Loading...
HRA 07/10/1986 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING THURSDAY, JULY 10, 1986 7:30 P.M. City of Fridley AGENDA HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING THURSDAY, JULY 10, 1986 .7:00 P.M. Location: Council Chamber (upper level) PAGES CALL TQ ORDER: ROLL CALL: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Housing & Redevelopment Authority Minutes: June 12, 1986 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: STATUS REPORT ON RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION AND STREET 1 - 1F IMPROVEMENTS TO MISSISSIPPI STREET UPDATE CN THE LUNDGREN DEVELOPMENT 2 - 2A CONSIDERATION OF A RESCLUTION OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT 3 - 3A AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY DIRECTING CONDEMNATION AND DETERMINING THE NECESSITY FOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY BY PROCEEDINGS IN EMINENT DOMAIN ON LOT 1 , BLOCK 1, SYLVAN HILLS PLAT 7 , 248 MISSISSIPPI STREET N.E. , FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA STATUS REPORT ON COLUMBIA PARK PROPERTTFS EXPANSION PROJECT 4 - 4A UPRATE CN LAKE POINTE CORPORATE CENTER 5 - 5D STATUS REPORT ON PARKING FOR FRIDLEY PLAZA OFFICE BUILDING 6 PARTNERSHIP WINFIELD DEVELOPMENT'S REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE 7 - 7A CONSIDERATION OF FINAL PAYMENT FOR TARGET PRQ3ECT 8 8B 9 - 9A CLAIMS OTHER BUSINESS: 10 - lOM ADJOURNMENT: 1 CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 . CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Commers called the June 12, 1986, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. ROLL CALL: Menbers Present: Larry Commers, Virginia Schnabel , John Meyer, Duane Prairie Menbers Absent: Walter Rasmussen Others Present: Mayor Nee Councilman Goodspeed Councilman Barnette Councilman Fitzpatrick Councilman Schneider Nasim Qureshi , HRA Director Jock Robertson,Community Development Director John. Flora, Public Works Director Rick Pribyl , City Finance Director Julie Burt, Asst. Finance Officer Dave Newman, HRA Attorney June Lundgren, 1140 Minnesota Building, St. Paul Cherry Lundgren, 1140 Minnesota Building, St. Paul Robert Levy (Rice Plaza), 100 S. 5th St. Mark Haggerty, Miller & Schroeder Jim Winkels, 5780 Lincoln Drive Bob Deike, 5248 Ewing Ave. S. Dave Weir, 10201 Wayzata Boulevard Linda Fisher, Legal Counsel for Woodbridge Properties (See attached list) APPROVAL OF MAY 8, 1986, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION BY HS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. COMMERS, TO APPROVE THE MAY 8, 1986, HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Commers took this opportunity to introduce John Meyer to the other_ Commission members and welcome him as a new member of the Housing & Redevelop- ment Authority. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE 2 • 1 . UPDATE ON DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH LOU LUNDGREN: Mr. Qureshi stated he would outline some of the changes that were different from the Agreement originally entered into with Mr. Lundgren that was now null and void. In the old Agreement, it was provided that the HRA would build an underground parking structure and lease it to the development. The mortgage company had problems with that so the Agreement has been restructured to say that there will be land acquired for the development of the multiple housing and whatever the HRA's cost is for acquisition of the property will be placed as a second mortgage on the proposed development. Mr. Qureshi stated that because of some shift in the timetable, they have adjusted some dates. It provided that Mr. Lundgren has to provide a new letter of credit by July 1 , 1986; and if he cannot get financing by August 1 , 1986, (if the HRA approves this agreement), the agreement will become null and void at that time. Mr. Qureshi stated there were some other items in the Agreement like the mini- mum improvements provided have to be at 82 million, and then on Sheet 1-A they had some assessment agreement. He stated that in checking with Anoka County, they were surprised to learn that Anoka County carried a very low value for apartment houses, so it was Staff's recommendation that the assessed value be $7 million instead of $82 million and they would proportionately reduce the other values accordingly. Mr. Qureshi stated all the documents the HRA had with the adjustment have been agreed upon and signed by the developer. He stated representatives for Lundgren were in the audience, and they have copies of the signed documents. Mr. Commers asked what the situation was with regard to the parking ramp itself. Mr. Qureshi stated the developer will build the parking ramp. The only thing the HRA is providing is land acquisition which will become a second mortgage on the property. Mr. Newman stated the most significant change, as pointed out by Mr. Qureshi , was that the HRA was not doing the leasing arrangement. They are doing a direct sale. The HRA is providing assistance up to $500,000. What they are doing is providing a loan to the developer in the amount equal to the cost of acquiring the parcel in an amount not to exceed $500,000. The developer will then pay that amount back to the HRA over a period of 15 years. Ms. Cherry Lundgren stated they have submitted the documents to the City for review. She stated there were some changes in amenities within the units. The units have been upgraded to meet the needs of the competitive market, but they feel it is the same product, if not an improved product. Ms. Schnabel asked when the apartment building would be constructed. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE 3 Ms. Lundgren stated that as soon as the property was able to be conveyed, because of the very tight timetable up front, they will be ready to start construction on the day they close on the property. Ms. Schnabel asked if it was the developer's intention to complete the project as originally proposed after the construction of the first building. Ms. Lundgren stated that was their intention. They feel the elderly project will probably be more attractive with the current financial situation as far as market rate bonds. MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. MEYER, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 7 -1986, A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT WITH THE FRIDLEY PLAZA ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. Mr. Ron Schoneman, Ron's Barber Shop, 246 Mississippi St. , asked how much longer were the tenants going to be left hanging, or was something going to be done finally? It was his understanding that June 12th was the end, and there would be no more extensions. Mr. Commers stated there were no more extensions with respect to the signing of the contract. This meeting was the deadline for the signing of the contract. If the developer does not meet the deadlines of July 1 and August 1 , the project will not go forward. If the deadlines are met, the project will move forward. He stated that it looked like the completion of the apartment building was Feb. 1988, and it was contemplated in the developer's plans that the front part of Rice Plaza was not required at this time. Mr. Qureshi stated the project being discussed at this time was essentially on open land. Once I1r. Lundgren proposes development in addition to the apartment building,there will be subsequent action by the HRA. At this time, the proposed development would not disturb the tenants in Rice Plaza. Ms. Schnabel stated she appreciated Mr. Schoneman's concern and the tenants ' concerns. She felt the HRA has finally draw the line as far as a timetable, and she felt it behooved Lou Lundgren to meet this particular timetable. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. RECEIVING COMMUNICATION FROM MR. FRED LEVY (MAY 19, 1986) : Mr. Newman stated he had indicated to the HRA at their last meeting that Mr. Levy would like to have a representative at the June 12th meeting to express his concerns. He stated Mr. Levy's son, Bob Levy, was at the meeting. Mr. Newman stated Mr. Levy had forwarded to him copies of his leases. Mr. Levy had asked that these not be part of public record. Mr. Newman stated he has reviewed the leases. It was his understanding that the County, as a result HOUSINNG & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE 4 • of the May 8th HRA meeting, also was in the process of getting an appraisal for the whole property including the Holly Shopping Center. They had hoped to have a rough number available for this meeting, but apparently the County has not yet furnished that information. Mr. Bob Levy stated he was the attorney for Rice Plaza, as well as some of the partners. The problem they have was a very simple one and that was that the original development, after it was put in the tax increment district, was before the HRA more than five years ago. Since then, there have been 3-4 prospective developers. It seemed that each time a different developer comes forth, the dust is stirred up, there are public hearings, the process goes forward, but the existing property owners and tenants suffer the conse- quences. For one reason or another, the developments have not gone through, but the property owners suffer difficulty in keeping the property leased. Existing tenants do not know how to deal with their long range plans. The developer goes away, but the owners have spent a lot of time and energy trying to soothe the nerves of the tenants; and no sooner do they think the issue has died, then the HRA finds a new developer and the process starts all over again. Mr. Levy stated it was a circumstance such as this that precipitated the acquisition of the hardware store site. At that time, about five years ago, they had entered into a verbal understanding to lease that property to a hardware store that would have taken the place of the Our Own Hardware store. He stated they try to be fair in their dealings with their tenants. They have been a member of the Fridley business community since 1968. They are not going to lease property without telling the prospective tenant that some- thing is pending. They want to be fair to prospective tenants; yet, they do not know what to tell them, so they refer them to the City and HRA staff to hear the story. Of course, as soon as that happens, the prospective tenant refuses to sign the lease because there are other opportunities where they can lease space without having to be faced with a "cloud of condemnation". Mr. Levy stated they now have the situation again where they have a vacancy in the shopping center. They have one tenant that has expressed a desire to expand if space was available. That space has become available. They suggested that the tenant talk directly to Staff about development plans; and after talking to Staff, the tenant withdrew any intention of leasing the adjoining space. They have another prospective new tenant; and they will be referring that tenant to the City Staff. They are very nervous that this tenant will walk away also once they hear about the latest development plans. Mr. Levy stated they have one tenant in the shopping center right now who is in poor health, unable to be in the store on a regular basis. He put the operation up for sale last fall , had a buyer; but again, not wanting to he guilty of misrepresentation,sent the buyer over to City Hall to find out the status of the property, and the buyer backed out of the deal . HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE 5 Mr. Levy stated he felt part of the responsibility for these_ circumstances fell upon the HRA. At the same time, they are trying to be cooperative with the City and HRA.. They recognize the HRA serves a public good and a public motive here, and that is to maximize the utilization of that property. Mr. Levy stated the Rice Plaza partnership would like the HRA to do one of two things: (1 ) either pull the property out of the tax increment district and leave them alone and the tenants alone; or, (2) take the property. Mr. Levy stated the motives here are public motives, not private motives for the existing property; yet the HRA has asked the property owners to take the risk and the financial burden attendant to the HRA's proposed development plans--the difficulty in leasing and continuing to renew leasing for existing tenants. This was not Rice Plaza's responsibility, it was the HRH's responsi- bility. If the HRA has these goals and objectives and motives, that was fine; but then the risks attendant to that are on the HRA's shoulders, not on the existing property owner. Mr. Levy stated the HRA had a unique opportunity at this time. The County was going to be taking frontage to expand Mississippi St. One circumstance that Rice Plaza as the property owner could not tolerate was to have their property cut up into little pieces. In the condemnation game, the sum of the parts does not necessarily equal the value of the whole. The value of the property was greater taken as a whole. He stated the County has recog- nized this; they recognize they are going to be facing a problem in how to deal with the severance issue by taking part of the property for county right- of-way. At the same time, they recognize the HRA will be needing to take the rest of the property in the relatively near future and decided it was silly to be addressing the issue separate from the HRA so they have decided to have their appraiser conduct an appraisal of the entire parcel . Mr. Levy stated they were at the point now whether Mr. Lundgren meets his timetable or not, Rice Plaza intends to resolve the issue. They hope to do this on a friendly basis with friendly negotiations; but, if necessary, on an adversary basis. Mr. Comers stated that as he understood it, there were some preliminary steps being taken to obtain some values and appraisals on the property and to assess the possibility of acquiring the Rice Plaza property. Mr. Levy stated one of his concerns was that obviously the existing project at this time dealt only with the vacant parcel of land. That did not make their problem go away. They will have the problem of how do they lease UD the existing space, do they make improvements to the property, do the tenants make improvements, can they make plans for expansion, etc.? So, they are looking at the entire parcel , not just the vacant land in back and not just the land in front that the County is looking at. They are looking at posi- tive indication from the HRA that they are going to take the necessary steps to acquire the entire parcel . HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE 6 • Mr. Qureshi stated that as information becomes available as_ far as value on the property, they will make that information available to the HRA. At that time, the HRA can make the determination whether or not it is prudent to acquire the property. Mr. Commers stated the HRA did appreciate Mr. Levy's position and they under- stood that position. The HRA would like to have a completed project as soon as they can, too. They have not been very pleased with the circumstances that have occurred over the last few years; but, hopefully, they will get something that will enable them to all go forward. He thanked Mr. Levy for coming to the meeting. 3. UPDATE ON WOODBRIDGE PROPERTIES' LAKE POINTE CORPORATE CENTER DEVELOPMENT: Mr. Qureshi stated City Staff had provided the HRA with some information on the Lake Pointe Corporate Center development at their last meeting. Since the HRA entered into an agreement with Woodbridge Properties in Dec. 1985, there were some timelines required, some commitments required by the HRA, and action required by the City Council. As far as the City Council and HRA are concerned, they have taken all the actions necessary to fulfill their part of the timetable commitment on the Agreement they entered into with Woodbridge. Mr. Qureshi stated Staff had also advised the HRA that one item that was 'providing some concern was the requirement by the PCA for an Indirect Source Permit (ISP) which the developer is required to provide when the development has more than 2,000 automobiles. Because this development has more than 2,000 automobiles, the developer made an application for an ISP. The ISP essentially controls the noise and air quality of the development and surrounding area affected by the development. The ISP, as originally submitted, necessitated certain improvements of the intersection at West Moore Lake Drive and Highway 65 and provided that as a condition of the year 2000 that when the total development was in, the air quality level at this intersection would be 8.6. The required level acceptable by PCA standards is 9. Because of the closeness of these two readings, there was some concern by the PCA of requiring improve- ment of Highway 65 itself. The City has all along contemplated improving the cross streets; but because of the high air quality reading, it necessitated that Highway 65 also be improved. The City had also indicated that if that was a requirement, in all practicality, they could not get the Highway Dept. to fund the improvement in a timely manner to meet the desire of the developer for the improvement of the intersection. Since then, Staff has met with the consultants again to find out what other options are available other than improving the highway to reduce the air quality number. Mr. Qureshi stated the developer has an option on the house next to the property the HRA is in the process of acquiring on W. Moore Lake Dr. By removing the structure from this location,the reading dropped to 4.6 which was a sub- stantial decrease and provided a much more comfort level to the need for improvement of the highway. c HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE 7 • Mr. Qureshi stated one of the other conditions proposed by the ISP was the monitoring of every phase of the development. That was of serious concern to the developer and the City because it could physically impair the develop- ment to proceed with the project if the readings are too close to the standards. Mr. Qureshi stated that the proposed permit has been on public record, has been published in the Minneapolis paper, and now is in the 30-day review period. If everything goes well , potentially that permit will be issued legally on July 15. Mr. Qureshi stated that because of the desire of the developer to have the West Moore Lake Drive/Highway 65 intersection improved quickly and the potential inability of the Highway Dept. to provide funding of the intersec- tion in a timely manner as desired by the developer, they have tried to evaluate available options to expedite the construction. One option was to provide funding other than from the Highway Dept. He stated a few days after the last HRA meeting, they had tried to evolve a shared agreement between the developer and the HRA to fund the cost of the Highway 65 improvement. The developer was quite insistent that the cost be totally funded by the HRA. Since then, they have had meetings and discussions and have proposed several agreements regarding the intersection improvement. (Mr. Prairie arrived at 8:20 p.m. ) Mr. Qureshi stated that basically what the HRA had provided the developer in the Dec. 1985 agreement was that if the developer completes the proposed development, land would be essentially paid back to him through the increment. The HRA would provide $2.1 million worth of public improvement on the land, the HRA would package the land between the 100 Twin property and Jerry Johnson property, and the HRA would provide improvements to the Highway 65/West Moore Lake Drive intersection. Additionally, he was willing to recommend that the HRA provide total improvement to the intersection at no ,additional cost to the developer. Mr. Qureshi stated the HRA members had a copy of a drafted agreement written by Dave Newman which embodied all the items the Staff feels are responsive to what was additionally proposed by Woodbridge. It was entitled, "Addendum to the Contract for Private Redevelopment By and Between the HRA and Lake Pointe Investment Co., a Limited Partnership". Ms. Schnabel asked if there was an estimated dollar figure for the total project upon completion . Mr. Qureshi stated they have estimated the total value would be ove r $80 million if the project is completed as planned. Mr. Newman stated Section 3.6 of the agreement, Material Frustration, was due to the fact that on May 1 , 1986, the ISP was not available, and under the agreement, all governmental permits had to be in by May 1 . It was his HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE 8 interpretation, as well as that of Jim O'Meara's who was involved in the initial document, that by the HRA agreeing to pay for the cost of the intersection in order to obtain an ISP, that then addressed the problems Woodbridge-has raised and eliminate the reason for Material Frustration. The purpose of Material Frustration was to allow 90 days for parties to negotiate and address the problems. Mr. Newman stated the agreement presented to the HRA was a rough draft , and in discussions with City Staff and the developer, it was Staff's position that this was as far as the City could go in recommendations , at least for the charges as they presently understand them. He reviewed the proposed agreement with the HRA members and summarized the major items as follows : A. That the HRA would assume responsibility for paying the necessary costs associated with the highway and intersection improvements required by the Indirect Source Permit. B. That the Fridley City Council would grant final approval to the rezoning, special use permit, and plat applications within 45 days of Lake Pointe acquiring the Access Parcel . C. Lake Pointe would agree to purchase the access parcel for the previously agreed sum of $1,000,000.00, upon the issuance of the Indirect Source Permit. D. That within 45 days of the issuance of the Indirect Source Permit the HRA would award the Contracts for the Public Improvements and this work would then be completed within 11 months of the awarding of the Contracts . E. That the implementation of the Minimum Market Values for the Minimum Improvements would be delayed one year. F. That if in fact the improvements to Highway 65 are not substantially completed by December 31, 1987, then for each additional year that these improvements are delayed , Lake Pointe's cost of acquiring the Access Parcel would be reduced by $100,000.00 Additionally, if the improvements to Highway 65 are not completed by December 31 , 1987, then the implementation of the Minimum Market Value for the Minimum Improvements would be delayed a second year. Mr. Commers stated there were significant changes in this draft, especially in the Assessments, that created a substantial additional risk to the HRA. Mr. Weir stated he would address some of the assumptions they had in November and December prior to signing the Agreement. This site was very alluring with a lot of potential . The area, however, was not an area that was established as a multi-tenant corporate headquarters rental-type office location in a north suburban area. They felt and shared the same dreams as the City that it did have the potential . It was not without substantial risks to undertake that, but the potential was there and it was an unusual opportunity. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE 9 Mr. Weir stated the first assumption was that they would be in a position to sign an assessment agreement that would put the City in the position of being assured of having tax revenues as a result of Woodbridge being assured of being able to have a development. That ability of being able to have a development, obviously, was a function of a variety of different permits and the complexity of obtaining them was beyond their wildest imagination. He stated there has been a lot of frustration and hard work on both sides . Mr. Wier stated the PCA, even though it has issued a draft on the ISP, just the issuance of the ISP itself did not facilitate Woodbridge to do all the things the City would like them to be committed to doing. They did not have the ISP by May 1 , and that put them into a position of material frustration. As a result of being in that position, they have and face, if they are to proceed, substantial costs as a result of that delay. Mr. Wier stated the second assumption was that, based upon the risk in the marketplace in this particular area, they had always contemplated that the site improvements would be installed and completed during 1986 for a variety of reasons: a) to create an entirely different atmosphere for the site than it currently has b) at that time, they believed the reconfiguration of the inter- change would be under construction during 1987 ; c) construction would definitely impede the ability to rent the property. Mr. Weir stated they had always assumed they would have the park campus-like improvements this year and would have the ability to start a new facility this summer so that next spring when the interchange was under construction, they would have at least their selling environment with an image they could be merchandising to future tenants. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE10 Mr. Weir stated the result of this delay and as a result of the permit, they were in the position where now they, collectively all of them, cannot guarantee any realistic likelihood that improvements can be delivered to that point during 1986. Not anyone was really at fault; it was just that because of •circumstances that have occurred referred to in the Material Frustration section, they are going to be unable to be in that position. That imposes one level of delay and additional costs. Mr. Weir stated that in its present format as the contracts have been proposed, there was substantial likelihood there will be increased costs even if the contracts are awarded in the form they are today. Mr. Weir stated that the ISP as it is proposed talks about Phase 1 and Phase 2. Phase 1 refers to the initial building of an 120,000 sq. ft. office building and a restaurant. The ISP in its current form says they cannot commence construction of anything other than the first building and the restaurant until the entire intersection and cross streets and Highway 65 have been totally completed. The City has some legitimate concerns that this improvement might be delayed beyond 1987. The Staff has worked incredi- bly hard to try to get the Highway Department's support, and maybe it can he done, but the potential undefinable costs of delay as a result of that can be enormous. Ms. Linda Fisher, Legal Counsel for Woodbridge Properties, stated the ISP was out for review in draft form. Based on their experience in the past and with the information presented in the permit which was also out for a 30-day public comment period in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet, she would say the ISP was close to 100% that it would be issued. To clarify what Mr. Weir had said, the way the draft permit reads right now, they cannot proceed beyond the first building and restaurant (Phase 1 ) until the inter- section is completed. It was possible they could conduct additional traffic and air quality analyses of what conditions would be for a second or third building and submit that to the PCA for review; and if it shows the standards will be met, it was possible the PCA would agree that they could proceed with the undefined phases for buildings. She stated they have not conducted those analyses and they do not know what the analyses would show nor do they know what the PCA's reaction would be. The PCA has indicated a willingness to look at it. There was some concern about timing and some danger in a 30- day period of submitting new information and "upsetting the apple cart". It has been their experience that it is best to proceed with the permit and get under construction and to later possibly look at the question of modi- fication. Mr. Weir stated this was an awkward spot for all of them to be in. They all had a dream; it was very carefully structured with a lot of different assump- tions. The proposal to repay a portion of Woodbridge's costs was set up in a very unusual , but beneficial , way, to the City--that if, and only if, Woodbridge performs do they get a repayment. If there is no money there on a particular year, they lose in perpetuity that right to ever be repaid, so the speed with which they can develop to generate"x" amount of tax dollars and the priority which they have over those tax dollars as the increment dollars was absolutely critical to them in being able to deliver and be in a HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGF 11 position to make the kind of commitment they bargained for in November and December. As a result of things that none of them wanted tb see, they are being faced with substantial costs as a result of this delay. Mr. Weir stated the Staff has done a terrific job with the guidelines they have had. The real issue at this meeting was whether the HRA interested in making an additional investment and certainly a sizeable one to put them collectively in a position to be able to go forward to the level the City would like to see. Woodbridge has no control over that at all , but they would like to see that happen. They also undersand it is really a value judgement that needs to be made. Mr. Commers stated that any additional funding would have to be taken from another project. Mr. Weir stated that was a value judgement. He would ask that the HRA look at the level of development. If they can make it as successful as they all think it can be, there is the potential for substantial increment in the future that can be a resource to repay the investment if the HRA feels it is a worthwhile investment. Mr. Qureshi stated that in his 22 years with the City, he has never put so much time and effort into a project as he has on this one. He has tried to evaluate as a staff representative to the HRA what he would be willing to recommend to the HRA. They have already negotiated that if Woodbridge performs, they get the land and all the utilities up to $2.1 million. They are also saying they will provide a certain level of intersection improvement as originally agreed, and because of the special problem of the ISP, he would recommend that the HRA provide additional money to the cost of whatever the Highway Dept. should have paid for the Highway 65/West Moore Lake Drive intersection. He stated he felt this project was one of the best things as it is envisioned that could happen to Fridley. He would recommend that the HRA accept the agreement prepared by Mr. Newman as Staff's recommendation. They would be giving Woodbridge Properties some additional help to help preserve a very good project in the City of Fridley. Mr. Newman stated he would like to make the comment that Mr. Weir has not agreed to the terms of the proposed agreement. Councilman Schneider stated he was enthused about the project; but he was also concerned that the HRA as a governmental agency was not in the business of taking the risk as opposed to being the enabler or facilitator to make the project happen. He stated if Mr. Qureshi was comfortable with his recommendation, he would support that recommendation. Mr. Weir stated that while they were not able to deliver with the level of obligations put upon them as a result of the agreement, he wanted to make it very clear that they are not contemplating that the City's general obligation bonds would be at risk. They are contemplating that the level of tax incre- ment necessary to meet those payments would be guaranteed; but that is not addressed in the agreement. He stated there needed to be some significant modifications incorporated in the agreement. For example, a one year delay rolls up an additional $1 million that could be lost forever. They will make HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE 12 sure the general obligation bonds are not put at risk, notwithstanding the fact that they may not be able to build to that level. In exchange for that, they are asking for significant relief as a result of additional costs incurred as a result of delays that are known and potential delays that are undetermined at this time for reasons such as the ISP and higher costs that might be incurred as a result of not being able to put improvements on the site. He did not want to just take exception to the sincerity of the Staff's proposal , but he had to say that they could not uphold their end of the bargain based on that kind of proposal . Mr. Qureshi stated Staff's prpposal has not been accepted by the HRA, and the Staff needs some direction from the HRA as to what direction the Staff can take. Can they go beyond this proposal? Ms. Schnabel stated that the HRA already has a commitment of approx. $9-10 million, even before this proposal was agreed upon, for a project that is valued at $80 million. In addition to that $9-10 million, they could potentially have an additional financial responsihility if certain agreements are not fulfilled within certain dates according to the proposal they have before them. Her over- all question for the HRA and perhaps the City to decide was: Was there a point where they reach a limit on a percent of a development they want to commit to? She stated she has supported the project as much as anyone else, but she still thought they had to decide how much more they are going to commit. Mr. Qureshi stated it was definitely a value judgement. Mr. Commers stated he was not convinced the HRA should have to run any additional risks,whether remote or realistic. They are helping the project by putting in another million dollars. They might have to pick up additional costs on public improvements if the contracts that are let have to be renego- tiated, and he felt they were getting pretty close to the line they were going to have to draw. He questioned whether paragraphs E and F, as summarized by David Newman, should even be in the negotiations . Mr. Weir stated this was all very complex, but as it related to the HRA's commitment, everything was very contingent and their concern about delay was not only time is money; it may be money lost forever. Ms. Schnabel stated the highway has to be improved because of the development; but that was not to say that the Highway Dept. itself could not step in had the City done nothing with Highway 65, causing problems and affecting the development. She felt in some ways the HRA was being asked to take more risk than they should and they are being affected by another governmental body and the material frustration that Woodbridge is suffering because of that was being placed on the HRA's shoulders. Maybe the HRA had material frustrations, too, that had to be considered at some point. She was concerned about how much of a dollar commitment the HRA can put into this development overall . She under- stood that the Staff has some real problems in trying to negotiate and come HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE 13 to some understandings, and it was frustrating for Staff to not know how far they can go. But, she did feel that somewhere along the line they need to get a handle on how much of a dollar respnnsibilityy they are willing to risk. She was concerned by the penalty clause on the HRA's behalf as item F of Mr. Newman's summary. Mr. John Meyer stated that, being a new member of the HRA and unfamiliar with the background on this project, he would have to strongly rely on the HRA staff who have studied this project in great detail . Mr. Weir stated he wanted to make it clear that as they originally contem- plated this structure, it was contemplated that they would, through their obligations, be contributing $250,000 from their project to the interchange; and in addition to that, it was contemplated there would be proceeds that would be available for a variety of other costs in the approximate amount of $500,000, so collectively through their various payments, there would already have been a direct investment on their behalf to the interchange of approx. $3/4 million of the total interchange budget. Mr. Weir stated that in response to Ms. Schnabel 's concerns, they would be much more comfortable and be able to address some of the HRA's concerns if, in fact, their $5.6 million was guaranteed in some form to be repaid to them as opposed to being totally contingent. If the development was unable to occur, regardless of whose fault it was, they would lose that money forever and could not guarantee they could ever give the HRA and the City what they would like to see on this property. It was a totally different kind of obli- gation than the HRA has ever encountered before. Ms. Schnabel stated she had not had any indication from Mr. Weir as to whether or not they contemplate proceeding with Phase 2 after they receive the ISP. Mr. Weir stated they do intend to proceed with Phase 2. They want to be able to proceed, and as soon as it is safe to do so, they intend to get permission to do more. It all gets back to the $5.6 million. If there is not any cash flow to get it, they don't get the S5.6 nillion, and yet their taxes continue to be paid as a result of their obligations on holding the property. Mr. Newman stated there was a 90-day negotiation period provided in the Material Frustration clause which started May 1st. He thought this exchange at this meeting was beneficial to both parties and he hoped that within the next few days they can get together with Mr. Weir and Mr. Deike and resolve these issues. Mr. Commers stated the HRA and the City want to maintain a good relationship with Woodbridge Properties. Mr. Weir thanked the HRA. He stated they are happy to be in Fridley. The reactions they have gotten in the marketplace have been extremely favorable. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE14 Mr. Qureshi stated he would like some direction from the HRA as to whether the HRA should be providing more assistance to Woodbridge Properties than what Staff was recommending. Mr. Commers stated it was his opinion that the HRA has given too much assistance already. Mr. Prairie stated he felt that maybe the HRA should provide a little more assistance. Ms. Schnabel stated she felt the HRA has given as much assistance as they should give at this point, taking into consideration what has been proposed by Staff. Beyond that, she would not be in favor of more assistance. She was concerned about how much they are putting into this project and the risks that are being presented to them versus the total dollar value of the develop- ment in proportion to other commitments they have made to other projects, realizing the more they put into this project, the more they are taking away from some other projects. Mr. Commers stated that paragraphs 7 and 8 in the Staff's proposal have gone too far. He did not necessarily see a problem with putting the assessment off for a year, but he was concerned about going beyond that. Mr. Commers stated Staff has heard the opinions of the HRA and there was nothing further they could do to direct Staff at this point. 4. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL TO AWARD CONTRACT FOR DEMOLITION AND SITE GRADING PROJECT NO. 163 AND WATER AND SANITARY SEWER PROJECT NO. 162: Mr. Qureshi stated the HRA had the following choices regarding the awarding of the contracts: 1 . If legally possible, the HRA could recommend to the City Council that the City Council award the contracts if there was no increase in cost, there was an approval .of extension of time, and subject to the Indirect Source Permit. 2. If the above was not legally possible, then the HRA could recommend to the City Council that the City Council reject the bids and readvertise. It was the consensus of the HRA to recommend to the City Council that the City Council award the contract for demolition and site grading Project No. 163 and water and sanitary sewer Project No. 162, subject to the following conditions: (1 ) there is no increase in cost; (2) there is approval of the extension of time; and (3) subject to the ISP. Chairperson Commers declared a recess at 10:00 p.m. Chairperson Commers reconvened the meeting at 10:30 p.m. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE15 • 6. APPROVAL OF S.E.H. CONTRACT FOR 100 TWIN AREA DESIGN: Mr. Qureshi stated it was their hope that if there had been an amended agree- ment between Woodbridge Properties and the HRA that was approved by the HRA, then Staff would have recommended to the HRA that they go ahead with the contract with the consultant to proceed with the plans. Since the amended agreement has not been agreed upon by the HRA, he did not think it could recommend that the HRA proceed with the contract with the consultant. Mr. Qureshi stated Staff would like the HRA to at least authorize Staff to expend some additional funds to keep the project moving until the next meeting. He was sure it was the desire of all concerned that they keep the project moving until it is either approved or not approved. The Commissioners agreed it was best to keep the project moving ahead. Hope- fully, things would be resolved by the next meeting. MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO EXPEND ADDITIONAL MONIES TO THE S.E.H. CONTRACT FOR THE 100 TWIN AREA DESIGN UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING: UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. APPOINTMENT OF TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE UNIVERSITY AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY: Mr. Robertson stated that on page 7 of the agenda, eight of the twelve individuals had been appointed to the Technical Advisory Committee. They have polled most of the businesses in Moon Plaza and Holly Center for individuals interested in serving on the Committee. Mr. Commers stated there were people representing the Sylvan Hills area and the Hyde Park area, but what about the residential neighborhood going north along University? Shouldn't there be input from people on the north end? Mr. Robertson stated it was the consultant's recommendation that the TAC membership be kept at a manageable size. This was discussed at the Staff level and it was Staff's recommendation that all of the property owners on the corridor be on the mailing list and be invited to all the TAC meetings, but in terms of size, they felt they should keep with the consultant's recommenda- tion of 12-13 members. Mr. Prairie stated that if one of the businesspeople did not accept the membership, maybe a homeowner from the northern residential area along University be added. Mr. Robertson stated that was at the discretion of the HRA. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE16 MOTION BY MR. MEYER, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPOINT THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE TO THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE UNIVERSITY AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY: Virginia Schnabel - Chair Richard Harris Joy Otten Gerald Paschke Gloria Lund (alternate) David Harris Teresa Ledwein Robert Schroer (alternate) Carmel Sheridan (alternate) Pat Gabel (Sylvan Hills rep. to be named) UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. APPROVAL OF BID TO MOVE HOUSE AT 5747 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. : MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO AWARD THE BID TO MOVE THE HOUSE AT 5747 CENTRAL AVENUE TO SAFEWAY MOVERS IN THE AMOUNT OF $257.00. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. PROPERTY ACQUISITION REQUEST FROM MR. GARY PIERCE, 6132 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. : Mr. Qureshi stated the HRA had received a copy of a memo to Mr. Robertson and himself from Jim Robinson dated May 30 stating that Mr. & Mrs. Gary Pierce have requested that the HRA purchase their property at 6132 Central Ave. Mr. Qureshi stated it has been the general policy of the HRA not to acquire property when there are no plans for that property. However, if the HRA wished to acquire the property, it was a reasonable price and there was a willing seller. MOTION BY MR. MEYER, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO REJECT THE PROPOSED OFFER FOR THE HRA TO ACQUIRE THE PIERCE PROPERTY AT 6312 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. RECEIVING COMMUNICATION FOR WINFIELD: Mr. Qureshi stated Winfield Development was requesting that the HRA recommend to the City Council that the property just south of the U. S. Swim & Fitness club be declared as having the potential for redevelopment property because of the soil correction costs which make the total land costs higher than the market costs for that area. The City Council has already authorized by preliminary resolution $3 million in IRB. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, JUNE 12, 1986 PAGE 17 Mr. Qureshi stated that because of the type of development Winfield is proposing for this property, they cannot compete in the State IRB pool until Sept. 30, 1986. If it is declared as a potential redevelopment property, then they can be eligible for the pool right away. If that was agreeable to the HRA, then they should adopt the resolution which requests the City Council to assist Winfield Development in obtaining the State IRB allocation. Mr. Commers asked if it was the intention of Winfield Development to also come to the HRA for assistance in soil correction. Mr. Jim Winkels, Winfield Development, stated, yes, they have done that in their letter to Mr. Qureshi dated June 5, 1986. He stated they are prohibited right now from asking the State for the IRB allocation and they are asking the City to give them the opportunity to go to the State to get those funds. There is still no guarantee, but it is their feeling that this point in time is a good opportunity to receive the allocation. By Sept. 30, the allocation might be gone. Mr. Winkels stated they have an identifiable cost of $116,000 plus for soil correction. They have requested approximately 3% or $90,000 in soil correc- tion from the HRA. They are not asking for this assistance at this time, but, if possible, they would like to come back and request assistance for soil correction costs. MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. HRA 8 -1986 TO ASSIST WINFIELD DEVELOPMENT IN OBTAINING STATE INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND ALLOCATION. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11 . CLAIMS: MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MS. SCHNABEL, TO APPROVE THE CHECK REGISTERED DATED JUNE 12, 1986, IN THE AMOUNT OF $238.30. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: Chairperson Commers declared the June 12, 1986, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting adjourned at 11 :30 p.m. Respectfully submitted,p Lyn ' Sa� Recording Secretary 1 L - I(4-o arpkne, 4 1r4114 ji&t.(Pli P - (I 40 N.A..:,,......., 7 h-1 't /- -r,,,,,-- 47114%fiT' 1/4-#21 (-1(C7:r 7-lai ) /Or 5 - .7 -/ ,- 1- Ya' 77: 417-, 5 )- ,r,,,,,, i 4.-tit, i ', 2/ ..,t/k 6, Zy--; ( 1 , -; drad,, ,:z, 5q/ Zo_ Ctx,,e: 6&trz( 0.cao- lkitti4K_ JuE 55(13 ::)___ . (41j14 J/471-) 119,Litatt _ f-10-ail6 & Tit 5 V-f-3- 52J-o 12ze) a7-II- A cx 3 i , ii - A7.Lc. / (/... LLy, ,f_.-:1' 11; IL:C.'‘-e-t: 'fl. c;,,',,L. .r/-7 Z•;. '-. 3 y__-, )0...t,--,._ &,,t,,_),.A.., ___, 3 kr- .,, 1 D � DIRECTORATE o°^a L OF Qo � PUBLIC WORKS FROMEMORANDUM �— TO: Nasim Qureshi, City Manager PW86-178 FROM: John G. Flora,(Public Works Director DATE: July 1, 1986 • SUBJECT: Mississippi/University Ave. Intersection The Anoka County Highway Department has been attempting to identify the right-of-way costs for the intersection improvement of Mississippi at University Avenue. In addition, they are attempting to identify the total acquisition costs for the Rice Creek Plaza property and Dairy Queen. To nate, they have not been received. As soon as this information is available, I will provide then to you. Based upon the delay in determining the right-of-way acquisition costs and a possible condemnation process, the Mississippi and University Avenue intersection improvement will not be accomplished this year as originally planned. Qnce the right-of-way and property costs have been determined, action can be initiated to obtain the needed right-of-way so that the project could be scheduled for an early start in 1987. Because of the delay in the street improvement, it would be appropriate to delay the NSP underground electric distribution project until next spring so as to minimize disruption of traffic and services in this area. I have contacted NSP and they would agree to delay within the original proposal suiinitted at an estimated cost of $95,000.00. Accordingly, I would recommend that the HRA consider executing the NSP agreement so that they can make appropriate plans for•oanpleting this work next spring. JGF/ts Attachment S ,'►TEMENT OF WORK REQUESTED lA Fo.M 17 7017 172 91 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY March 19 19 86 WORK REQUESTED BY City of Fridley • WORK TO BE AT City of Fridley (See attached sketches (2)) ADDRESS Mississippi Street from University Ave. west to 2nd St. , Mississippi St. south to Satellite Lane, - 700' along University Ave. west Service Rd. , No. of Mississippi St. CONSISTING OF: Northern States Power Company will replace the existing overhead electric distribution facilities with underground distribution along the above routes at a cost not to exceed $90,000.00. This price does not include the cost to relocate services to existing buildings. It also assumes that streets to be crossed can be open-cut for installation of NSP underground facilities. The City of Fridley to provide necessary easements and clear area of all construction obstacles. Compaction along cable route after installation of NSP facilities is the City's responsibility. NSP will backfill the trench with existing soil . All restoration of construction area is the responsibility of the City of Fridley. The facilities installed or removed by the Company shall be the property of the Company and any payment by customer shall not entitle customer to any ownership interest or right therein. The undersigned hereby requests and authorizes the NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY to do the work described above,and in consideration thereof,agrees to pay an amount not to exceed Ninety Thousand and no/10C (s 90.000.00 ),in accordance with the following terms: Payable within 30 days following notice from NSP that construction is completed. Credit Approval Receipt of the above amount hereby acknowledged on behalf of NSP by NORTHERN STATES PO COMPANY Customer City of Fridley - By (6/ 4'^.4 By NSP Representative J. Ra defel dt Division NORTH NSP Proj. No. FROM-MIS-AAE Const.$ Rem. $ Maint.$ Oper. $ Transf. $ Total $ ORIGINAL-DIVISION ACCOUNTING COPY-CUSTOMER COPY-DIVISION DISTRIBUTION ENGINEERING 1B i I c I 1 ti I I SAT-L L:�—t L4. h lk,0 z o r) o ',< t a C . k ii h . a , n, 8 v w N 4, , y w • Q� e d -'�-... 9: 4`� ff• 4-4". ,,t 'or Writ.," Oil'IS' }_' >� LaJ,Qx' 33C.A..? ' -' ? - 3_3x4. 4 :8 4 7,. ..._ a I ii 9' E8 \ /6s' /46-' ' /4J /6.,- . :.zIe,e �.`!I i /72:sSrSs.zPPS. Z^':I I' ilk \i N N tO p k (X) ,.,t e\ t oo t ° �bk N o° y N. •••\ w a O 4l ap ^ (� \ —N - 1 1.. ' L O t C. Z. , V . . tg I4.i 61 !�•! CD D D 1'1moi 0 '.\ C \ \ ! o aD3b �~� n ?C • H lr :1) k- N 3 0 a th w a o, z !3 t 1 i ire ilI 1 f..,j\:-/ D. V. o !. ,t g, v. 2 E - - a " !i: m S < 2 I C v t. 0 x �g tlry > ,c ° ap a z r, t. M ! < n m ip S G O x ' ! _ y C .2 Y G ( . ' C c / V2-- "h 2 2 v. ®{ Ad 4w, T \ nli : 1 7` W 11 I I 1 0 I 1.1 & h�' to 1 p VI r ° f H � m t � LI- - z. - I\ Rei N) 0 3-G SK o Po Nt 01 t kI to _"'_"'® y ti \ M � o i t ko. P. jbJ f n1 b• O o, i LI 1' ,EP — Clo 200•6 0 ij. ----- - —3-% Ac. TAcR£rI.O Goo' -.L.- 1 nsri vc, ".""4; IN o PK./AC. _ .1 O .1., LI © .7-$-oo INCA/ 4G. ]COQ,rtl �il Li �� w "i • • • N V --- )( .J /yIrsSSSSLP77 14 1 0 • hNN ' 1 L., y ti w 3.21b z. ^ ) '1, 3 b TN k b, N '...\,..., L., e, CI /1,1'\ ' IN - S7GN / b `V i v b h i I- o n N � � a �, oV . Xt. /rlc t. 4 y b • a f`c .P�n/-3 /✓-4 _.E. Of t.INS✓. X X o�Y /rIa78�. iy 6.. 10 / eon o f C `I 'z IN I 0 ? � \ itis I tt )c `..._ --a /N IV, 't'l 7// C.) il, )2_ 1 ,_ O fr ` -5 v. Z C C ¢ • C, 2411k 1 ' ` " m im EZ x c c -mac cs GT .� m = F! ! w '' in , id)1 0. 7 1D HOUSI'JG & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 10, 1986 PAGE 3 MOTION BY MR. RASMUSSEN, SECONDED BY MR. PRA*RIE, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 4 1986, A RESOLUTION GRANTING ANOKA COUNTY A RIGHT-OF-WAY TO PROPERTY ALONG MISSISSIPPI STREET ABUTTING THE FRIDLEY LIQUOR WAREHOUSE AND DOCTOR RYAN'S AUTOMOTIVE FOR THE PURPOSE OF STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ALONG MISSISSIPPI STREET. Ms. Schnabel stated she really hoped the County does consult with the business people in the area regarding the impact of the road situation, because it might cause some problems. She did understand the philosophy regarding the proposed improvements and how it would improve the traffic flow through that intersection. Mr. Qureshi stated there was no question that the property owners would know about this proposal because of the right-of-way the County wants to acquire. City Staff can certainly request that the County keep the business people and tenants well informed of their plans. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECLARED THF MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BUDGET AMOUNT TO BF SPENT FOR UNDERGROUND POWER LINE RELOCATION BY NSP ON MISSISSIPPI STREET, WEST OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE, AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER Tn EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE NOUSIIJG t REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND NORTHERN STATES PO !ER: Mr. Qureshi stated he had given the HRA this information last year. At that tine, they had a rough estimate fron NSP. Now NSP has mi: their detailed plans, and they feel the cost will he nore in the area of $85-90,000, so they are asking the NRA to authorize $90,000 for the relocation of NSP power lines underground on Mississippi St. west of University Ave. Also, service would have to be provided to Dr. Ryan and power to the Holly Center sign. That estimate was $5,000 or under, so that was the reason for the request for $95,000. MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 5 1986, A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BUDGET AMOUNT TO BE SPENT FOP UNDERGROUND POWER LINE RELOCATION BY NSP ON MISSISSIPPI STREET, WEST OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HOUSING S REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND NORTHERN STATES POWER. Mr. Rasmussen asked if there was a legal opinion regarding this relocation cost to NSP as it might affect any other contract or agreement the City had with NSP as discussed previously regarding a conflict over relocation costs. Mr. Qureshi stated the situation Mr. Rasmussen was talking about was when they were relocating lines underground in the Center City area. At that tine, an NSP employee, without checking with a superior, made a commitment to a certain cost. When NSP came back later with a higher cost, the City said that NSP had committed to the former cost and forced NSP to stay with lE HOUSING R REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, APRIL 10, 1986 PAGE 4 that commitment. That situation did not in any way affect these relocation costs. Mr. Prieditis stated .the HRA did approve and amend a resolution on Sept. 5, 1985, changing the relocation amount from $95,000 to $85,000. Mr. Rasmussen stated he was just concerned that there not be any other misunderstandings with NSP over these relocation costs. UPON A VOICE VOTE, PRIEDITIS, PRAIRIE, AND SCHIIABEL VOTING AYE, RASMUSSEN ABSTAINING, VICE-CHAIRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED. 5. RELOCATION CLAIM FOR 5747 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. : Mr. Qureshi stated they had given the LIRA the background information on the relocation claim and a letter from Jack Bagley, Relocation Consultant, stating why these payments were necessary ,quoting sections of the Uniform Relocation and Real Properties Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 and the Minnesota State Statute 117.52. Mr. Qureshi stated payment was recommended in the amount of 54,000 for down payment assistance and $2,086 for actual moving costs. MOTION BY MS. SCIINABEL, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO ACCEPT IIR. BAGLEY'S RECOMMENDATION AND AUTHORIZE THE PAYMENT or 4,onn poi.? DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE AND $2,086 FOR MOVING COSTS TO ROBIN L. TROMBLEY AND STEVEN J. PUKES, 5747 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. Mr. Rasmussen stated his only comment was that these costs seened exorbitant. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. CLAIMS: MOTION BY MR. PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. RASMUSSEN, TO APPROVE THE CHECK REGISTER DATED APRIL 10, 1986. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION BY MS. SCHNABEL, SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE THE BILLING FOR PERSONAL SERVICES, JANUARY THROUGH MARCH, 1986, IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,262.90. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON PRIEDITIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. OTHER BUSINESS: Mr. Qureshi stated the City had written a letter to Lou Lundgren outlining that if it was his desire to move ahead with his project on the southwest quadrant of Mississippi and University behind Rice Plaza, the City needed sone additional information and documentation from him. 1F RESOLUTION NO. 5 -1986 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BUDGET AMOUNT TO BE SPENT FOR UNDERGROUND POWER LINE RELOCATION BY NSP ON MISSISSIPPI STREET, WEST OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND NORTHERN STATES POWER. WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, on September 5, 1985, adopted Resolution No. HRA 12-1985 authorizing the City to negotiate the relocation of the NSP power lines underground on Mississippi Street between University Avenue and 2nd Street and provide services to the SW quadrant and that this improvement cost was not to exceed $85,000; and WHEREAS, the initial estimate of $85,000 provided by NSP was an estimate based on a visual inspection; and WHEREAS, NSP has determined that their actual cost for burying the overhead feeder line on Mississippi Street will be $90,000; and WHEREAS, there is an additional cost of $5,000 for the rewiring of the Holly Shopping Center sign and Docc Ryan's Service Station which was not included in the initial estimate from NSP; and WHEREAS, it has been established that it is desirable to relocate the NSP lines underground, and it is necessary that the rewiring of the Holly Center and Doc Ryans be completed. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley, to authorize the City to increase the budget amount to no more than $95,000 for the relocation of NSP power lines underground on Mississippi Street between University Ave. and 2nd Street and rewire services to the Holly Shopping Center and Doc Ryans. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority , to authorize the City to execute an agreement between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley and Northern States Power for the abovementioned services. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 10th DAY OF April , 1986. LAWRENCE R. COMERS - CHAIRMAN ATTEST: NASIM M. QUERESHI - DIRECTOR 2 - Tt1E zEEEEEF STEPAt1EAD BANK STATE BANK OF SPRINGFIELD SPRINGFIELD. MINNESOTA 56087 'TELEPHONE ;SO7. 723.4261 July 1 , 1986 IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT #29131 TO: The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley, Minnesota 6431 University Avenue Northeast Fridley, Minnesota 55432 We hereby issue an Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 29131 in favor of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley, Minnesota (the "Authority") , for the account of Fridley Plaza Associates Limited Partnership and Louis R. Lundgren (the "Developer") which is available by negotiation of the Authority's draft at sight effective until the Authority issues a Certificate of Completion (as defined in the Contract for Private Development defined hereinbelow) or February 1 , 1988, whichever occurs first; for Two Hundred Thousand and no hundreds Dollars ($200,000.00) , accompanied by a written statement, substantially in the form of the written statement attached hereto as Exhibit A, executed by the Executive Director of the Authority or his designee, bearing the number of the Letter of Credit and stating that the Authority and the Developer and Fridley Plaza Associates Limited Partnership, dated as of June 12, 1986, (the "Contract for Private Development") . We hereby agree with the Authority that all drafts drawn under and in substantial compliance with the terms of this credit shall be duly honored on presentation. MOK: 1NWMM1,Yrs .... ... . 2A This credit shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota including, in particular, Minnesota Statures, Section 336.5-101 to 336.5-117 (Uniform Commercial Code, Article 5, Letters of Credit) . This letter of credit #29131 replaces and terminates previous letter of Credit No. 111385-2 dated November 13 , 1986. Sincerely, � w Kevin Jensen President 3 RESOLUTION NO. HRA- / -1986 A RESCLUTION OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY DIRECTING CONDEMNATION AND DETERMINING THE NECESSITY FOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY BY PROCEEDINGS IN EMINENT DOMAIN CN LOT 1, BLOCK 1, SYLVAN HILLS, PLAT_7, 248 MISSISSIPPI STREET NE, FRIILEY, MINNESOTA IT IS HEREBY RESCLVED by the Board of Coatmissioners (the "Board") of the Housing and Redevlopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley, Minnesota (the "Authority") , as follows: 1. The Authority, on June 12, 1986, entered into a Contract for Private Development ( the "Development Agreement") with the Fridley Plaza Associates Limited Partnership concerning developnent of certain property within and around the Authority's Tax Increnent Financing District No. 1. 2. Pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement, the Authority undertakes to acquire certain property therein specified as the Development Property, if necessary via the exercise of the Authority' s power of eminent cbmain. The Board hereby finds that the acquisition of such property by the Authority pursuant to the Development Agreement, whether by negotiation or pursuant to the exercise of the Authority's power of eninent domain, is and would be in the public interest pursuant to the purposes of the Development Agreement and the goals of the Authority's Modified Redevelopment Plan for its Redevelopment Project No. 1. 3. The Board hereby authorizes the officers and agents of the Authority, at the direction of the Executive Director, to commence such efforts as may be necessary, including private negotiation and the institution of eninent domain proceedings, to acquire said property as described below, subject to the Developer having completed to the satisfaction of the Director of the Authority the conditions contained in Section 3.1 (b) , Subd. i-iii of the Development Agreement. Lot 1, Block 1, Sylvan Hills, Plat 7, Fridley, Minnesota FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED 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 purpose of this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMAND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS I2'IY Y OFt.iii , 1986. i LARRY COMERS, CHAIRWN HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ATTEST: NAS IM M. QURESHI, DIREC'T'OR HWSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 3A ARTICLE III Land Transactions ; Undertakings of the Authority Section 3. 1 . Acquisition of the Development Property by the Authority. (a) Acquisition Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Authority shall acquire the Development Property, if necessary, via the exercise of the Authority ' s power of eminent domain. (b) Conditions Precedent. The Authority ' s obliga- tion to acquire the Development Property shall be con- tingent on the satisfaction by the Developer of the following conditions: ( i ) The Developer shall be in material com- pliance with all the terms and provisions of this Agreement ; ( ii ) The Developer shall have submitted Con- struction Plans, which shall have been approved by the Authority pursuant to Section 4 . 2 of this Agreement ; ( iii ) The Authority shall be satisfied of the financial commitment and ability of the Developer to construct the Minimum Improvements . The Devel- oper will be required to submit the following in- formation, in form and substance reasonably acceptable to the Authority: (a) statements of the history and capability of the Developer and the entities which will be responsible for construc- tion, marketing and management of the Project ; (b) financial statements ( balance sheet ) of the Developer and/or principals of the Developer (audited statements, when available , are requested) ; (c) commitment letters from banks with respect to interim and long-term financing including the letter of credit required in Section 4 . 5; (d) pro forma financial projections for the Project feasibility and marketing plans and evi- dence of the Developer 's ability to raise necessary funds beyond the funds being provided under the Mortgage; and (e) evidence to the Authority of a commitment for a First Mortgage which meets the re- quirements of Sections 7 .1 and 7 . 2 hereof; and ( iv) There shall have been obtained from the City all special use permits necessary for the 3 - 1 4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Nasim Qureshi FROM: Jock Robertson, Director of Community Development DATE: July 2, 1986 SUBJECT: Summary of Columbia Park Properties Expansion Plans To Date In mid April of this year, Mr. Jim Signorelli of Columbia Park Prop- erties (CPP) informed us that they would be financially unable to proceed with the proposed 15,000 square foot addition to the medical office building and the parking ramp by the June 1 , 1986 date in the Development Agreement. The CPP Board of Directors wishes to delay the start for an unknown period while at the same time retaining the surface parking easement. Negotiations were temporarily interrupted by Mr. Signorelli 's departure from CPP, but his successor, Mr. Gary Van House, will attempt to deliver a proposal in time for the July 10, 1986, HRA meeting. JR/lmn M-86-142 4A FOURMIES AVENUE. ,:p K.n 4.r Tc e41.'.F TG(5C-..g: 'G%..'.1?'^e-R�::3 /1-±_t!;. . 4. , ',qv t--,,F.,>rec--f '...'1, -,,,_0 — ,,,,,f p � � TEL.e.....,, 4 Al j 2'mav'.s �� y. c.:::'( c,...i.:. cine. ;!1- > �y t E,..,..- i % 11, CO f K ,3 C' 1 / CC > - CC o, y33 • r� r A>o? , W i • A Gd R�Ob''>< .c.a.' 4It .4 - � NS w z e-1 o: S 7LLI w:�G 1. o ,, 3o.a ..21,-co r — o w o .a k ,,� TTT _ J!I s 7 - �i r--, tNrN 11. N ; F `f r'-7. ,rte ,-E. `�.7.::- F -url.:ti�:._ ':+•1•.mo i. _-.__..__._.> SITE PLAN o : _� ' 5 rickDIRECTORATE o- • OF �� oQc PUBLIC WORKS CITYOF MEMORANDUM f RJ DLfY 10: _ Nasim Qureshi, City Manager PW86-179 FROM: John G. F1ora,lPublic Works Director DATE: July 1, 1986 SUBJECT: Woodbridge Development As requested by the HRA at their meeting of June 12, 1986, we oontacted the law biaders for the demolition and site grading work utilities and street projects associated with the 100 Win Drive-In site. Orfei & Sons, Utility Contractor , agreed to extend the award date to July 15, 1986 . H & S Asphalt agreed to extend the award of Phase II of the City's St. 1986 - 1 & 2 street improvement project. Park Construction did not accept an award extension. At a meeting with representatives fran Woodbridge and Sunde Engineering, we prepared a revised scheduled for completing the minimum desired improvements to the 100 Win Drive-In site which consisted of demolition of the site and earth work preparation for Pad C (the first building) and its associated parking lot, road network right-of-way, detention ponds, perimeter area north of Woodbridge Drive, water, sanitary and storm sewer systems, concrete curb and gutter and basemat for the interior street, bikeway/walkway system north of Woodbridge Drive, perimeter landscaping, irrigation system, and street lights would be complete by Novemeber 30, 1986. All reTaining earth work, landscaping and bikeway/walkway syste l completed by June 30, 1987. We have advertised the Demolition and Site Grading Project #163 with bid opening date July 11, 1986 . We will be advertising the Landscaping, Irrigation and Street Lighting Project #168 with a bid award date of July 21, 1986. Me above work is identified in Schedule C of the Woodbridge/HRh Agreement. Therefore, it would be appropriate for the HRA to concur in the advertising of Projects #163 and #168. JGFts 5A HERRICK & NEWMAN. P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW VIRGIL C.NERRICK DAVID P NEWMAN 4279 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N JAMES E.SCNMECK►E►ER FRIDLEY.MINNESOTA 55432 571-3050 . June 27, 1986 Robert J. Deike Holmes & Graven Chartered 470 Pillsbury Centre Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 RE: Lake Pointe Development Dear Mr. Deike: I am writing for the purpose of summarizing the posi- tion of the Fridley HRA regarding the proposed Development with Lake Pointe Investment Company. As you know, Mr. Weir on behalf of Lake Pointe Investment has attempted to invoke the provisions of Section 3.6 of the Contract for Private Redevelopment on the basis that the Indirect Source Permit required by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency had not been issued by May 1, 1986 . It now appears that the Indirect Source Permit will be issued on or about July 14 , 1986 . This Permit will require the completion of certain improvements to Highway 65 . The Fridley HRA has indicated that it will agree to expend the sums necessary in order to ensure that the required improve- ments to Highway 65 are completed. Consequently, it would appear that within the next few weeks your client will be able to obtain an Indirect Source Permit in a form which will give him the necessary assurance that he can proceed with the proposed development. Due to the delays incurred in the issuance of the Indirect Source Permit, Lake Pointe Investment Company has taken the position that it will incur additional damages . As a result, Mr. Qureshi, the Director of the Fridley HRA and David Weir have engaged in numerous discussions and negotiating sessions in an effort to address the concerns of both parties . At the June 12, 1986 meeting of the HRA, Mr. Qureshi provided to the HRA a proposed resolution of the remaining issues. Enclosed you will find a copy of this - proposal . The major items contained in that proposal are as follows: 5B Robert Deike June 27 , 1986 Page Two 1 . That the HRA would assume responsibility for paying the necessary costs associated with the highway and intersection improvements required by the Indirect Source Permit. 2 . That the Fridley City Council would grant final approval to the rezoning, special-use permit, and plat applications within 45 days of Lake Pointe acquiring the Access Parcel. 3 . Lake Pointe would agree to purchase the access par- cel for the previously agreed sum of $1,000 ,000 .00 , upon the issuance of the Indirect Source Permit. 4 . That within 45 days of the issuance of the Indirect Source Permit the HRA would award the Contracts for the Public Improvements and this work would then be completed within 11 months of the awarding of the Contracts. 5 . That the implementation of the Minimum Market Values for the Minimum Improvements would be delayed 1 year. 6 . That if in fact the improvements to Highway 65 are not substantially completed by December 31 , 1987 , then for each additional year that these improve- ments are delayed, Lake Pointe' s cost of acquiring the Access Parcel would be reduced by $100 ,000 .00 . Additionally, if the improvements to Highway 65 are not completed by December 31 , 1987 , then the imple- mentation of the Minimum Market Value for the Minimum Improvements would be delayed a second year . This proposal constitutes a substantial deviation from the HRA' s obligations under the Contract for Private Redevelopment in that the HRA would now be agreeing to pay the necessary costs of the Highway 65 improvements , which is estimated to be approximately $1,000 ,000 .00 ; the HRA would agree to an automatic 1 year extension of the Assessment Agreement with the possibility of a second year extension as well; and the HRA would agree to reduce the cost of purchasing the Assess Parcel if the improvements to Highway 65 were not completed by December 31 , 1987 . As you know, Mr. Weir was in attendance at this meeting of the HRA. He indicated to the HRA that these proposed modifications did not adequately address his concerns. At 5C Robert Deike June 27 , 1986 Page Three that meeting the Commissioners of the HRA informally indi- cated to the Director that two of the Commissioners felt that the HRA should hold the line with this proposal, one Commissioner felt that the staff should be prepared to make additional concessions in order to address the concerns of the developer, and a fourth Commissioner felt that the pro- posal went to far and that he was uncertain as to whether or not he could support it. However, the Commissioners did direct the staff to continue negotiations with your client. Since this most recent HRA meeting, you, Sid Inman and myself have had numerous telephone conversations . Additionally we met on June 17 and on June 20 , 1986 . At the meeting of June 20 I indicated to you that as part of our ongoing effort to resolve this impasse, the staff of the HRA would support the following alternative proposal: 1 . Incorporate paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of page 2 above . 2 . Arrearages under the Limited Revenue Note would be allowed to accrue without interest during the life of the note, rather than being forever eliminated as the Note currently provides. However, the arreara- ges would not be paid until after the 3.9 million dollar General Obligation Bond has been paid in full and all arrearages would be paid by increments generated by the Development. The survival of the arrearages would only occur if the arrearage arose out of an event wherein the developer was unable to obtain necessary governmental permits, providing that the developer had acted expeditiously in applying for the necessary permits and the proposed development was consistent with zoning and the deve- lopment invisioned under the Contract for Private Redevelopment. This proposed change constitutes a major modification to the terms of the current Limited Revenue Note . 3 . The HRA will agree to complete all of the intersec- tion improvements and improvements which are required by the Indirect Source Permit to Highway 65 . The HRA will also guarantee that all improvements will be made up to the highway right-of-way boundary by December 31 , 1987 . 4 . The HRA will of course continue to agree to provide site improvements of at least $2 ,440 ,000 .00 . These improvements were originally intended to be funded by the General Obligation Bond. The amount of the Bond was determined from the construction estimates prepared by David Weir' s staff . Consequently, under 5D Robert Deike June 27 , 1986 Page Four r the Bond, $2 ,440,000.00 is the maximum amount which the HRA can guarantee will be generated by the Bonds for the use of site improvements. Beyond the $250 ,000 .00 allocated from the bond funds for the intersection improvements the HRA is more than willing to work with Mr. Weir in determining an allocation of the balance among the various improve- ments . It is the opinion of the HRA staff that this proposal of June 20 , 1986 is even more generous than the proposal pre- sented to the HRA on June 12 . The principal reason is that not only is the HRA agreeing to do intersection improvements but if a payment is missed under the Limited Revenue Note, it will not be lost but will be allowed to accrue interest free during the life of the Note. Depending upon the construction schedule, the benefit of this right of accrual could be substantial. At our most recent meeting you also verbally provided me with Lake Pointe Investment Company's position on these same subjects . It was obvious that there is a substantial discrepancy between the respective positions of the parties. We believe that both of the proposals presented by the staff of the Fridley HRA fulfill the obligations of Section 3 .6 of Contract for Private Redevelopment in that they ameliorate the issues which gave rise to material frustation. I would hope that your client recognizes that both of these offers constitute proposals to provide significant additional assistance than what was comtemplated under the Contract for Private Development and that he will continue to give each of these offers serious consideration. Both I and the rest of the HRA staff remain willing and eager to work with you and Mr. Weir in attempting to resolve this impasse. I also would like to remind you that the next regular meeting of the Fridley HRA is scheduled for July 10 , 1986 at 7 : 00 P.M. Both you and your client are invited to attend if you wish. Sincerel yours , . fl David P. ewman DPN:JEB Enclosure cc: Nasim Qureshi Jock Robertson 6 HERRICK & NEWMAN, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW VIRGIL C.HERRICK 6279 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. DAVID P.NEWMAN FRIDLEY.MINNESOTA 55432 JAMES E.SCNMECKPEPER 571-3850 June 30, 1986 • W. G. Doty Fridley Plaza Office Building Partnership 6401 University Avenue, N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 F & M Marquette National Bank Atten: Corporate Trust Department 90 South Sixth Street Minneapolis , MN 55402 RE: Fridley Plaza Office Building Partnership Gentlemen: As you will recall, I sent to you on April 30 , 1986 a notice of default. A copy of this correspondence is included. On May 5, 1986 I received a phone call from Mr. LeMay in which he inquired on the status of this matter. Again on June 27 , 1986 I contacted Mr. LeMay to see if he was aware of any progress being made on this item. He informed me that he was unaware of any activity which might have been occuring. The next meeting of the Fridley H.R.A. is scheduled for July 10 , 1986 . At that time I will be presenting this item to the Commissioners for their recommendation as to how they wish to have me proceed. Clearly, one of the options which the H.R.A. has is to bring an unlawful detainer action against the Fridley Plaza Office Building Partnership. If either of you have a position which you would like to pre- sent to the H.R.A. I would encourage you to either attend the meeting, or to submit your position in writing in advance. Sincerely yours, David P. Newman DPN:KLS cc: Nasim Qureshi Jock Robertson 7 WINFIELD DEVELOPMENTS, INC. 5780 Lincoln Drive, Edina, Minnesota 55436 Telephone(612)938-8661/TWX: 910-576-3137 • June 5, 1986 • Mr. Nasim Qureshi City Manager City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue North East Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Re: Fridley Business Plaza Dear Mr. Qureshi: Please allow this letter to clarify and summarize our recent discussions and the City actions regarding Winfield's proposed Fridley Business Plaza. First, Applications for Variances and a Special Use Permit have been approved. Approval for the Watershed District Permit has also been obtained. Second, the City Council has adopted a Preliminary Resolution regarding the issuance of $3,000,000 in Industrial Development Bonds (IDBS). At present we are unable to make application to the State of Minnesota for the IDB Allocation until after September 30, 1986 due to the fact that the Project is not a manufacturing business, an energy related project or is it located in a redevelopment district. Third, as I indicated, we have just recently been made aware of a significant soil problem at this site (see attached Soil Report Exhibit A). The estimate, furnished by contractors, to correct the soil is in excess of $116,000. This cost coupled with the already high cost of this Project, creates a serious problem in terms of financial feasibility. As indicated in our previous discussions, Winfield would like to request some assistance from the City in order that we may move ahead with this Project. Specifically, Winfield would like to request the following actions and assistance: 1) That the property be placed in a redevelopment district or that a finding be made that the Project area could meet the criteria for inclusion in a redevelopment district. This finding would allow Winfield to use the approval for 1DBs already granted by the City Council to make application to the State of Minnesota. At the State we would still have to compete for the State IDB allocation. Our understanding of the criteria for establishment of a redevelopment district is that this Project would easily qualify given the high soil correction cost as compared to the property value. We feel it is imperative that the IDBs be obtained at the State now for the following reasons: WINNIPEG • REGINA • SASKATOON • MINNEAPOLIS 7A 111 tir Page 2 Mr. Nasim Qureshi June 5, 1986 a) The Project feasibility is severely damaged without the lower interest rate attainable through the IDBs. b) If forced to wait until after September 30th to apply to the State there is a good probability that the State allocation will already be distributed to other projects in other communities. c) The tax law currently discussed in Congress raises the concern that IDBs may be totally eliminated on January 1, 1987. 2) That 3% of the Project value be provided for soil correction assistance. On an approximately $3,000,000 project this would amount to about $90,000. This amount creates a Project value to assistance ratio of about 30 to 1 and looked at in another way amounts to about one year's taxes on this Project. 3) That the above request be considered for Concept Approval by the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority at their meeting of June 12th and by the City Council (assuming this is the correct procedure) on June 16, 1986. Previously summarized, we are at an impasse at present on the Project due to some very real problems. The assistance requested is vital to this Project. If the City can help in the manner requested we are prepared to move at once to commence the Project. If I can be of any further assistance or answer any questions please feel free to call me at 938-8661. --bSncerely, James F. Winkels Project Manager JFIti/b1 cc James Casserly, Miller & Schroeder James O'Meara, O'Connor & Hannan 8 CITY OF FRIDLEY MEMORANDUM TO: NASIM QURESHI, CITY MANAGER FROM: RICK PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: FINAL TARGET BILL DATE: JULY 1, 1986 We have finalized all of the expenditures for Phase I of the Target Project. The attached information refers to the accounting of these costs . The delay in presenting the documentation and final billing has been a result of some unfinished business with the contractor and their responsibility to clean up the plaza. We have provided you with two documents . First is a summary of the actual versus projected costs. As you see we are $64, 715 . 53 under budget. We are proposing to use $60,000 of that excess for future perimeter improvements to the area. This step will be labeled Phase II. Second, is our final bill to the HRA for Phase I which amounts to $86 , 864 . 80 . Due to some previous billing errors, the City was paid by both Target and the HRA for expenditures amounting to $61,008.75. That money has been redeposited into your account. In order to keep the accounting straight in these transactions, it is important that we show them in gross. The net effect of all this is the HRA owes the City of Fridley $25,856.05 for Phase I. 8A REPORT Accumulated Project Costs - REPORT M1 Target Project, 1981 - 1985 • As of: 12/31/85 Projected Actual Costs Costs Variance Land & Building Acquisition Expenditures: Madson 115,561.87 1 115,561.87 0. 00 Christenson 274,995.00 2 274,995.00 0.00 North Western Bell 270,000.00 3 270,000.00 0.00 Brunkow 105,000.00 4 105,000.00 0. 00 Brunkow Final Balloon Payment 21 ,000.00 5 21 ,094.69 (94. 69) Miscellaneous 10,219.56 18 10,219.56 0.00 Total 796,776. 43 796,871. 12 (94.69) Other Expenditures, by program: 578 Wlkwy, Lghts, Sry Drv, Lndscpng 112,999.00 6 74,917. 00 38,082. 00 579 Retaining Wall 178,078.50 7 173,728.30 4,350. 20 580 City Personnel Expenditures 13,000.00 8 12,835.96 164.04 581 All Relocation Expenditures 36,600.00 9 36, 147.95 452.05 582 Demolition 18,850.00 10 15,710.00 3, 140. 00 583 Plat 5,000.00 11 3,715. 26 1 ,284. 74 584 Traffic Study 1 ,000.00 12 1 ,000. 00 0. 00 585 NSP-Non City Hall Lines 23,000.00 13 16,018.97 6,981 .03 586 R.S.P. Architects 11 ,800.00 14 13,990.45 (2, 190.45) 587 LP Tank & City Hall NSP Line 22,000.00 15 11 ,224.52 10,775. 48 588 Land Preparation 186,688. 75 16 177,503.00 9, 185. 75 589 Storage Facilities (Bridge) 75,000.00 17 75,000.00 0.00 577 Sally Port 0.00 19 0.00 0. 00 000 Interest Expenditures 0.00 20 7,414.62 (7,414.62) Materials for Monnette work (8528) 0.00 22 0.00 0. 00 Personal services for Monnette work (8529) 0.00 23 0.00 0.00 Future Improvements 24 0.00 0. 00 $60,000 Total 684,016.25 619,206.03 64,810. 22 Total All Costs 1 ,480,792.68 1 ,416,077. 15 64,715. 53 City of fridley revenue - HRA 21 362,026.85 • Target 24 74,035.75 436,062.60 8B =ROM: CITY OF FRIDLEY TO: FRIDLEY HRA DATE: July, 1986 RE: Billing for Services in the Target Project Area Thru December 31 , 1985; Amended to included Sally Port Credits and Billing for retainage City Account Code: Old: 51-3371-000-00 New: 528-00-000-33630 Amended Previous Actual Billings Balance Costs Thru Due 12/31/85 12/31/84 Other Expenditures, by program: 578 Wlkwy, Lghts, Sry Dry, Lndscpng 74,917.00 6 35,663.00 39,254.00 579 Retaining Wall 173,728.30 7 197,201 .50 (23,473. 20) 580 City Personnel Expenditures 12,835.96 8 7,444.70 5,391.26 581 All Relocation Expenditures 36, 147.95 9 45,427.49 (9,279.54) 582 Demolition 15,710.00 10 24, 125.00 (8,415.00) 583 Plat 3,715.26 11 3,715.26 0.00 584 Traffic Study 1 ,000.00 12 1 , 131.46 (131.46) 585 NSP-Non City Hall Lines 16,018.97 13 3, 185.28 12,833.69 586 R.S.P. Architects 13,990.45 14 13,990.45 0.00 224.52 15 11 ,224.52 0.00 587 LP Tank & City Hall NSP Line 11,224.52 588 Land Preparation 177,503.00 16 86,276.81 91 ,226. 19 589 Storage Facilities (Bridge) 75,000.00 17 75,000.00 0. 00 577 Sally Port 0.00 19 2,000.00 (2,000.00 000 Interest Expenditures 7,414.62 20 7,608.76 (194. 14 0.00 222 0.00 0.00 Materials for Monnette Work 0.00 230.00 0.00 Personal Services for Monnette Work Totals 619,206.03 513,994.23 105,211 .80 City of Fridley Revenue 21 18,347.00 Target AMOUNT DUE 86,864.82 9 CLAIMS 1481 - 1486 9A QTY OF FRIDLEY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, N.E. FRIDLEY, NN 55432 DATE: JUNE 20, 1986 TO: Housing Redevelopment Authority City of Fridley 6431 University Ave. , N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 RE: Partial Estimate for S.E.H. For Central Ave./Highway 65 Roadway Design PATE 5.E.H. INVOICE # MOUNT 9/19/85 5795 $ 15,203.03 12/26/85 6283 1,008.98 4/18/86 6861 1,731.08 5/20/86 7 054 246.08 Total Due $ 18,189.17 Contract Amount 30,750.00 Completed to Date 18,189.17 Amount Paid Previously 2,740.06 Amount due this Estimate 15.11 `— Balance to complete Contract $ 12,560.83 3/6/3/8 FRIIGEY HCUSIN3 AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 10 MEMORANDUM TO: CHAIR! N (DMMERS AND HRA COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: NAS IM M. QURESHI, HRA DIRECR SUBJECT: APRINTM 2 T OF HRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DATE: JULY 2, 1986 As per the Agreement between the HRA and the City of Fridley for staff services for the HRA dated September 13, 1979, it is necessary for the Authority to review and approve the selection, by the Director, of an Executive Director to the HRA. On March 31, 1986 Jahn "Jock" Robertson was hired as the City's Director of Community Development. He has now assumed the job responsibilities once held by Jerry Boardman, who also served as the Executive Director of the HRA. Due to Jock's role in the development activities of the City, it is my recommendation that the members of the Authority approve his appointment as the Executive Director of the HRA. Please find enclosed in you informational packet a copy of the Agreement for Staff Services between the City and the HRA which explains the selection process for an Executive Director and a copy of Jock's resume which shall provided additional background information. 10A CONTRACT FOR STAFF SERVICES FOR THE FRIDLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this 13th day Of Septe�her , 1979, by and between the City of Fridley, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and the Fridley Housing and Redev,Aop- ment Authority, a public corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as Authority. WHEREAS, the Authority desires to engage the City to render certain technical advice and assistance in connection with the activities and projects of the Authority. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein set forth, the Authority and the City hereby agree as follows: 1. Scope of Services To Be Supplied by Fridley: Fridley shall furnish to the Authority all necessary services required by the Authority and as called for by the Authority, including but not limited to, furnish- ing the -services-of a Director, an Executive Director, Finance Director, Engineering Staff, Planning Staff, Attorney, and Secretary (all hereinafter called "Services"), and related equipment as below described and referred to (all hereinafter called "Equipment"). a. The Director shall be the Fridley City Manager. He shall have responsibility for the general supervision of the projects of the Author- ity and supervision of the personnel of Fridley who are to furnish ser- vices to the Authority pursuant to this agreement. He shall perform, or have performed, such activities as the Authority shall from time to time reasonably request. He shall be responsible for the care and custody of all funds of the Authority and for the deposit thereof in the name of the Authority in such bank or banks as the Authority from time to time shall designate; for the keeping of regular books of accounts showing re- ceipts and expenditures; for budget and budgeting activities; for rende-i:g to the Authority, as requested by the Authority, of an account of t'.e in- come and expenses of the Authority; for rendering such addition?; finan- cial and other reports as the Authority from time to time shall request. 10B b. The Executive Director shall be that person designated by the Director and approved by the Authority. He shall perform all duties required by the Director, including, but not limited to, the following: coordinating and supervising all aspects of the planning and redevelopment of projects of the Authority, including work of and between consultants, contractors, and other employees of Fridley who are to provide services to the Authority pursuant to this agreement; supervising anal coordinating with, answering, and acting on requests of, and meeting with representatives of, other units of government; meeting with and counseling local community groups and residents; keeping of the records of the Authority; acting as secretary at meetings of the Authority; recording all votes and keeping the seal of the Authority; and all other duties properly and reasonably requested by the Director. c. The Finance Director shall be the Finance Director of Fridley, and shall perform all duties required by the Director, including, but not limited to, the following: Preparation and maintenance of all financial books and records, and supervision of the disbursements of funds; preparation of periodic reports reflecting income and expenditures; internal audits, and other checks and revisions of the financial status of projects; maintenance of all payroll, related accounts, including documentation of amounts to be billed under the terms of this contract; and all other duties necessary to the financial administration of the Authority and its projects. d. The Engineering Staff shall consist of the Engineer of Fridley and his staff, and shall perform all duties required by the Director, including, but not limited to, the following: All engineering work necessary to the timely and successful completion of allwork needed in connection with Authority projects and not contracted for by the Authority with other engineering consultants or contractors; coordination of all engineering work; public works recommendations; review of plans and specifications for project improvements prepared or submitted by consultants or contractors; preparation of plans and specifications for all public im- provement projects; and review and recommendation on all plans as they may relate to streets, highways, sidewalks, alleys, utility services, and construction techniques. -2- 1OC e. The Planning Staff shall consist of the Planning Staff of Fridley, and it shall perform all-duties required by the Director, in- cluding but not limited to, the following: All planning work necessary to the timely and successful completion of all Authority projects; co- ordination of all planning work; and review and recommendation on all plans as they relate to land use, land controls, and other general plan- ning activities. f. The Attorney shall be the Attorney of Fridley, and his as- sistants, and shall perform all duties required by the Director, in- cluding but not limited to, the following: All legal work necessary to the timely and successful completion of the projects of the Authority; drafting and reviewing contracts; rendering legal advice and opinions on matters relating to the projects, when required by the Authority; at- tending meetings of the Authority; and assuring that their activities in relation to the projects activities are in conformance with local, State and Federal Law. g. The Secretary shall be any one of the secretaries made available from time to time by the Director for use of the Authority from the personnel of Fridley and shall perform all duties required of the posi- tion, including but not limited to, the following: Taking of dictation; doing typing and filing for any of the Authority's administrative staff; taking minutes and keeping records of meetings of the Authority, public hearings, and staff meetings as required by the Director or Executive Director; and any other secretarial work necessary to the timely and successful completion of the Authority projects, as required by the Director or Executive Director. h. Equipment shall include office space, supplying of normal daily business postage and office supplies, use of telephone and telegraph and reproduction equipment, car expense, travel expense, and such other item as from time to time may reasonably and properly be needed by the Authority and as Fridley may then agree to provide. 2. Payment. The Authority shall pay to the City for services pro- vided hereunder the actual cost of wages and benefits thereon of em- ployees furnished by the City and such other costs as office supplies, sundry materials, photocopy and printing charges, vehicle charges, all to be paid for by the Authority at the City cost plus space and occupancy charges at the currently prevailing rate and futher plus use charges for -3- 10D office furniture and equipment based on a reasonable depreciation schedule. In addition to the actual cost of services provided under this agreement, the Authority shall pay the City for overall admini- strative expenses not to exceed five (5%) per cent of the salaries of the personnel services assigned to the Authority. 3. General Provisions. A. Any of the work product, drawings, designs, applications, and other materials prepared by the professional and clerical staff on the Authority shall remain the property of the Authority. B. The City shall make available to members of the Authority staff as appointed by the City Manager pursuant to this agreement reasonable space for the performance of their work. Such reasonable space shall include the use of typewriters and equipment of the City and filing cabinets. C. Liability for Injury or Damage. The City does not assume any responsibility or liability for the acts or omissions of the officers, employees, or agents of the Authority ap- pointed pursuant to this agreement who in the performance of work for the Authority have done something which gives cause or rise to any claim for damages. In this regard, it shall be the responsibility of the City, together with the Authority, to ensure that any insurance policies and workmen's compensation policies provide coverage for the professional and clerical staff and commissioners when doing work for the Authority. D. Amendments. This agreement may be amended or modified at any time by written agreement between the parties hereto. Such amendment or modification may be made by either party by giving two weeks (14 days) written notice to the other party of the intended modification. When accepted by the other party, the amendment or modification shall become binding as if a part of this agreement. -4- 10E E. Minnesota Law to Govern. This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. F. Term of Agreement. The terms of this agreement shall be perpetual. G. Entire Agreement. This agreement, when executed, shall be the entire agreement between the parties for the sharing of services and equipment. H. Cancellation. In the event the Authority is not satisfied with service of the Executive Director, to be provided hereby, it may request the City Manager, by giving thirty (30) days written notice, to replace the Executive Director serving the Authority. The Authority or City may cancel this agreement, by giving written notice to the Manager at least ninety (90) days before such action is to be taken. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Authority have executed this agreement this 13th day of September , 1979. FRIDLEY $ SING AND REDEYE +' ENT AUTHORIT By: Its Chairperson AND / .41/er Its Executive Director CITY OF FRIDLEY By: 11?)deL;44p Itsr AND t.cc—7,4 M - � Its Manager —5- 1OF FRILL,EY HQJSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEMORANDUM TO: CHAIRMAN CONNERS AND HRA COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: NAS IM M. QURESH I, HRA DIRECIOR SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF HRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR L1ATE: JULY 2, 1986 As per the Agreement between the HRA and the City of Fridley for staff services for the HRA dated September 13, 1979, it is necessary for the Authority to review and approve the selection, by the Director, of an Executive Director to the HRA. On March 31, 1986 John "Jock" Robertson was hired as the City' s Director of Community Development. He has now assumed the job responsibilities once held by Jerry Boardman, who also served as the Executive Director of the HRA. Due to Jock's role in the development activities of the City, it is my recommendation that the members of the Authority approve his appointment as the Executive Director of the HRA. Please find enclosed in you informational packet a copy of the Agreement for Staff Services between the City and the HRA which explains the selection process for an Executive Director and a copy of Jock' s resume which shall provided additional background information. 10:G JOHN L. (JOCK) ROBERTSON 2409 Russell Avenue South Home: 377-6109 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55405 Office: 647-9421 CAREER OBJECTIVE To use my professional experience to direct and coordinate the healthy growth and development of a community QUALIFICATIONS Eighteen years of successful management experience in: • Economic development programming, promotion, and coordination • Comprehensive community planning and code enforcement • Development services to business, industry and housing • Inter—governmental communication and coordination • Public information and community relations EDUCATION M,A. — Urban Planning and Development, University of Washington —$.A — Architecture, University of Minnesota -Certificate — Basic _Economic Development Course, University of Arizona Certificate — Real Estate I and II, Prosource Education, Minnesota ACHIEVEMENTS Directed the growth of a national economic development business that locates new industries in client communities. Financed, organized and implemented a private community—wide energy conservation program for small business owners. Directed proposal preparation, planning, operations, and negotiations for several governmental and private business organizations. Assisted architecture, engineering and legal firms with designing various development projects to fit the needs of communities. Developed and implemented plans to coordinate industrial and institutional expansion with surrounding residential and retail areas. Created and managed community information programs of newsletters, media relations, AV programs, interest group negotiations, and survey research. lOH EXPERIENCE - • President — International Development Consultants, Inc. , Minneapolis, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Kansas City, and Sarasota. ( 983 to present) Responsible for directing growth and operations of national economic development marketing network for over thirty client cities and business park developers. Evaluate client's economic development and marketing programs for effectiveness. Firm has located 11 new industries since 1983, using combinations of incentives including SBA loans, job training grants, IDB's, and Tax Increment Financing. Recently located the new Dataforms, Inc. plant of 55 thousand square feet and 65 employees in Chaska, Minnesota. Supervise five Principals in preparing competitive proposals, marketing brochures, display ads, training seminars for citizen committees, and audio— visual presentations. Administer financial planning including cash flow forecasts and financing alternatives. Make presentations and lead discussions with state and local government bodies, and business and professional groups. Chairman — Energy Account Managers, Inc. , St. Paul. (1983 to 1986) ' Responsible for preparing successful grant proposal, planning, development, financing and marketing of energy auditing and design services for assisting small business owners in reducing electricity and gas bills. This program was part of the City of St. Paul Business Revitalization Program. Administered business and financial planning, data processing and equipment time—sharing. Supervised activities of two professionals and 8 interns. Also wrote and edited grant proposals, and made written and oral presentations to governmental agencies such as city councils, state agencies, and legislative committees. President — Robertson & Associates, Inc. , Minneapolis. (1978 to 1984) "Responsible for serving business ani government organizations on various development projects including: — Nebraska Public Power District — Housing needs and tax revenue created by the proposed 500KV powerline development project. — Boisclair Corporation — Urban design and historic preservation recommendations for its "Riverplace" residential and commercial development. — Barr Engineering Company — Water and related land resources planning capabilities of Minnesota counties. — Federal Emergency Management Agency, Chicago — Flood hazard reduction recommendations for housing and retail districts in cities such as Fort Wayne, Indiana that were in the process of recovering from recent floods. — Crowell and Moring, Attorneys, Wash. ,D.C. — Evaluations of all local government comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances in three state area for applicability to the Nebraska Public Power District project. 2 10I Manager, Special Projects — Upper Mississippi River Basin Commission, Bloomington, Minnesota. (1978 to 1981 ) Responsible for preparing and managing a comprehensive public participation and information project to generate public awareness of planning and management issues and to provide public recommendations to the Commission. Supervised three professionals and wrote and edited the Commission's quarterly newsletter, "Mississippi Issues", planning progress reports, and contributed articles for other publications. Served as Executive Director of the Public Participation Committee, and administered surveys of public attitudes on management issues. Prepared successful grant application and work program to recommend non— structural methods, including zoning, to reduce flood damages in residential and business areas along the Meramec River in suburban St. Louis. Also prepared and supervised implementation of PERT event—logic network to administer the Comprehensive Master Plan program for land use, transportation, and environmental management by 10 Federal Agencies and 5 states. _Vice President, Planning_Director — National Biocentric, Inc., Roseville, Minnesota, (1976 — 1978) Responsible for marketing and performance of planning and management consulting services on land use, transportation, utilities, and environmental projects for government and businesses. Supervised a staff of four professionals in preparing grant applications, proposals, and technical work. Relevant clients and projects include: — Hennepin County VTI — Site selection evaluation for third campus project. — Mercer County, North Dakota — Comprehensive planning and growth management recommendations for communities impacted by three power plant developments. — Minnesota Department of Economic Development — Cost/Benefit analysis of AMTRAK service on the City of Duluth. — Grand Trunk Railroad, Michigan and Ohio — Evaluation of proposed changes in railyard operations on adjacent residential and commercial areas in several communities. Planning Director, Enviromental Management — Minnesota State Planning Agency, (1973 — 1976) Responsible for environmental management operations including Crital Areas, Environmental Impact Analysis, Power Plant and Transmission Siting, and Permit Coordination. Supervised three Program Directors with staffs totaling nine professional planners and engineers in preparing policy recommendations, proposed regulations, and coordination with state agencies and local governments. Also prepared and presented briefings, including audio—visual productions for legislative commitees, local governments and citizen groups. Assistant Director — Washington State Land Planning Commission, (1971 — 1 Responsible for land development planning and zoning recommendations and design of state—wide land information service for use by local governments and state agencies. Supervised staff of three, and conducted information sessions for state legislators, local governments, and pressure groups. 3 10J • Regional Planner — Pu•et Sound Govern . . . - (1969 --1971 ) Responsible for preparation of development plan for the four—county Seattle metropolitan region, based on adopted local government comprehensive plans and ordinances and on state and regional recreation and open space policies. Managed a region-wide citizen participation program including workshops for local government officials and citizen groups. Supervised two interns. Prin.c pal Planner — Snohomish County, Washington, (1967-1969) Responsible for preparation and implementation of comprehensive plan and development ordinances for communities impacted by new Boeing 747 plant. Supervised staff of six professional planners, and coordinated code enforcement activities of building departments, zoning boards, and other municipalities. Also evaluated planned residential development proposals and negotiated desired development improvements with developers. Assistant Planner — Seattle Plannin_g _Commission, -(1965 — 1967) Member of first neighborhood planning team for residential and retail areas impacted by growth of the university campus and by the downtown medical center. Participated in public information workshops. Instructor, Part Time — University of Washington, (1967 — 1973) and Macalester College, (1975 — 1986) Responsible for conducting courses on urban planning, land use regulation, and real estate development for community leaders, college students and i professionals. MEMBERSHIPS American Economic Development Council American Institute of Certified Planners Minnesota Chapter, American Planning Association Sigma Tau Delta Honorary Society in Architecture REFERENCES Dale Ahlquist, Chaska Investment Co. Jeff Davidson, Crowell & Moring, Ltd. 7401 Metro Blvd., Suite 315 1100 Connecticut Ave. N.W. , S. 1200 Edina, MN 55435 Washington, D.C. 20036 612/835-4111 202/452-4158 ` David A. Lanegran, Chairman State Representative Way a Simoneau St. Paul Planning Commission and 239 State Office Building -- Macalester College Geography St. Paul, MN 55155 612/696-6126 612/296-4331 4 10K • SALARY HISTORY AND REQUIREMENTS John L. (Jock) Robertson Based on my last ten year earnings history, as outlined below, I require a minimum salary of $40,000 per year. President- International Development Consultants, (1983 to present) Base salary of $24,000, plus expenses, plus performance bonus, up to a total of $48,000 per year. Chairman- Energy Account Managers, Inc. (1983 to 1986) Chairman serves at no salary, only expenses. President- Robertson & Associates, Inc. (1978 to 1984) Salaried varied from $21,000 to $47,000, plus expenses, per year. Manager, Special Projects- Upper Mississippi River Basin Commission, (1978 to 1981 ) Salary increased from $27,000 to $31,000, plus expenses. Vice President, Planning Director- National Biocentric, Inc. (1976 - 1978) Salary was $26,000 plus expenses. Planning Director, Environmental Management- Minnesota State Planning Agency. (1973 to 1976) Salary increased from $21 ,000 to $25,000, plus expenses. 5 1OL PUBLICATIONS John L. (Jock) Robertson "Case Study: How a Company Selects a Site," Paper presented at Minnesota Star Cities Conference, May 15, 1984. "Socioeconomic Consequences" (of proposed MANDAN 500KV powerline) Environmental Report - MANDAN Project. Columbus: Nebraska Public Power District, 1983. "Small Business Energy Savings," St. Paul : Macalester Resource Management Center, 1983 Editor, Managing Hazardous Material Accidents, St. Paul , Robert Hamilton and Associates, 1982. (With Roy E. Peterson,) Assistance in Preparation of a Local Planning Handbook for Use by County Officials in Local Water and Related Land Resources Planning, Minneapolis, Barr Engineering Co. , 1982. ( Individual Reports) "Flood Hazard Reduction Recommendations for: City of Fort Wayne and Allen, LePorte and Starke Counties, Indiana; Berrian and Monroe Counties, Michigan; and City of Napoleon, Ohio," Chicago, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region V, 1982. (With Mary E. Morris and Ronald M. Sommer) Citizen Review Council Policy Delphi on Alternative Institutional Arrangements for Management of the Upper Mississippi River System, Minneapolis, Upper Mississippi River Basin Commission, 1981. "The Potential for Conflict Resolution," Naturalist, Vol . 32, No. 1, Spring 1981. Editor, Mississippi Issues: Upper Basin Views and Previews, quarterly newsletter, Minneapolis, Upper Mississippi River Basin Commission, 1979 to 1982. (With Selina Bendix, et. al . ) Environmental Assessment: Approaching Maturity, Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor Science Publishers, 1978. (With Mentor C. Addicks) "Cities Get New State Environmental Options," Minnesota Cities, Vol . 61, No. 13, December 1976. "The Minnesota Critical Areas Program," Data Needs and Data Gathering Areas of Critical Environmental Concern: Part 2, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Institute for Environmental Studies, 1975. (With Hugh W. Calkins and Susan Wierman) "The Legislative Mandate for State Land Information Systems," Perspectives on Information Systems, Stockton, Urban and Regional Information Systems, 1974. Course of Study for Social Science 150, An Introductory Course for the Citizen Planner, Tacoma, The Planning Association of Washington and Tacoma Community College, 1974. (With Richard U. Chapin and Ronald L. McConnell ) "Washington: The Legislative Land Planning Commission," State Government XLVI , Summer, 1973. 1011 Land Planning Information: A Call for Coordination and Compatibility, Olympia, Washington State Land Planning Commission, 1973. Interim Regional Development Plan, Seattle, Puget Sound Governmental Conference, 1971. (With Einar M. Syvertsen, et. al .) Environmental Planning in the Central Puget Sound Region, Seattle, Puget Sound Governmental Conference, 1969. (With Myer R. Wolfe and Hiram Walker) "Regional Corridor Impact Analysis: The Mohawk Valley and Piedmont Crescent," Community Consequences of Highway Improvement, Seattle, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 1966. (With Thomas J. Norton) "Recommendations for the Establishment of Additional Scenic Areas in Washington," Ekistics, Vol . 19, No. 115, June 1965. J ) Pe° 10 001 07-10-86 CHECK REGISTER PAGE 1 FRIDLEY STATE BANK - HRA DESCRIPTION VENDOR INV. # AMOUNT 1481 ***CHECK PREPAID*** HERRICK & NEWMAN $ 3 ,458. 25 APRIL & MAY LEGAL SERVICES 1482 ***CHECK PREPAID*** CITY OF FRIDLEY 41 . 00 WEED CUTTING - SPRING VALLEY LOT 16, BLK 2 1483 ***CHECK PREPAID*** HERRICK & NEWMAN 4 ,031 . 94 JUNE LEGAL SERVICES 1484 ***CHECK PREPAID*** NATIONAL CITY BANK OF MINNEAPOLIS 153 ,624 . 00 INTEREST & FEES ON BOND PAYMENT 1485 ***CHECK PREPAID*** FIRST BANK MINNEAPOLIS 100. 00 BOND PAYMENT FEE 1486 ***CHECK PREPAID*** FIRST CHICAGO NATIONAL BANK 25. 00 BOND PAYMENT FEE 1487 ***CHECK PREPAID*** OLSON, GUNN & SERAN LTD. 417. 05 LEGAL SERVICES RE: HRA CONDEMNATION TOTAL CHECKS $161 , 697 . 24 08-14-86 CHECK REGISTER PAGE 1 FRIDLEY STATE BANK - HRA DESCRIPTION VENDOR INV. # AMOUNT 1488 ***CHECK PREPAID*** FRIDLEY STATE BANK $486, 000.00 INVESTMENT 1489 ***CHECK PREPAID*** STORER CABLE COMMUNICATIONS 5, 000. 00 RELOCATION OF CABLE UNDERGROUND 1490 ***CHECK PREPAID*** CITY OF FRIDLEY 86, 864 . 80 REIMBURSEMENT COSTS FOR PHASE I 1491 ***CHECK PREPAID*** FIRST TRUST COMPANY OF ST. PAUL 124 , 573 . 87 BOND PAYMENT 1492 ***CHECK PREPAID*** COLUMBIA PARK PROPERTIES 10 ,000. 00 DEPOSIT REFUND 1493 ***CHECK PREPAID*** OLSON, GUNN & SERAN LTD., 325. 00 LEGAL SERVICES 1494 ***CHECK PREPAID*** C.E. LASALLE & ASSOCIATES 3 , 500,00 APPRAISAL FOR 100 TWIN THEATER SITE 1495 ***CHECK PREPAID*** FIRST BANK ST, PAUL 3 ,639. 04 REMARKETING AGREEMENT 1496 ***CHECK PREPAID*** HERRICK & NEWMAN, PA. 4 ,441 . 15 LEGAL SERVICES THRU JULY, 1986 1497 ***CHECK PREPAID*** . CITY OF FRIDLEY 38, 586.34 REIMBURSEMENT FOR PERSONAL SERVICES - OCT THRU DEC, 1984 & APRIL THRU JULY, 1986 TOTAL CHECKS $762, 930. 20