Loading...
HRA 06/02/2005 - 29592�--, CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY JUNE 2, 2005 �'`� �"' CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Commers called the Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Pesent: John Meyer Virginia Schnabel Larry Commers Pat Gabel William Holm Others Present: William Burns, HRA Executive Director Paul Bolin, Assistant HRA Director Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Rick Pribyl, Finance Director APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 7, 2005 MOTION by Commissioner Holm, seconded by Commissioner Gabel, to approve the minutes as submitted. UPON A VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA: • Claims and Expenses MOTION by Commissioner Schnabel, seconded by Commissioner Meyer, to approve the claims and expenses. UPON A UNANIMOUS VOTE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ACTION: • Resolution authorizing the execution of tax increment pledge agreement. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — JLJNE 2, 2005 Page 2 of 13 ,r-� Mr. Pribyl stated there is a tax increment pledge agreement associated with the refinancing of the 1997A tax increment bond. On May 23�d, the Council approved the sale of finro general obligation bonds one being the refinancing of this particular bond. With the refinancing the City will save over $158,000 over the next 3'/Z years to the maturity of these bonds. As in the past when the City sells or refinances these types of bonds there's a pledge agreement that goes along with the sale of that bond. Before the HRA this evening is a pledge agreement for the 1997A bond was issued in that year to refinance a prior bond and to provide funding for the acquisition of the Lake Pointe property. Chairperson Commers stated he thought there had been some issue with this bond. Mr. Pribyl responded there had not been an issue with this and the bond counsel, Mary Ippel from Briggs and Morgan, is fine with this refinancing. Commissioner Meyer asked Mr. Pribyl to summarize what a pledge agreement is. Mr. Pribyl explained that the pledge agreement is pledging the increments from District 6 District 6 as the revenue stream that's used to retire this debt. The bond counsel has reviewed and determined the increments sufficient to retire this debt. Chairperson Commers asked when this will be paid. Mr. Pribyl stated this debt will be retired in 2009. These will be paid semi-annually over a year of 3'/Z years. MOTION by Commissioner Holm, seconded by Commissioner Schnabel, to approve Resolution 2005-01. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. • Review of Spring Valley Estates Master Site Plan Mr. Hickok stated this is a property that was before the HRA previously but which has been restructured. The petitioner John DeMello is requesting a rezoning of five lots to S2 which are located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street and 6421, 6441 and 6461 Central Avenue. The petitioner is also requesting approval of a preliminary plat for the same property to allow construction of a mixed use development. In the previous proposal this project included the three properties along 64th Avenue, those three properties are not a part of the new development. A three storied Italian Villa style mixed use development is proposed with 10,492 square feet of retail space on the corner of Mississippi Street and Old Central and 70 senior condominium units. The one, two and three bedroom units will be owner-occupied and will have underground parking. Access to the complex would be taken directly across from the anticipated HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — JLJNE 2, 2005 Page 3 of 13 r�, Town Center development on the west side of Central Avenue and on Mississippi. In 2004, the petitioner brought forth a different proposal for a larger development which was denied. The 2004 proposal denial revolved around density, traffic on 64�' Avenue, limited snow storage and landscaping opportunities. The changes that have been made include that there are now not two separate parcels but is one parcel with both retail and housing. It does not include the three properties along 64th in an effort to keep the character along 64th untouched as neighbors' concerns indicated at the last meetinq� and neighborhood and Council concerns which was focused on drive access onto 64 and the potential for new trafFc. The plan includes less retail space so there is less demand for surface parking and less demand for green space which allows for more area for snow storage. The project is three stories high rather than four stories which is very important to the neighborhood. One of the major concerns about the previous proposal was the mass of the building relative to the lower scale buildings in the surrounding area. They have reduced the project by an entire story; a total of 10 feet. There are also 20 less condominium units as a result of density concerns. Mr. Hickok further explained the S2 zoning requires a Master Plan to be approved by the City. The HRA reviews the Master Plan and makes recommendations to the Council. Any modifications to the site plan following Council approval must be brought back to the Council and reviewed by the HRA prior to Council approval. The Planning Commission approved this Master Plan at their meeting yesterday. Staff recommends that the HRA concur with the Planning Commission and recommend approval of the � Master Plan for this development. Chairperson Commers questioned why the HRA needs to approve the Master Plan. Mr. Hickok explained this is an information item and is a redevelopment project, much like Town Center across the street and Gateway West project. There is not a statute or ordinance requirement that the HRA formally approve this, other than to be involved in the process since the HRA is such an important part of redevelopment. Chairperson Commers stated the HRA hasn't been involved in the planning process for this proposal and does not have the necessary information to make an informed judgment. Mr. Hickok stated it is not the HRA's role to get involved in the planning process for such a project as staff focused on the technical aspects of the project such as landscaping, grading and drainage, ponding, snow storage, parking, etc. The HRA's role is if there's any concerns they may have they're welcome to pass those on to the Council. Commissioner Schnabel stated she also questioned the HRA's involvement. She asked if there are a lot of neighbors concerned about this project. �..,� Mr. Hickok responded that there were about five neighbors present at the Planning Commission meeting as well as one letter from a neighbor being presented. Some of HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — JCJNE 2, 2005 Page 4 of 13 .� the comments were relative to issues that were part of the earlier project that simply required clarification for the current proposal and there were some concerns about how this development will affect the integrity of the neighborhood. Commissioner Schnabel questioned when the Planning Commission approves a Master Plan aren't they in control of the development and if changes have to go through them. She also asked if the HRA has any financial involvement in this development. Mr. Hickok responded the HRA does not have a financial involvement. Many times the HRA has been involved financially with S2 developments so the Master Plan in that case is more important to the HRA. It really is the Planning Commission and Council that "puts the stamp" on the project as required by the ordinance. Chairperson Commers stated the HRA appreciates the information on the development and the clarification of their role in this matter. Mr. Hickok continued reviewing the Spring Valley Estates project explaining that the proposal is an Italian Villa style. The developer and architect have provided some architectural interest and have building facades that are not just straight flat planes but have a lot of focal points, height, and depth variation to give the project an interesting appeal. The architect and developer wanted it noted that the colors that come across on the computer screen are different from what will actually be on the site. There is a r-� different mix of materials with brick, stone, concrete board, and stucco which is very typical of the new developments. The site plan shows that the building is a crescent which wraps around an inner parking area for the condo complex and comes in off of Old Central across from the Town Center development. The parking to the north is relative to the commercial area. All the surface parking is to provide convenient access to the commercial area of the complex. The majority of the parking is under the building so each unit has a minimum of one stall with additional stalls available. It's a very good lay out. The Master Plan portion allows some flexibility; such as the north edge where the parking is only 14 feet rather than the 20 feet from the properly line and on the western edge the drive aisle is only 2 feet back rather than the typical 20 feet. The county has asked for an enormous amount of right-of-way along both property edges and that has caused them to have to shrink their site down and reduce green space. They have done a nice job in their ponding and landscape plan to provide vertical integration of green space so that there isn't the feel of this being compressed or the setbacks being less. As both the staff and Planning Commission have indicated, this is a very good site plan. There is a landscape issue that staff is still working out as far as a shortage of the required number of trees. Commissioner Meyer asked if the only entrance into this complex is off of Central. Mr. Hickok responded there is a vehicle access on the north side and the west side. There is direct access into all of the retail from outside as well as inside the building. �-., The underground parking can be accessed from both Mississippi and Central. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — JiJNE 2, 2005 Page 5 of 13 .� Commissioner Gable questioned the selling prices for the condominium units and what type of retail they anticipate. n Mr. Hickok stated they expect the selling price to begin in the mid to high $100,000 range and the upper range would be in the upper $200,000. There are a number of different floor plans. As far as the retail area, they hope to have five bays of up to 1200 square feet with some common area with coffee shops, pharmacy or dry cleaner; things that would have a neighborhood market draw. The Town Center project opposite of this proposal has been delayed due to a court review of ownership and title issues. The developer is optimistic he'll be back with a final plat in June. Commissioner Meyer questioned if a traffic study has been performed on the intersection of Mississippi and Old Central. Mr. Hickok stated there has been an extensive study with both projects having been considered and it was determined that they will not create a significant impact on the roadways. There was a concern expressed at the Planning Commission meeting about whether or not this was spot zoning. Due to the previous proposal for this site, there has been a record created by the earlier hearings and testimony so the City does not believe this is spot zoning and it matches what our Comprehensive Plan calls for. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: Letter of understanding between HRA and Medtronic for expenses to reconcile tax increment payments for 2004. Chairperson Commers questions why this is being done. Mr. Pribyl explained he has been in contact with Medtronic and this has gone on for 6 months where the City has computed based on what the County has actually provided in tax increment and their staff has attempted to calculate the actual increment based on their knowledge of Minnesota property tax law. Medtronic had some concerns as far as the calculations Anoka County had made in response to the petition they filed for payable years 1993 — 1994 — 1995. Medtronic requested that somebody independent that has knowledge of properly taxes to do the calculations and confirm whether they're correct or the County is correct. One of the issues is Anoka County has implemented a new property tax system and they have a concern regarding some of the conversion of values. It has been a very friendly conversation between the staff and Medtronic and Medtronic understands that they're responsible for any cost in regard to this and will reimburse. Chairperson Commers asked why Medtronic isn't dealing directly with the County. Mr. Pribyl explained Ehlers and Associates is the firm that Medtronic would like to have �—., reviewed this matter. Shelly Ehlers, who used to work at Anoka County, is a staff member at Ehlers. Ehlers is a public finance organization which does not work for HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — JUNE 2, 2005 Page 6 of 13 ;� private developers. The City would have to hire Ehlers to perform this review and Medtronic would reimburse the City for those costs. Chairperson Commers was concerned that by the City hiring Ehlers that would make it the City's report and may put the City at odds with the County. There must be other firms Medtronic could hire to perform this review. Mr. Pribyl responded that should something come out of this, Anoka County would reevaluate the increment that was distributed. And the City would want to know if there had been an error in the calculations because of the fact that our land payment is a result of those calculations. Medtronic's feeling is that the County distributed too much which resulted in an overpayment to them. Also, staff does not see this as an adversarial situation. Chairperson Commers stated if there is a dispute, it's between Medtronic and the County. MOTION by Commissioner Schnabel, seconded by Commissioner Holm, to approve the retention of Ehlers and Associates with the payment by Medtronic for any expense in order to make a calculation to determine the correctness of the tax increment for the years 1993, 1994 and 1995. ,—�. Commissioner Gable agreed with Chairperson Commers' concerns and questioned why the City should be the middle man. Commissioner Holm questioned why Medtronic can't hire Ehlers directly. Mr. Pribyl explained that Ehlers does not work for private developers, only public agencies. Commissioner Holm asked what would happen if the HRA does not approve this. Mr. Pribyl responded that Medtronic would probably search out some other consultant to perForm the task. Commissioner Holm asked if consultants other than Ehlers would have less credibility with the County. Mr. Pribyl explained that one of Ehlers staff members knows the County system well and complete the task quickly. Mr. Burns asked other than for purposes of creating good will with Medtronic, how Mr. Pribyl would describe the public purpose in this agreement. ^ Mr. Pribyl stated Medtronic is alleging that the City has overpaid them based on their knowledge of the tax increment and development agreement. This is probably the only HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — J[JNE 2, 2005 Page 7 of 13 ,� public interest is that the City would save money based on Medtronic's concern that there had been an over payment. This whole discussion has been very friendly and the public purpose served is if Medtronic is correct, the City has overpaid Medtronic. Commissioner Holm questioned the down side of the City being involved in this matter. Mr. Pribyl responded the only down side is possibly some erosion of good will between the two organizations. Chairperson Commers added that the down side is the City may be at odds with the County and there may be a lawsuit if there's some discrepancy that goes in Medtronic's favor and that lawsuit would be based on a report the City had authored. Mr. Pribyl anticipates the outcome of this to be a greater understanding for Medtronic as far as how the property tax calculations work in the State of Minnesota. Mr. Burns commented the City has periodically contested assessments with the County. Mr. Pribyl stated that is correct and there have been at least two previous incidents where Mr. Casserly found that the County had classified properties incorrectly or not converted them correctly and requested those modifications be made. In this case, Medtronic would like to go to the County with a very educated process and be able to ,� show the County exactly where an error was made. CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED ON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: COMMERS NAY HOLM AYE GABLE NAY SCHNABEL AYE MEYER AYE • Review draft of SE quadrant parking study. Mr. Bolin stated that back in March the HRA awarded a contract for this study to Bonestroo, Rosene & Andrelik (BRA). They examined the parking lots used by the City, Columbia Park Medical Clinic, by the Fridley Professional Building and the vacant Target Operations Center lot just north of City Hall. The purpose of the study was to identify if there are any real needs for parking in this area now and what's going to happen in the future when the Target building becomes occupied again. Going into this study it was believed that there was a parking problem in this area. What was found is that there are some problems but easy remedies as well. BRA did half hour parking counts over four separate days during the week and these counts provide a snapshot of the current conditions for parking in this quadrant. The peak time parking demands range from 60 to 90% occupancy. The City Hall upper level approached 90% at peak but the lower level parking ramp never got over 70% which means that even during the worst case scenario, there are still 26 open parking stalls in our lower level. The HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — JLTNE 2, 2005 Page 8 of 13 �"� Columbia Park Medical Center west lot hits a high of 90% at peak times, however the 58 stall parking area on the east side of their building didn't reach more than 60% occupancy which results in 23 empty parking spaces at any given time in that area. The Fridley Professional Building east lot ranges from 60 to 80% occupancy. Some of the conclusions that came out of this study; the parking for the three occupied buildings is starting to approach a level where finding a parking spot may be somewhat difficult during peak times and the study points out that if the Target Operations Center is filled with office uses the current parking area will most likely be inadequate. Through some parking management, the study points out we may be able to alleviate some of the perceived parking problems, specifically better signage for the City Hall's lower ramp. For Columbia Park the study recommends the employees be instructed to park in that east lot that typically has 23 vacant stalls. Another conclusion of the study and subsequent discussions with the consultant is that ramping may be the only real solution for future shortages if the Columbia Park Medical building expands or the Target Center becomes fully occupied. Also, the study determined that there is no one- ramp solution to address all of these parking shortages. The distance befinreen Columbia Park and the Target building is too great for a cross parking arrangement. Another problem is all the buildings in this quadrant have the same peak demand times so there is no real opportunity to share parking. Speaking with the consultant, as City Hall is unlikely to outgrow its current parking the HRA may wish to give up their interest in building a parking ramp on the Target Operations lot. Staff will be bringing to the HRA in July a request from a potential purchaser of that site. � Commissioner Schnabel questioned if City employees currently park in the lower ramp. Mr. Bolin stated those City employees who actually work in the lower level use the lower parking ramp. During severe weather, additional employees utilize the lower level and some employees park in the Target lot. Signage and direction from the City Manager to staff may open the upper level. Commissioner Schnabel commented that the lower ramp is very dark and is not a comfortable atmosphere particularly for women. She questioned at what time it would be appropriate for the HRA to make a decision whether or not to relinquish their interest in the Target parking lot. Mr. Bolin stated the formal request from the potential purchaser of the Target site will be presented to the HRA at their July meeting. In addition to seeking permission to construct a ramp on that site, the purchaser will be asking to re-stripe the lot to a smaller parking space size. He will also be asking that the HRA give up the right to construct the ramp of its own and to sell the parcel to him now rather than in 2014 or the HRA keep the lease agreement they have with Target in place until that time, depending upon which is more advantageous to the City. Jim Casserly is looking into this for the HRA. The City may get more revenue out of continuing to receive the lease payments through 2014 and make the sale at that time rather than to do the sale now. Staff is ,-�., expecting a lot more information from Yale Place Associates before the July meeting and more information from the legal counsel as well. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — JLJNE 2, 2005 Page 9 of 13 Commissioner Meyer questioned why the HRA would care about hanging onto their rights to build a parking ramp on the Target site when it will not alleviate the parking problems for City Hall or Columbia Park Medical. Mr. Bolin stated that was one of the key reasons for doing this study and the HRA had been asked last year to give up that right. What the study shows is that City Hall doesn't have a parking shortage it can't manage and any future parking problems for Columbia Park will not be resolved by the HRA constructing a ramp on the Target site. What this study says is that the HRA may want to consider relinquishing that right at this time. Chairperson Commers questioned how much assistance the proposed purchaser is seeking to build a ramp. Mr. Bolin responded at this time they're seeking no assistance other than a break on the sale price of the property. The current agreement with Target requires that Target purchase those parcels from the HRA in 2014 for the sum of $300,000. Chairperson Commers stated it appears they're going to file a tax protest and he asked what that would do to any tax increment left on that property. �, Mr. Hickok stated Target had an agreement with the City that they would have a base value and that agreement ends this year. Now that the base value is gone and the building has been empty, they're going to challenge the value. They're past that minimum value agreement for assessment purposes and they want to tell the County and the City that they've been paying too much based on that base agreement. Target has been waiting for this agreement for minimum assessment to expire and then they'll come back and claim they paid too much. Mr. Bolin commented that much like the Medtronic re-evaluation of TIF, he's had a number of conversations with Jim Casserly recently and it appears the County erred in their original valuation of the Target building ne� door and didn't pay out enough tax increment. Mr. Casserly is working on this issue for the HRA and staff may be talking to the County about the Target building. Chairperson Commers then questioned if they do file a tax protest and their valuations are changed will the City be getting less tax increment. Mr. Bolin stated that is correct. Mr. Hickok stated in July Columbia Park Medical Group will again present their request for $125,000 assistance from the City to improve the City's portion of the parking area that Columbia Park is using. They're requesting 45% of the cost from the City because �--�, that is the percentage of the parking area that is City owned. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — JLJNE 2, 2005 Page 10 of 13 � • Gateway West — Discussion of design elements to be included in the request for proposals. Mr. Bolin stated the City has taken possession of all the properties needed to move forward with the creation of the TIF district, which will be presented at the HRA's August meeting. By the end of August they will be able to move forward with the demolition and site preparation so it can then be passed off to a developer. Staff is currently preparing a request for proposals to solicit developers who can carry out the City's wishes to build si�cteen single family homes in the project area. Discussions to date have only included the type of housing to be built, single family, but other than that staff has not been given any guidance as to design elements the HRA or Council would like to see in this area. The developers will offer guidance if the HRA so chooses or they could make recommendations as to design types, building materials and interior finishes or other amenities associated with the development. He would like to learn from the HRA what they would like to see included in the Request for Proposals (RFP) or the developers. He referred to the pattern book put together in 1998 or 1999 that lays out different rules of thumb for placing new homes in Fridley. In this book there are guidelines for 60 foot lots which are the standard in the Gateway West area. Are these architectural rules of thumb suificient to put in the RFP? He reviewed the rules of thumb from the pattern book. In preparing for this meeting staff spent a lot of time looking at a number of new developments. The term "new urbanism� is heard quite a bit now and that is building new homes that look like they belong in the neighborhood and n have been there for a number of years. This style of home has front porches and features not seen on typical tract homes. Commissioner Meyer stated this type of house is not appropriate for the Hyde Park area as he believes it would clash with the Hyde Park environment because the proposed homes are two stories. Commissioner Gable stated she didn't see a problem because the new homes would all be together as a part of the development. She believes the HRA could go in any direction as far as the style of home. Commissioner Meyer stated even with varying the colors and materials, the homes are all of a certain type, which clashes with the homes that are in the area. Mr. Bolin stated that staff is just trying to get some ideas from the HRA and to show them what other communities are doing on these types of developments. Mr. Hickok stated staff has discussed that a critical piece of this development is to consider these four sided buildings and to not put so much emphasis on Third Street that University Avenue looks like the back door and the utilitarian alley. It's going to be important to lay out the site plan so that however the homes face, it doesn't look like we've forgotten University or Third Street. �, Commissioner Schnabel asked if staff is anticipating an alley for this development. /"� HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — JUNE 2, 2005 Page 11 of 13 Mr. Bolin stated staff is not anticipating anything; garages could be a possibility or going out to Third Street could be a possibility. Commissioner Schnabel stated she would be opposed to alleys. Mr. Bolin commented that staff has discussed the fact that seeing the back of a garage with windows would be a better view from University than seeing nothing but garage doors. Mr. Hickok stated also they would want to avoid a row of uniform garages or uniform styles lot to lot so that some are attached, or set up, or set back so that there is an interesting perspective. Staff is going to take the information HRA provides and pay a lot of attention this project will have from all angles. Commissioner Gable stated she hoped all the garages would be attached. Commissioner Meyer questioned whether there will be hard and fast guidelines in the RFP's. Mr. Bolin explained there will be a mix of things in the RFP that will have to be set in stone, such as the lot size and a four-sided building with windows on all four sides. But ^ as far as architectural features there can be some flexibility. It's the HRA's discretion to help sift through the responses to find a developer who will deliver the product the City wants for their investment. The pattern book with the 10 rules of thumb would be hard and fast rules for this development. But if there are little details or certain types of homes the HRA would or would not like included those can be included in the RFP as well. He also commented that the area is currently a mix of older and newer homes with a mix of styles. Commissioner Holm asked the price range for homes in this development and if those prices appear to fit the plans for the Hyde Park area. Mr. Bolin stated pricing is one of the items that has not been discussed but will come out of the response from the RFP's. A recent appraisal of a home to the north of the Hyde Park area came in around $400,000. Commissioner Holm asked if the lot layouts are being left somewhat open or have lot sizes been determined. Mr. Bolin stated that has been left somewhat open but to really blend in with the neighborhood the lot width should be the 60 foot minimum standard in that area. The new homes can all have similar setbacks to the neighboring properties. Using the existing configuration of lots it looks like there can easily be 8 lots on the northerly site ,.-1 and 8 lots on the southerly site as well. Some of the things probably should not be firmly defined at this time. � HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — JiJNE 2, 2005 Page 12 of 13 Commissioner Holm commented that he likes the idea of not having garages as the focal point of each of the sites and whatever the developers can suggest would be welcome. He does like the variety of homes and the new urbanism look is pretty sterile in terms of all of the homes looking quite a bit alike. A mixture of elevations would be helpful and should be encouraged in the RFP. Commissioner Gabel stated she doesn't want the homes to be "cookie cutter" either. She hoped there would be some creativity and unique ideas for this area. Commissioner Meyer pointed out the variety of housing styles in the Hyde Park neighborhood. He also hoped that the City doesn't do the new urbanism. Commissioner Schnabel stated she recently read about the new interest in porches and so many communities are starting to add porches on the front because it gets them to know the neighbors and they're watching the neighborhood. She stated she would prefer a mix of houses going in. It will be quite evident that this is a whole new development but she felt a mix of styles could be accommodated without making it too obvious. If garages can be turned so that the doors don't face the street that's more common now than it used to be. Chairperson Commers stated he would not like to see a row of garages from University /—�, and would like the rear view of the homes to be as nice as possible. He then asked when the RFP will be completed. Mr. Bolin stated the RFP has been completed, but he will try and incorporate the suggestions made by the HRA. A copy of the RFP will be sent to HRA members with their July packet. Chairperson Commers asked if there is sufficient time remaining to get these homes built yet this year. Mr. Bolin stated he can go ahead and send out the RFP before the July meeting if the HRA is comfortable with that. He also explained that Kurth Surveying is currently surveying the property and checking title work to make sure they have marketable titles for each lot. If the HRA would prefer, he could have Kurth Surveying lay out a preliminary plat for 16 lots which may get a developer into the ground sooner. The down side to that is if we guess wrong or the developer wants a slight adjustment that money has been spent for nothing. After some discussion, the HRA members decided to review the RFP at their June 8th meeting and Mr. Bolin could then send out the RFP's. They also advised against Kurth Surveying creating a preliminary plat for this site. �"'� HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING — JIJNE 2, 2005 Page 13 of 13 �� • Monthly Housing Report Mr. Bolin reviewed the loan program figures for May stating they closed on one loan in May, sent out 5 new applications and processed 6 applications. Year-to-date they've closed on 5 loans. On May 24�' an open house was held on the housing programs which were attended by 13 households and it appears all will be obtaining loans through the City's program. As far as the loan origination report, one loan was approved for a total of $5,800 and year-to-date the program has loaned out just under $38,000. As in previous months this loan was made to a single family home and was for windows and doors. For this past month they received just over $34,000 in loan payments. $511 was paid in monthly servicing fees. There are currently four loans delinquent for a total of $2,900 on a principal balance of $35,000. At the July or August meeting staff will bring a new agreement for the loan servicing they do with the community re-investment fund. Staff has not had an active agreement with them since 2002 when the old agreement expired. They're now going to update that agreement. Mr. Bolin stated for the Operation / Insulation program there were no appointments scheduled in May or for the Remodeling Advisor. At least 6 of the 13 households that attended the May meeting have contacted the Remodeling Advisor this month. Mr. Bolin reminded the HRA that there is a joint HRA / Council meeting June 8, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. � Chairperson Commers asked Mr. Bolin to put together a summary of what the HRA has averaged in relocation costs. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Commissioner Schnabel, seconded by Commissioner Gabel, to adjourn. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. RespectFully submitted by, ��������-- � Rebecca Brazys Recording Secretary ��