was for storage facilities and garage facilities for the police and the city. He asked if there should be some shared costs with the city on that? Mr. Qureshi stated they are thinking of sharing 50/50 of the architect's fees on these things. This resolution provides for the hiring of the architect at a fee not to exceed $11 ,000. It should be a separate request to the Staff to ask the City Council to participate in a 50/50 shared cost with the architect. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 13-1984, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF TO WORK WITH R.S.P. ARCHITECTS". UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairperson Commers stated the HRA would direct Staff to request the City Council to participate in the architect's fee on a 50/50 basis. Mr. Inman stated he would like to deal with the rest of the items (Resolutions HRA 11-1984, NRA 14-1984, HRA 15-1984, and HRA 16-1984) under one single construction fund. If the HRA's concern was in just awarding the bids, then he did not think it would be a problem for the City Council to act as the HRA's agent. Mr. Commers asked what the HRA had done in the past. For example, how did they handle the demolition, etc. , of the Doty property? Mr. Inman stated some of it was authorized by the HRA, and some of was authorized by the City Council , depending upon the speed with which they had to act. It believed most of the demolition work was contracted through the City and the HRA paid the City. Mr. Qureshi stated that, again, providing the information to the HRA was no problem; it was just the time restraint. Mr. Inman stated he felt the HRA would have to authorize the City to call for bids. Anything over $15,000, the HRA has to authorize the publication calling for bids. Mr. Commers stated that, if the HRA authorized the call for bids, would the HRA be able to review the things being bid on at the May meeting? Mr. Qureshi stated they could have some plans available at that meeting. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 11 MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO AUTHORIZE THE PUBLICATION CALLING FOR BIDS FOR RESOLUTION NO. HRA 11-1984 ("RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF TO CONTRACT FOR SITE PREPARATION OF THE LAND NORTH OF CITY HALL"); RESOLUTION NO. HRA 14-1984 ("RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE RETAINING WALL"); RESOLUTION NO. HRA 15-1984 ("RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF MISCELLANEOUS STORAGE FACILITIES AND BRIDGE") ; AND RESOLUTION NO. HRA 16-1984 ("RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO CONSTRUCT A CONCRETE/BRICK WALKWAY, WALKWAY LIGHTS, SERVICE DRIVE AND LANDSCAPING"); AND TO AUTHORIZE CITY STAFF TO SEPARATE OR COMBINE THE VARIOUS ITEMS FOR BIDDING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 12. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. HRA 17-1984 AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF TO COMP_ETE THE MOVThG OF THE C IT`S'S tI.UID'1NETROLEU'1 AND BURYING OF ' = ANKS: MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 17-1984, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY STAFF TO COMPLETE THE MOVING OF THE CITY'S LIQUID PETROLEUM AND THE BURYING OF THOSE TANKS". UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 13. RECEIVE LETTER FROM JERRY PASCHKE: Mr. Qureshi stated that Mr. Paschke proposes to develop a 30,000 sq. ft. building on Lot 5 and a 15,000 sq. ft. building on Lot 3. Basically, there are two problems with this area: soil problems and drainage problems. He stated it would be Staff's recommendation to take the same basic approach as the HRA did in the past that the HRA would he only a party to the total cost and not pay all the cost. It would involve calling for bids, correcting the soil , and going through the process. He felt this was reasonable assistance to provide and then go on to the approach of buying the land, writing down the land, and selling it. If the HRA is agreeable to this, he would propose they authorize a public hearing for the sale of land and at that time, the City would bring in a developers agreement for the HRA to approve. Mr. Commers stated that when the HRA discussed this with Mr. Paschke in the past, they told him they were willing to give some assistance. They never made any commitment for total assistance on this project. At that time, they had asked Mr. Boardman to meet with Mr. Paschke to negotiate something and indicate that the HRA was willing to do something in terms of participation. He stated the HRA cannot make a commitment until they see some negotiations. Mr. Qureshi stated that if the HRA was willing to give some assistance, they should go ahead and set up a public hearing for the sale of land, the City would submit a developers agreement, put in some numbers and give the rationale for those numbers. He stated he has discussed this with HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 12 Mr. Paschke. Mr. Paschke does have some documentation on what the costs of soil correction and bidding are. The HRA's approach would be basically along the same guideline as was done with the two other projects in this tax increment district. If the HRA was comfortable with that, he would negotiate with Mr. Paschke and come back with the proposed agreements. Mr. Commers asked if they were talking about a public hearing on Lots 3, 5, and 6? Mr. Qureshi stated there was also a proposal on Lots 4 and 7, and he would suggest they include those two lots in the public hearing to start the process. Mr. Commers stated he had no problem calling for a public hearing on Lots 3, 5, and 6, but they have not had any information on Lots 4 and 7. The HRA has always taken the same position, that something should be negotiated and,subject to staff negotiation, the HRA is willing to give some assistance. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO AUTHORIZE THE CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON LOTS 3, 5, AND 6. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 14. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION N0. HRA 18-1984 OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT OF CERTAIN CLAIMS WITHOUT PRIOR HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPROVAL: Mr. Inman stated this is a standard resolution that the City has adopted. Most cities have resolutions like this. This would authorize him as the HRA's finance officer to authorize with his signature the release of checks prior to the HRA's approval . This will essentially save late charges and allows him to take any discounts when available. He stated these checks will be on the check register and, if the HRA has a problem with a check, even though the monies have gone out, the HRA can still bring an action on it. Mr. Inman stated this was discussed at the last HRA meeting. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 18-1984,"RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FO THE CITY OF FRIDLEY AUTHORIZING THE PAYMENT OF CERTAIN CLAIMS WITHOUT PRIOR HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPROVAL". UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 19, 1984 PAGE 13 15. CHECK REGISTER APPROVAL: MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE THE CHECK REGISTER DATED APRIL 6, 1984, IN THE AMOUNT OF $26,742.09. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 16. AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO HERRICK & NEWMAN: MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO APPROVE THE PAYMENT TO HERRICK & NEWMAN IN THE AMOUNT OF $335.80 AS PRESENTED IN THEIR INVOICE DATED APRIL 10, 1984. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE APRIL 19, 1984, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, t�2 ty e Saba Recording Secretary 1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEAR1N3 FRIDLEY HOUSDG AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley, Minnesota (the "HRA") , will hold a public hearing at its regular meeting to be held on Thursday, May 10, 1984, at the Fridley City Hall, 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, commencing at 7:00 p.m., CT, az the proposed sale, lease or other disposition by the HRA of real property located in the University Industrial Park, Lots 3, 5, and 6 , Block 4, along Main Street and Ranchers Road north of 79th Avenue, in Fridley, Minnesota. The subject property is located within the HRA's Redevelopment Project No. 1, and the proposed disposition thereof is being considered in connection with a redevelopment project for the property. All persons appearing at the public hearing will be given an opportunity to present their oral or written comments on the proposal. LARRY COMMERS Chairman Fridley Housing & Redevelopment Authority Publish: April 25 & May 2, 1984 4/0/4/2 iminummaiisialintiliMINIEMEIMEZ111 I - 1B r.1111 COPY ULVT ( U6IAi •Ir L)r t PF rifit° Vi. Lour lry ov A..+ootah. The•-ps.40T&., 4R..+ weurair'r #74.6.4.4v. 1 •)- hos on,o wh ed ben 4�^�N ensr Inv .'I _/ " 1\ rt.-WT. I r e of THE Arfratw0rr'14 am •{qac 4...r..r4•,rr `I , 4. ,.r+-2. 'Lal' n ` t--1�rL.Op-- /r-. `' U r- ______\ $ ; t S 1 yr t1/1 r2 T ^V G I-Vt+ 2S�M = W O N.L. a KS of i \� r"` E %, of 4 '_,/, 14,•1. la. is I ???rs ^t. 1 tc-i,. 1 AI ?a a-' k, Al -- \,4 fi .%' �.� ' I: .I t3•i•11 4. too 00 y)1'. ♦ /// ) r. \ I I • 3f / \�I 0 .0 L .0 (� z J o 81 OL' - 2 p I 10 `, t o Z c 1 C It/ a i VI , 11 r? \ ... 3 I. I i 1 '• a. 'F V r t3 i.., .. I ,. 400 ao %01.04 •-"- 25 '- 3- N '2S' i V. ti WI.1.5. 1•"1"1•S .Si r ; z (j1 I ,, 1 P. r a - (C A t I i hI i 1 H NO .f h N r 4 I Z i("" ; s. r ) �:: . ) i� r N4J1•ileYW1— er 200.00 20/•99 .- ., ~ c'c _L r -� - - — g'of....__,------N44'g59�'µ --'-_1,7 to0 /• I Z y O D I 1 ., r i► I J► e , el ,1 C a . v 3 S c, 4 �I 4 .. 0 0> I 4 3 �i I 1 a o , �� a r LL , � C a: r: c I i • Orr Ni :••'• • 211 tot 1 to 4047 spa t01•M ' .• ' k', 1 1 Oo• f ) i Nl9•15!!•W I I M i Nsq�•2e•aa'N ��--'` .45 .16 4'4.1,,4n 7_ Zi I I W �I N 1 I I N v i - V _o! g1 1 0 1 � �� e , pI 1 �41 •• 50 •w7. C Wl ,�. 4• I 1 v gyp• �� ..•.t... .. t24gr, 1 too 00 ,'A. 'r 4t • 0o /1. !'10 •+M•2e'w.4 r. 5 't '"e 'N 2 i r•'L. ti. .w Q ., 7 tl I S. I . ,e+ a . - •- t-e I 1 it.t. j 33 33 u n 4' ,34 t• 1 t` s3 . , �� 1 a +>`..-/ - --�4g.. - ' 1 \�aro /1.3473 I. •s 1 \ - t'-L�rM�S -IS �! 102n, 3 b ���- J .,.,. -la... a w ..,. f N.F. tis • ' _' 25 472 •• ` N ri•785rw • • / . . --- I 3 ASSIGNMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT This Agreement is made this day of 1984 , by and between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley, Minnesota (the "HRA") , a municipal corporation and political subdivision organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and Dayton-Hudson Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, doing business as Target Stores ( "Target") . RECITALS A. HRA and Target are parties to that certain Contract for Private Development and Lease-Purchase Agreement dated , 1984 , (the "Development Agreement" ) relating to certain real estate in the City of Fridley, Anoka County , Minnesota, legally described in Exhibit A annexed hereto (the "Property") . B. Upon the happening of certain events the Develop- ment Agreement becomes a lease of the portion of the Property not purchased by Target (the "Leased Premises") . C. Pursuant to Section 3. 3 of the Development Agree- ment Target is required to pay Rent for the Leased Premises . D. Target and the HRA desire to provide for payment of all of the Rent by the assignment hereinafter described. ACCORDINGLY, the parties hereto agree as follows : 1 . Definitions. Capitalized terms used herein but not defined herein shall have the meanings set out in the Develop- ment Agreement. 2 . Assignment. Simultaneous herewith Target shall assign to the HRA that certain issued by in the principal amount of (the "Investment" ) . Such assignment shall be a present, outright assignment, without recourse , and is not an assignment as security. 3 . Discharge of Obligation to Pay Rent. The concur- rent assignment of the Investment by Target to the HRA consti- tutes full and absolute performance and discharge by Target of its obligation to pay Rent pursuant to Section 3 . 3 of the Develop- ment Agreement and the HRA hereby fully and absolutely releases Target from the obligation to pay Rent pursuant to Section 3 . 3 of the Development Agreement, regardless of whether the Invest- ment is paid pursuant to its terms. 3A 4 . Re-assignment. The HRA agrees to re-assign the Investment to Target immediately upon the happening of any of the following described events: (a) Termination of the Development Agreement by either party pursuant to Section 3 .2 of the Development Agreement; (b) Purchase by the HRA of all interests of Target in the Property pursuant to Section 5.2 of the Develop- ment Agreement; or (c) Termination of the Development Agreement by Target under Section 10 . 1 (b) thereof prior to closing on Parcel A by reason of default by the HRA under Section 3 .5 of the Development Agreement. In the case of re-assignment of the Investment pursuant to para- graph 4 (b) above, the HRA shall be entitled to receive all interest which accrues on the Investment until the date of such re-assignment, and any amount thereof which is accrued but not yet payable on the Investment shall be paid by Target to the HRA within 15 days of the date that such accrued interest is payable on the Investment. 5 . Reduction of Rent. If Target purchases Subparcel B-1 or Subparcel B-2 , or both, and is thereby entitled to a reduction of Rent pursuant to Section 3.4 of the Development Agreement, then from and after the date such reduction is effec- tive the HRA shall owe Target the amount of such reduction, as calculated pursuant to Section 3 .4 of the Development Agreement which accrued amounts of such reduction shall be paid by the HRA to Target within 15 days of the date on which the HRA is entitled to receive interest on the Investment. 6 . Interest Until Rent Commencement. All interest which accrues on the Investment from the date hereof until the first day that no tenants (which are in possession on the date hereof of any portion of the Property) remain in possession of the Leases Premises shall belong to Target, and within 15 days of the date on which the HRA is entitled to receive such accrued interest on the Investment the HRA shall pay to Target all such interest. 7 . Other Obligations Continue. Except as expressly set forth in Paragraph 3 above, nothing herein contained shall release or discharge any of the obligations of Target under the Development Agreement. 8 . Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. - 2 - 4 3B HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA By Its And by Its DAYTON-HUDSON CORPORATION By Its And by Its - 3 - 3C STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF ANOKA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1984 , by the , and by the , of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley , Minnesota, a municipal corporation and political subdivision organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota , on behalf of said corporation. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1984 , by the , and by the , of Dayton-Hudson Corporation, a Minnesota corporation , on behalf of said corporation. This instrument was drafted by Faegre & Benson (CSF) 2300 Multifoods Tower 33 South Sixth Street Minneapolis , MN 55402 - 4 - 4 � THE CITY OF HOUSING ...::