02-18-03 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2003
RICHFIELD CITY HALL
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7 P.M.
AGENDA
Call to order
1. Approval of minutes of Regular HRA Meeting of January 21, 2003
Notes:
2. HRA approval of agenda
3. Consent Calendar contains several separate items which are acted upon by the HRA in one
motion. Once the Consent Calendar has been approved, the individual items and
recommended actions have also been approved. No further HRA action is necessary.
However, any HRA Commissioner may request that an item be removed from the Consent
Calendar and placed on the regular agenda for HRA discussion. and action. All items listed on
the Consent Calendar are recommended for approval.
A. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing purchase of 6309 Bryant Avenue with
Community Development Block Grant funds for rehabilitation through New Home Program
S.R. No. 9
B. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing execution of contract with Project for
Pride in Living in amount of $158,950 for rehabilitation of 6945 Clinton Avenue for future
sale to first time buyer under New Home Program S.R. No. 10
C. Consideration of approval of resolution amending Tax Increment Financing Plan for City
Bella Tax Increment Financing District within Richfield Redevelopment Project Area S.R.
No. 11
D. Consideration of approval of modification to Transformation Homes and First Time
Advantage Loan program guidelines S.R. No. 12
E. Consideration of approval of supplemental agreement to Contract for Private
Redevelopment between Gramercy Corporation and HRA for condemnation and relocation
costs and required financial security S.R. No. 13
Notes:
4. Consideration of future status of Lyndale Gateway West redevelopment project as proposed
by Lyndale Gateway, LLC
Staff Report No. 14
Notes:
5. Executive Director report
6. Claims and payroll
Adjournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made
at least 96 hours in advance to the Administrative Services Director at 612-861-9702.
AGENDA ITEM #
REPORT # .,
STAFF REPORT
r
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY MEETING
FEBRUARY 18, 2003
~ REPORT PREPARED BY: MICHELLE LEWIS,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TECHNICIAN
NAME, T/TLE
REPORT PRESENTER: BRUCE PALMBORG,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ ,.
SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:
ITEM FOR HRA CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution authorizing the purchase of real property located at 6309 Bryant
Avenue with Communit Development Block Grant funds for the New Home Proaram_
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the attached resolution authorizing the purchase
of real property located at 6309 Bryant Avenue South for
rehabilitation through the New Home Program.
~ II. BACKGROUND
The structure at 6309 Bryant Avenue was built in 1935 and is a 522 sq. ft. one-story
structure with a detached garage, and is currently vacant. The bedroom and living
room are combined. The owner has requested to sell the property to the City. The
structure has various code violations and is in need of considerable repairs. The lot
is 40 ft. by 128 ft.
If approved, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) would purchase the
property, demolish the existing buildings, and enter into an agreement with Twin
Cities Habitat for Humanity (HFH) to construct a new home on this property under
the HRA's New Home Program. The agreement would be presented to the HRA at
a subsequent meeting.
0218-63096ryantAve
The purchase price of the property has been determined to be $120,000 based on
an independent appraisal report prepared by an appraiser who is experienced in
valuing property in the Richfield market. HFH would contribute $30,000 towards the
acquisition from federal grant funds they have received. The remaining $90,000
would come from Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds available
from the City, which have been identified for this acquisition.
To fully utilize federal funding for acquisition, the City must purchase the property
and subsequently transfer it to the HRA. No City funds would be used for
acquisition.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• This use of CDBG funds to buy substandard property and construct a
home with HFH has been a productive program combination for several
years. Habitat has completed seven homes in Richfield.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• A poor quality house will be replaced by a new home.
C. FINANCIAL
• Federal CDBG funds and proceeds of sale will provide the financial
means to implement the project. No City General Fund revenues are
utilized.
D. LEGAL
• The sale from the City to the HRA will require a City Council public
hearing and second reading of a transitory ordinance scheduled for
March 25, 2003.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Do not acquire the property.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• N/A
HRA RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 6309 BRYANT AVENUE SOUTH UNDER THE NEW HOME PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Richfield, Minnesota ("the HRA") desires to purchase certain real property pursuant to and
in furtherance of the New Home Program, said property being described as:
Lot 11, Block 2, Ray's Lynnhurst 2nd Addition; and
WHEREAS, the HRA is authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section 469.012 to
acquire real property within its area of operation; and
WHEREAS, a purchase price of $120,000 has been established based on an
independent appraisal; and
WHEREAS, $90,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds are available
for acquisition, and Habitat for Humanity will contribute $30,000 towards acquisition.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Richfield Housing and
Redevelopment Authority:
1. The purchase price for 6309 Bryant Avenue South is approved at $120,000.
2. The Chairperson and Executive Director are authorized to execute a purchase
agreement and other documents to allow purchase for the amount set forth in this
resolution.
Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield,
Minnesota on this 18th day of February 2003.
Thomas E. Harms, Chair
ATTEST:
Michael Sandahl, Secretary
AGENDA SECTION: 3B
AGENDA ITEM # I ~
REPORT #
STAFF REPORT
~ HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY MEETING
FEBRUARY 18, 2003
REPORT PREPARED BY: PAM BOOKHOUT,
REHABILITATION SPECIALIST
NAME, TITLE
REPORT PRESENTER: BRUCE PALMBORG,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:
ITEM FOR HRA CONSIDERATION:
Authorization to execute a contract with Project for Pride in Living to rehabilitate the property at
6945 Clinton Avenue South, for future sale to a first time buyer under the New Home Program.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the execution
of the contract with Project for Pride in Living in the amount of
$158,950 for the rehabilitation of the property at 6945 Clinton Avenue
South under the New Home Program, for future sale to a first time
buyer.
~ II. BACKGROUND
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) approved the purchase of a
single-family property at 6945 Clinton Avenue for remodeling and sale to an income
qualified first time buyer at their meeting in January. Code repairs, updates to
finishes, and treatment of vvater issues and lead-based paint will also be completed.
Project for Pride in Living (PPL) is anon-profit agency whose mission is to assist
low and moderate income people to become self-sufficient through housing and
neighborhood development, employment and job training, youth education and
0218PPL contract 6945 Clinton
support services. PPL has built or remodeled over 1,380 housing units in the
metropolitan area since its beginning 30 years ago. PPL would provide
architectural design, assembly of subcontractors, site supervision, and overall
construction management.
With PPL, improvements to the home will include:
• Interior layout changes to expand kitchen.
• Kitchen and bath remodels -new fixtures, cabinets and code repairs.
• Wall and ceiling repair, painting and new floor coverings.
• Construction of a covered front entry.
• New roof; and increase roof line to match from main house to south addition (an
addition added years ago as a four season porch, with a lower pitch).
• Siding, wrap and trim repair.
• Insulation and exterior doors.
• Two basement egress windows and window wells.
• Garage repairs and new driveway installation.
• Grading, landscaping and sod.
Other work includes a new furnace, electrical and plumbing repairs, new appliances
and lead hazard abatement.
Although the sale price of the home will be determined upon completion, based on
Hennepin County Assessor data, staff estimates its value at $200,000. According
to the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, a
$170,000 home should be affordable to aloes-to-moderate income family (a four
member family with income of $54,400/year). Therefore, a $30,000 second
mortgage from the HRA and a low interest rate on the mortgage obtained by the
first-time buyer will make it affordable. Depending on the mortgage product, a down
payment of $5,000 to $8,000 will be required.
~ III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• PPL is a well known nonprofit housing developer and provider in the
Twin Cities area. Their architectural and construction staff have a
proven track record.
• The contract provisions are similar to previous contracts with other non-
profit developers, such as Habitat for Humanity and Affordable Suburban
Housing Inc.
• The HRA seeks to expand its network to other non-profit metropolitan
housing providers to develop attractive, affordable housing at a
reasonable cost.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• The house is currently vacant.
• Continued neglect will make the conditions worse.
C. FINANCIAL
• PPL provided an estimate that included the repairs and improvements,
closing costs, taxes, contingency and marketing. The estimated cost
is approximately $158,950. Proceeds of sale will cover those costs.
D. LEGAL
• According to Minnesota Statutes 469.015 Subd 4, competitive public
bidding is not required in the following circumstances:
(1) In the case of a contract for the acquisition of a low-rent
housing project (does not apply to this project);
(2) -With respect to a structured parking facility (does not apply to
this project); and
(3) In the case of any building in which at least 75 percent of the
usable square footage constitutes a housing development
project, and a.) the project is financed with proceeds of bonds
or nongovernmental sources (project will be financed with
proceeds from sale); b.) project is located on land that is owned
by the HRA for development purposes (purchase is
authorized); and c.) elimination of the public bidding
requirements makes the project economical and feasible
(pertains to this project).
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S)
• Do not authorize execution of the contract with PPL.
• Direct staff to administer a public bidding process.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution
Information on Project for Pride in Living (PPL)
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• PPL representative
HRA RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH PROJECT FOR
PRIDE IN LIVING FOR THE REHABILITATION OF 6945 CLINTON AVENUE
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has authorized the purchase the property at 6945
Clinton Avenue by voluntary acquisition, to convey it to the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (HRA) for the purpose of rehabilitation
and sale, said real property being legally described as Lot 9, -Block 3, D.L. Tate's Addition,
and whose street address is 6945 Clinton Avenue South; and
WHEREAS, the HRA determines, as allowed in MN Statutes 469.015 Subd 4, that
holding a public bidding process is not financially prudent because the cost for advertising,
staff time, and developer overhead would make the project more expensive; and
WHEREAS, a project has been proposed as a cooperative effort between the HRA
and Project for Pride in Living (PPL); and
WHEREAS, the property at 6945 Clinton Avenue would be rehabilitated and
improved; and
WHEREAS, the cost for rehabilitating and improving the property in accordance
with the contract is not to exceed $158,950; and
_ WHEREAS, following completion of construction, the property will be sold to a low
to moderate income, first-time buying family.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota that the Chairperson and Executive
Director are authorized to enter into a Construction Agreement with PPL for a contract not
to exceed $158,950 for the rehabilitation and improvement of the property at 6945 Clinton
Avenue.
Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Richfield, Minnesota this 18th day of February 2003.
Thomas E. Harms, Chair
ATTEST:
Michael Sandahl, Secretary
30 Years of Building Futures
PPL was founded in 1972 by a group of
volunteers concerned about the
growing number of rundown houses in
the Minneapolis core urban
neighborhoods.
The agency has since grown, gaining
national recognition for its unique and
effective approach to assisting people
improve their lives through:
• Affordable Housing
& Neighborhood Development
• Employment ~ Job Training
• Youth Development & Education
• Support Services
"Until I was able to find safe,
affordable housing for myself and my
kids I was unable to pursue any of my
other goals. Once my housing need
was met, I was able to enroll in
classes that will help me get agood-
paying job in the health care field."
- Teishica Participant, PPL Connections to Work
& Self-sufficiency Program
PPL serves thousands of individuals
and families every year through vital
and interconnected programs that offer housing,
employment, education
and self-sufficiency services.
Affordable Housing
& Neighborhood Development
• Over 600 units of affordable rental housing
owned and/or managed by PPL. On-site human
services are available including children's
programming.
• Serving low and moderate income families and
individuals through both new construction and
renovation of existing homes and commercial
sites.
Employment ~ Job Training
• Serving a wide range of adults with barriers to
successful employment through paid training
programs that operate through businesses and
classroom instruction:
• PPL SHOP
•. PPL Industries
• Train to Work
• Press for Success, punchpress program
• Connections to Work, welfare to work program
• Minneapolis Hospitality Skills Training Program
Adult Support Services
• Serving families and individuals who live iri PPL
housing by providing a range of support
services and links to community resources.
Youth Programs
• Striving to improve the lives of children who live
in PPL buildings and surrounding areas through
programs such as: tutor/mentoring with college
students, after school programs, and help with
homework.
Project for Pride in Living
2516 Chicago Avenue • Minneapolis, MN 55404
b 12.874-8511 • FAX: 612,8741444
einailppl@ppNnc.org • www.ppNnc.org
THIRTY YEARS Of BUILDING FUTURES:
The spirit of Joe Selvaggio, a tg~z founder and its executive
director for zg years, transcends PPL through his venerable
vision of a hand up for the poor, decent housing, self-sufficient
families and stronger neighborhoods in the lowest-income pock-
ets of the metro area.
Todau, backed by hundreds of fenders, volunteers, staff, local
business and government, PPL houses more than 60o families in
rental properties it owns or manages; assists dozens of people
every week who seek to leave welfare through. education, train-
ing and work; manages commercial developments that have
helped revitalize inner-city neighborhoods; and provides job
training for the hard-to-employ PPL volunteers tutor and men-
torhundreds of youth who reside in and nearby PPL properties.
Approaching 8tt million in annual revenue, PPL has developed,
refurbished or constructed r,38t housing units and nearly
z34,ooo sq. ft. of commercial space, significantly raising both
the quality of living conditions and economic activity in core
city neighborhoods. It generates revenue from sales, fees, rents
and corporate and individual grants, and keeps administrative
costs down.
"PPL's partnership with Beth El Synagogue and Avodah B'Yachad-Service Together in St. Louis Park
is heartwarming. This is an ezamp(e of how collaboration has helped generate community revitalization in several inner-
city neighborhoods. Together we have held up an ideal of organizations,
communities, and neighborhoods coming together for a common purpose -
to make the world a better place."
Most importantly, the spirit and vision that drives PPL are
grasped by hundreds of stakeholders. PPL, a grassroots organ-
ization, links people of means -those who invest time or
funds -with the poor and those in need of a second chance or
better opportunity
Selvaggio's vision was embraced by his successors after he
retired in c99G to start a second cazeer as a fundraiser and to
inspire greater giving by citizens. Steve Cramer, a former
i'~4inneapolis City Council member and PpL executive, ran the
- PAULA BEUGEN, former Director, Avodah 6'Yachad-Service Together, le~vish Community Relations %auncil
organization for three years before leaving to head the
Minneapolis Community Development Agency. Cramer is cur-
rently adivision director for Hennepin County. In zooo, Jim
Scheibel, a former mayor of St. Paul and city council member,
returned from a post in Washington, D.C., as director of
AmeriCorps VISTA and the National Senior Service Corps, to
lead PPL into its 3oth year and beyond.
AGENDA ITEM # 3 C
REPORT # , ,
STAFF REPORT
~ HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY MEETING
FEBRUARY 18, 2003
REPORT PREPARED BY: BRUCE NORDQUIST,
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
REPORT PRESENTER: BRUCE NORDQUIST,
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
S/GNA7'URE
REVIEWED BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:
ITEM FOR HRA CONSIDERATION:
Amending the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the City Bella Tax Increment Financing
District.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Authorize the attached resolution amending the Tax
Increment Financing Plan for the City Bella Tax Increment Financing
District (a Redevelopment District) within the Richfield
Redevelopment Project Area.
~ II. BACKGROUND
Given revisions to the Contract for Private Development that occurred January 21,
2003, the Tax Increment Financing Plan is being updated in two areas:
• Original Net Tax Capacity as certified for the district will be based on assessor
2002 values for taxes payable in 2003. The district was certified after July 2002
so this adjustment is to make the plan match what is occurring.
• The "use of funds" has been adjusted so that only costs not yet incurredwould
be applied toward the issuance of atax-exempt note from the available tax
increment.
0218cityBellaTlF
HRA RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE CITY
BELLA TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT (A REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT)
WITHIN THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
WHEREAS, The Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Plan") for the City Bella Tax
Increment Financing District (the "District") was adopted on June 11, 2002, and
WHEREAS, it has been recommended by staff of the Richfield Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield (the "HRA") that certain
amendments to the Plan be made, and
WHEREAS, approval of the proposed amendments does not require the formalities
required for the adoption of the initial Plan, and
WHEREAS, the HRA has received the report and recommendation of staff, and has
been fully advised of the nature and effect of the proposed amendments.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the HRA as follows:
1. The first paragraph of Subsection 2-8 of the Plan is amended to read as
follows:
Pursuant to M.S.,Section 469.174 Subd. 7 and M. S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the
Original Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market
values placed on the property by the assessor in 2002 for taxes payable in 2003.
2. Subsection 2-10 of the Plan is amended to read as follows:
Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds
Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate the integrated
development of housing, commercial, parking and green space elements with pedestrian
paths to adjacent existing uses. The HRA and City of Richfield have determined that it will
be necessary to provide assistance to the project for certain costs. The HRA has studied
the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District.
To facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this Plan
authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain .eligible
expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with the District is
outlined in the following table.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• Changes are required to keep the Tax Increment Financing- Plan
current. Both the HRA's Legal Counsel and financial advisor
recommend that the plan be kept as current as possible if a tax-
exempt note is being considered. No changes in financial obligation
occur.
• These types of changes do not require a public hearing prior to
consideration.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• The most accurate up-to-date information is being provided.
• No changes in financial obligations occur.
C. FINANCIAL
• Modifications to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for City Bella were
prepared by Ehlers and Associates, Inc.
D. LEGAL
• The resolution was prepared by Legal Counsel.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Do not update the Tax Increment Financing Plan.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution
Changes to plan document
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• N/A
USES OF FUNDS TOTAL AS TOTAL AS
ADOPTED MODIFIED
Land/Building Acquisition $5,500,000 $4,000,000
Parking Facilities $6,000,000 $6,000,000
Other Public Improvements/Skyway System $2,500,000 $2,500,000
Site Improvements/Plaza $0 $1,500,000
Interest $9,850,000 $9,850,000
Administrative Costs (up to 10%) $2,650,000 $2,650,000
PROJECT COSTS TOTAL $26,500,000 $26,500,000
The above budget is organized according to the Office of State Auditor (OSA) reporting
forms.
Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories
without a modification to this Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax
increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above
pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763,
Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent caf the tax increment paid by property within the District
will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of the District
but within the boundaries of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, (including
administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of the District) subject to the
limitations as described in this Plan.
Approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Richfield, Minnesota this 18th day of February, 2003.
Thomas E. Harms, Chair
ATTEST:
Michael Sandahl, Secretary
Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax
Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax
Capacity (ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by
the assessor in 2002 for taxes payable 2003.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year
(beginning in the payment year 2004) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased
as a result of
1. Change in tax exempt status of property;
2. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district;
3. Change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements;
4. Change in the use of the property and classification;
5. Change in state law governing class rates; or
6. Change in previously issued building permits.
In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTC,
no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the HRA or City.
The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2003, assuming the
request for certification is made before June 30, 2003. The Original Tax Capacity and the Original Local
Tax Rate for the District appear in the table on the next page.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated
Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, upon
completion of the project, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table on the
next page. The HRA and City request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment
of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2004. The Project Tax
Capacity (PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the project is completed.
Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) 570,280
Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity(ONTC) 52,030
Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) 518,250
Original Local Tax Rate 1.33543 Pay 2002
Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) 692,087
Percent Retained by the HRA 100%
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the HRA shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its
request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S.,
Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for
which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding
approval of the Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S, Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor
shall increase the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for
which a building permit was issued.
The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District has found one building permit that
was issued in the 18 months preceding July 11, 2002, but it should not increase the original tax
capacity. Please see Appendix H for the building permit that was issued.
MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
and the
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
for the establishment of
THE CITY BELLA TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
(a redevelopment district)
within
THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF RICHFIELD
HENNEPIN COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Public Hearing: June 11, 2002
Adopted: June 11, 2002
Prepared by: FREERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105
651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehlers-inc.com
Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds
Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate the integrated development of housing,
commercial, parking and green space elements with pedestrian paths to adjacent existing uses. The HRA and
City have determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project for certain costs. The HRA
has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To
facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this Plan authorizes the use of
tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses
of funds associated with the District is outlined in the following table.
USES OF FUNDS TOTAL AS
ADOPTED TOTAL AS
MODIFIED
LandBuilding Acquisition $5,500,000 $4,000,000
Parking Facilities $6,000,000 $6,000,000
Other Public Improvements/Skyway System $2,500,000 $2,500,000
Site Improvements/Plaza $0 $1,500,000
Interest $9,850,000 $9,850,000
Administrative Costs (up to 10%) $2,650,000 $2,650,000
PROJECT COSTS TOTAL $26,500,000 $26,500,000
The above budget is organized according to the Office of State Auditor (OSA) reporting forms.
Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification to
this Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal
modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant t¢LI.S., Section
469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent of the tax increment paid by property within the District will be
spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of the District but within the boundaries
of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent
outside of the District) subject to the limitations as described in this Plan.
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the City Bella Tax Increment Financing District 2-6
AGENDA ITEM # 3D
REPORT # 12
STAFF REPORT
~ HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY MEETING
FEBRUARY 18, 2003
REPORT PREPARED BY: PAM BOOKHOUT,
REHABILITATION SPECIALIST
NAME, TITLE
REPORT PRESENTER: BRUCE PALMBORG,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:
ITEM FOR HRA CONSIDERATION:
Modify the Transformation Homes and First Time Advantage Loan program guidelines.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Modify the Transformation Homes and First Time
Advantage Loan program guidelines.
III. BACKGROUND ~
In 1994, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) authorized the
Transformation Home Loan program. The program provides zero interest incentive
loan financing to homeowners making value added improvements. For projects
costing in the $30,000-$50,000 range, a ten percent loan has been available
($3,000-$5,000). For projects costing $50,000 or over, a 15 percent loan has been
available ($7,500-$15,000). Since the program began in 1994, 95 homeowners
have taken advantage of the loan opportunity. $1,028,957 in loan funds helped
leverage $6,802,843 in homeowner investment. Funds were not available in 2002
for the program. Many interested homeowners have expressed interest over the
months. Currently, approximately 50 homeowners are on a mailing list to be
informed if any funding is identified.
021803 Program Guidelines
As a result of a recent refunding of the Series 1999 bonds, $200,000 will be
available for Transformation Home loans in 2003. Because of the demand and
limited funds, staff recommends:
• Limit each loan to a maximum of $5,000 instead of $15,000. With the new
limit, 40 loans would be available rather than 13 loans.
• .Eliminate the Relocation Support Grant, v-thich has been available to loan
recipients who needed to be out of their homes during remodeling, due to
kitchens or bathrooms being unavailable for use. A maximum of $500 per
month, not to exceed $1,500 has been available under the program.
• Prioritize applicants that are further along in the process, e.g. they have
architectural drawings or have closed on their primary financing. This ensures
that projects most likely to happen receive funding, and staff time is used more
efficiently
• Drop the provision for a loan when remodeling in the $30,000 to $50,000
range. Very few loans occurred under this program option. It would be
smoother administratively to have one level of funding for projects with costs at
or above $50,000.
The First Time Advantage program made loans available to first time owners who
had owned their home for a year or less, and who met certain income criteria. This
program was available through three separate grants made to the HRA by the
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA). Grant funds were sought again in
2002, but the State has narrowed the window for the types of projects eligible for
funding and First Time Advantage was not funded. However, the HRA has $83,022
in loan repayments from this program, which can. be redirected into new loans. The
original program guidelines state that an owner can apply for up to 10 percent of
their purchase price. With limited funds available, staff recommends limiting each
loan to a maximum of $10,000. For reference, the average amount borrowed in
2001 was $11,$0.0. A $10,000 limit would allow at .least eight loans to be made
from repayments, if the maximum were borrowed each time.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• Both the Transformation and First Time Advantage loans have been
useful and well regarded.
Limited funds means fewer loans are possible under existing
guidelines. Limiting the maximum loan amount in each program will
allow more .loans.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
The economic climate may limit some remodeling.
• The reduced benefit to the borrower may limit some remodeling.
• Approximately 50 people have been hoping to be informed of the
program's status and future. Those households will be informed
directly of fund availability.
C. FINANCIAL
• Funds from the bond refunding and from loan repayments are
currently available and can only be used for limited purposes as
described in this report.
With modified dollar amounts, program documents already in use can
continue to be used.
D. LEGAL
• The modifications to the guidelines do not modify any of the required
loan documents.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Do not modify program guidelines.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Language reflecting the proposed guideline changes.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• N/A
MODIFICATIONS TO THE TRANSFORMATION HOMES LOAN PROGRAM
Criteria for Program Eligibility
1. On a case by case basis, -the Remodeling Advisor may be required to visit the property and
prepare an action plan to ensure viability of the project.
2. Project costs for remodeling improvements must be $50,000 or more. The Transformation
Loan will be in the amount of $5,000 regardless of project size.
6. Based on the degree of substandardness revealed by the Pre-Condition Remodeling Report,
the HRA may choose to reject an application and not fund a project.
Application Procedure
The Homeowner must:
1. Meet with the Richfield Remodeling Advisor, as requested by the HRA;
2. Submit a complete application, which includes a completed application form, attached copy of
all bids demonstrating project costs, scopes of improvement and plans; and-
3. Allow aPre-Remodeling Condition Report to be conducted by the HRA or agent of the HRA.
Applications will be reviewed and awarded on a first-come, first served basis. In addition to the
above, the HRA by its sole determination, will prioritize applicants and reserve funding which
evidence of progress using the following criteria:
• Loan commitment from a lender in written form;
• Complete, final and secured bid from contractor; and/or
• Architectural drawings prepared demonstrating substantial remodeling is proposed
MODIFICATIONS TO THE FIRST TIME ADVANTAGE LOAN PROGRAM
Definitions
Applicant. Person or persons who purchase and occupy a Richfield home to be remodeled, who
apply for an FTA Loan, and who met the definition of "first-time buyer" when purchasing the
property to be improved.
First Time Advantage Loan: Interest free loan offered by the. HRA for remodeling a home
purchased one year or less from date of application by Applicant. Loan is payable upon sale of the
property or forgiven after 30 years. Also referred to as FTA Loan, Advantage Loan, or Loan.
Criteria for Eligibility
In order for a project to be eligible for an FTA Loan, certain conditions must be met.
• Applicant's gross annual income-must be less than or equal to 80% of the Twin Cities Area
Median Income, as determined annually by HUD, and adjusted for household size.
• No home purchase price limits apply.
• Loan may be provided post closing, within one year of the settlement date, or at closing as a
junior lien to the first mortgage.
Conditions of the First Time Advantage Loan.
1. A minimum of $1,000, up to a maximum of $10,000 is available to the Applicant, depending on
the improvement identified.
AGENDA ITEM # 3 E
REPORT # ~~
STAFF REPORT
~ HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY MEETING
FEBRUARY 18, 2003
BRUCE NORDQUIST,
REPORT PREPARED BY: HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
BRUCE NORDQUIST,
REPORT PRESENTER: HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:
ITEM FOR HRA CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a Supplemental Agreement between Gramercy Corporation and the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority for condemnation and relocation costs and required financial
security.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Authorize the attached Supplemental Agreement Contract
for Private Redevelopment.
III. BACKGROUND ~
Upon initiating the eminent domain proceedings for City Bella property at the end of
December 2002, it was required that the redeveloper Gramercy Corporation
acknowledge responsibility for condemnation awards, relocation benefits and
providing .financial security for those costs.
The Supplemental Agreement formalizes the representations made, responsibility
taken and financial security provided.
0218 G ra m e rcyAg re e m e n t
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The City Bella project is based on a Contract for Private
Redevelopment between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
(HRA) and Gramercy Corporation.
• A Supplemental Agreement to the Contract formalizes Gramercy
Corporation's responsibilities for condemnation awards, relocation
benefits and financial security.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Eminent domain proceedings have begun, costs are being incurred,
and the developer is responsible for the costs. This agreement
formalizes those requirements.
C. FINANCIAL
• Gramercy Corporation has provided the financial security as
requested and acknowledged other responsibilities related to the
eminent domain proceedings.
D. LEGAL
• Legal Counsel prepared the Supplemental Agreement.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• Modify the conditions in the agreement.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Supplemental Agreement
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• NA
Chervl Krumholz
From: Jackie Scott ~~~ ~ ~~~G~
sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 1:40 PM <~~
To: Cheryl Krumholz ~~
Subject: Letter to Joan from Bruce Nordquist
~~~
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 17, 2003
TO: Joan Helmberger, Acting Chair
FROM: Bruce Nordquist, Housing and Redevelopment Manager
SUBJECT: Modified Agreement for February 17 HRA Board Meeting
The agreement has changed slightly for the Consent Agenda item 3E "Supplemental Agreement to Contract for Private
Redevelopment between Gramercy Corporation and HRA for Condemnation and Relocation Costs and Required
Security".
The revised agreement is attached.
Paragraph 5.01 was added by the HRA's legal counsel to satisfy Gramercy Corporation's request that they receive a report
on payment of relocation as it occurs. Legal Counsel indicates the addition is not a substantive change.
BN:js
Copy: Samantha Orduno, Executive Director
021803Resolution.D0
C
1
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT
TO
CONTRACT FOR
PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this _ day of , 2003 is by
and between THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA, a Minnesota public body corporate and politic (the
"HRA"), and GRAMERCY CORPORATION, a Minnesota corporation (the "Redeveloper").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the HRA and Redeveloper entered into an Amended and Restated Contract
for Private Redevelopment (the "Contract") as of , 200_ relating to the City
Bella TIF District; and
WHEREAS, on or about December 16, 2002, the HRA, following a public hearing did
adopt a resolution authorizing condemnation of certain parcels within the .Redevelopment
Property; and
WHEREAS, the resolution was conditioned upon Redeveloper satisfying the conditions
contained in Section 3.4 of the Contract including entering into a written agreement and
providing security therefore covering all awards that may be payable in the condemnation
actions, and all relocation benefits payable as a result of displacements caused by such actions;
and any amounts that may become payable. as a result of the .discontinuance of any such action;
and
WHEREAS, in its letter to the Executive Director of the HRA dated December, 2002,
the Redeveloper acknowledged such obligation.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements and undertakings of the
parties, the parties do hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
Section 1.01. Redeveloper's Undertaking. Redeveloper confirms to the HRA as follows:
1. Redeveloper shall be responsible for the making of any deposit or payment made
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 117.042.
2. Redeveloper shall be responsible for any and all condemnation awards, including,
without limitation, awards of commissioners and awards from any appeal of the
commissioner award.
3. Redeveloper shall be responsible for payments made as and for relocation benefits
to any individual determined to be entitled to such benefits.
Section 2.01. Security. Redeveloper will provide security for the undertakings described
in Section 1.01 above as follows:
JBD-225415v2
RC125-209
1. Prior to the sending of any 90-day relocation notice, the Redeveloper will furnish
the HRA with security in the form of an Assignment of Deposit Account and
UCC Financing Statement. The amount of such deposit will be determined by the
Executive Director after consultation with the HRA's relocation consultant. In
the event that the HRA subsequently determines that relocation benefits may
exceed the amount of the deposited funds, the Redeveloper shall, upon five
business day written notice provide the HRA with such increased amount.
2. Prior to the date on which title and possession is to transfer to the HRA pursuant
to any action to acquire title and possession under Minnesota Statutes, Section
117.042, the Redeveloper shall provide security to the HRA in the form of an
Assignment of Deposit Account and UCC Financing Statement equal to the
amount of any appraisal made by the respondent in the action, or, if none, 150%
of the HRA's approved appraisal of value.
3. Prior to the date on which the HRA obtains title to any parcel acquired through
condemnation, whether by payment of the "quick-take" deposit, or by the partial
payment of any commissioner award pending appeal, the Redeveloper shall, if
requested provide additional security to the HRA, equal to the amount of any
appraisal made by the respondent in the action, or if none, up to 150% of the
HRA's approved appraisal of value, or the commissioners' award if one has been
made.
Section 3.01 Redeveloper's Obligation Remains. Redeveloper acknowledges and agrees
that the making of any of the deposits required of it under this Agreement does not. relieve it of
its obligation to pay the actual amounts due pursuant to its obligations under Section 1.01.
Section 4.01. Release of Security. Once the HRA has determined that any security
provided under this Agreement is no longer needed, or that the amount of any security can be
reduced, it will notify the Redeveloper of that determination, and will execute any instruments
reasonably necessary to effect such release of reduction of security.
Section 5.01. Consultation with Redeveloper. Prior to making any payment of relocation
benefits, the HRA will discuss the proposed payment with the Redeveloper, and will, subject to
limitations on disclosure contained in applicable law, provide the Redeveloper with information
supporting such proposed payment.
Section 6.01. Notices and Demands. .Except as otherwise expressly provided in this
Agreement, a notice, demand, or other communication under the Agreement by either party to
the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered it if is dispatched by registered or certified mail,
postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally:
As to the HRA: Housing and Redevelopment Authority
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Attention: Executive Director
JBD-225415v2
RC125-209
With Copy to: John Dean
Kennedy & Graven
470 Pillsbury Center
Minneapolis, MN 554302
As to the Redeveloper: Gramercy Corporation
6601 Lyndale Avenue South
Suite 110
Richfield, MN 55423
Attention: Michael W. Conlan, President
With Copy to: Rolfe A. Worden
Hinshaw &Culbertson
Suite 3100
222 So. 9~' Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
or at such other address with respect to either such party as that party may, from time to time,
designate in writing and forward to the other.
Section 7.01. Counterparts. This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in any
number of counterparts, all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and. seals as of the day -
and year first above written.
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF
RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Dated:
2003
Bv:
Dated:
Its: Chairperson
2003 By:
Its: Executive Director
Dated: , 2003
GRAMERCY CORPORATION
By:
Its:
JBD-225415v2
RC125-209
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
ss..
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
2003, by
and ,the Chairperson ana rxecutlve >Jlrector or
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
ss..
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2003, by
the of Gramercy Corporation, a corporation under the laws
of Minnesota, by and on behalf of said corporation.
day of
Notary Public
JBD-225415v2
RC125-209
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT
TO
CONTRACT FOR
PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this _ day of , 2003 is by
and between THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA, a Minnesota public body corporate and politic (the
"HRA"), and GRAMERCY CORPORATION, a Minnesota corporation (the "Redeveloper").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the HRA and Redeveloper entered into an Amended and Restated Contract
for Private Redevelopment (the "Contract") as of January 21, 2003 relating to the City Bella TIF
District; and
WHEREAS, on or about December 16, 2002, the HRA, following a public hearing did
adopt a resolution authorizing condemnation of certain parcels within the Redevelopment
Property; and
WHEREAS, the resolution was conditioned upon Redeveloper satisfying the conditions
contained in Section 3.4 of the Contract including entering into a written agreement and
providing security therefore covering all awards that may be payable in the condemnation
actions, and all relocation benefits payable as a result of displacements caused by such actions;
and any amounts that may become payable as a result of the discontinuance of any such action;
and
WHEREAS, in its letter to the Executive Director of the HRA dated December 16, 2002,
the Redeveloper acknowledged such obligation.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements and undertakings of the
parties, the parties do hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
Section 1.01. Redeveloper's Undertaking. Redeveloper confirms to the HRA as follows:
1. Redeveloper shall be responsible for the making of any deposit or payment made
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 117.042.
2. Redeveloper shall be responsible for any and all condemnation awards, including,
without limitation, awards of commissioners and awards from any appeal of the
commissioner award.
3. Redeveloper shall be responsible for payments made as and for relocation benefits
to any individual determined to be entitled to such benefits.
Section 2.01. Security. Redeveloper will provide security for the undertakings described
in Section 1.01 above as follows:
JBD-225415v2
RC125-209
1. Prior to the sending of any 90-day relocation notice, the Redeveloper will furnish
the HRA with security in the form of an Assignment of Deposit Account and
UCC Financing Statement. The amount of such deposit will be determined by the
Executive Director after consultation with the HRA's relocation consultant. In
the event that the HRA subsequently determines that relocation benefits may
exceed the amount of the deposited funds, the Redeveloper shall, upon five
business day written notice provide the HRA with such increased amount.
2. Prior to the date on which title and possession is to transfer to the HRA pursuant
to any action to acquire title and possession under Minnesota Statutes, Section
117.042, the Redeveloper shall provide security to the HRA in the form of an
Assignment of Deposit Account and UCC Financing Statement equal to the
amount of any appraisal made by the respondent in the action, or, if none, 150%
of the HRA's approved appraisal of value.
3. Prior to the date on which the HRA obtains title to any parcel acquired through
condemnation, whether by payment of the "quick-take" deposit, or by the partial
payment of any commissioner award pending appeal, the Redeveloper shall, if
requested provide additional security to the HRA, equal to the amount of any
appraisal made by the respondent in the action, or if none, up to 150% of the
HRA's approved appraisal of value, or the commissioners' award if one has been
made.
Section 3.01 Redeveloper's Obligation Remains. Redeveloper acknowledges and agrees
that the making of any of the deposits required of it under this Agreement does not relieve it of
its obligation to pay the actual amounts due pursuant to its obligations under Section 1.01.
Section 4.01. Release of Security. Once the HRA has determined that any security
provided under this Agreement is no longer needed, or that the amount of any security can be
reduced, it will notify the Redeveloper of that determination, and will execute any instruments
reasonably necessary to effect such release of reduction of security.
Section 5.01. Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this
Agreement, a notice, demand, or other communication under the Agreement by either party to
the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered it if is dispatched by registered or certified mail,
postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally:
As to the HRA: Housing and Redevelopment Authority
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Attention: Executive Director
With Copy to: John Dean
Kennedy & Graven
470 Pillsbury Center
Minneapolis, MN 554302
JBD-225415v2
RC125-209
As to the Redeveloper: Gramercy Corporation
6601 Lyndale Avenue South
Suite 110
Richfield, MN 55423
Attention: Michael W. Conlan, President
With Copy to: Rolfe A. Worden
Hinshaw &Culbertson
Suite 3100
222 So. 9t" Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
or at such other address with respect to either such party as that party may, from time to time,
designate in writing and forward to the other.
Section 6.01. Counterparts. This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in any
number of counterparts, all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and seals as of the day
and year first above written.
Dated:
2003
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF
RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Bv:
Dated:
Its: Chairperson
2003 By:
Its: Executive Director
Dated: , 2003
GRAMERCY CORPORATION
By:
Its:
JBD-225415v2
RC125-209
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
ss..
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
2003, by
and ,the C;halrperson ana ~xecunve Lirector of
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
ss..
day of
Notary Public
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2003, by
the of Gramercy Corporation, a corporation under the laws
of Minnesota, by and on behalf of said corporation.
Notary Public
JBD-225415v2
RC125-209
AGENDA ITEM # 4
REPORT #
STAFF REPORT
~ HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY MEETING
FEBRUARY 18, 2003
JOLT STARK,
REPORT PREPARED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
REPORT PRESENTER: JOHN STARK,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ ~
REVIEWED BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR:
ITEM FOR HRA CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the future status of the Lyndale Gateway West redevelopment project as
proposed by Lyndale Gateway, LLC.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: No recommended action. Housing and Redevelopment
Authority to determine the policy direction for proceeding with the
proposed development.
III. BACKGROUND I
On August 5, 2002, the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
entered into a Contract for Private Redevelopment (Contract) with Lyndale Gateway
LLC for the redevelopment of the Lyndale Gateway West area. That Contract did
not, however, establish the financing plan for the redevelopment project. This was
because many costs (primarily site assembly costs) were not known at that time.
The Contract required the developer to identify their sources of financing at, or
before, the December HRA meeting. On December 16, staff and the developer
provided the HRA with a conceptual framework for financing. The HRA approved
the conceptual financing method at that meeting, as did the Richfield City Council at
their December 10, 2002 meeting.
0218Lynd
The Developer has now informed staff that, even with the public assistance that had
been conceptually approved, there remained a large funding "gap" in the project.
The developer told staff that, in addition to the $610,000 in Candlewood bond
proceeds that the HRA had intended to grant to the project, they would require up to
$1,150,000 more in public assistance. While the $610,000 Candlewood bond
proceeds had been a component of the financing ever since CSM's development
proposal in 2000, this additional need for funding would be a new financing
component.
A potential source of funds would be the bonds of 1996, which have a year end
cash balance of $1,850,000. They are taxable bonds, which can be utilized to
finance land acquisitions and related activities. However, this is the only HRA fund
that has a significant cash balance. Once the cash is expended there is unlikely to
be any further opportunity to create such a fund. For the 2003 approved budget no
expenditures were charged against this fund. Staff has attempted to maintain the
balance until the full impacts of decreasing revenues have been identified. This will
become more apparent with the completion of the current legislative session.
If the HRA were to provide the required $1,150,000 of additional assistance, the
potential sources of recuperating that money would be from:
1. Construction contingencies identified by the developer ($300,000) that may not
ultimately be needed.
2. The sales proceeds from any home sales that would result in the developer
achieving profit margin greater than 15%.
3. Any tax increment that is not needed to pay off the long-term bond (achieved
through inflation).
Based on the historic attempts to redevelop this site, staff is concluding that it may
be impossible to redevelop this block; primarily because the estimated cost of site
assembly currently exceeds $6 million (over $41/sq.ft. -which is far more than any
past redevelopment project in Richfield). Among the past attempts to redevelop this
area are:
• Laurent Park Development, a mixed use concept which was proposed in 1997,
but failed to proceed due to lack of financial feasibility.
• An attempt by the existing property owners to renovate/redevelop the area in
1996/97 that failed to proceed due to poor physical condition of the structures
and excessive overall costs to develop.
• A development proposal by CSM in 1998/1999 that included a hotel and retail
shops that failed to progress because the hotel concept became infeasible from
a market perspective.
• A development proposal by CSM in 1999/2000 that included a Walgreens drug
store and amulti-tenant retail building that failed because of legislative changes
to the property tax class rates which resulted in a financially infeasible project.
• In the RFP process that staff undertook to identify a new developer in
2001/2002, many developers indicated to staff that it appeared financially
infeasible to develop the block (due to the high site assembly costs) which
resulted in their unwillingness to provide a development proposal.
If the HRA were to begin action to terminate the agreement with Lyndale Gateway
LLC, it would do so under the provision in the Contract (in Section 3.0) that the
developer furnish evidence of sufficient funding for the project and that a failure to
do so would leave the developer in default of the Contract. In such a case, the HRA
would issue a 60 day notice to cure the default (ie identify sufficient funding) before
taking final action to terminate the Contract.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• On August 5, 2002, the HRA entered into a Contract for Private
Development with Lyndale Gateway, LLC for the Lyndale Gateway
West Area.
• The Contract, when approved, anticipated that the financing plan
would be approved in a later action by the HRA.
• On December 16, 2002, the HRA approved a conceptual financing
plan for the Lyndale Gateway West project.
• The developer has indicated a need for $1.15 million in additional
public assistance (above and beyond that included in the conceptual
financing plan) in order to progress with the project.
• Staff has anticipated that the HRA would characterize an additional
$1.15 million in public assistance as excessive.
• The financing plan (which the Contract requires from the developer)
would, therefore, be deemed infeasible.
• Absent a feasible financing plan from the developer, the HRA has the
right to begin the Contract termination process.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• An inability to redevelop this block would result in an inability to
reconstruct the adjoining portion of Lyndale Avenue; this might
ultimately affect the ability to reconstruct the Lyndale Avenue/I-494
bridge as contemplated.
• Staff has anticipated that the HRA would characterize an additional
$1.15 million in public assistance as excessive public assistance. This
level of public assistance is highly unusual in a market-rate
redevelopment project.
• There are sufficient HRA funds to fulfill the developer's request, if the
HRA deems such an expenditure to be consistent with sound financial
public policy. However, this level of public assistance utilizing the
remaining monies from the two bonds could have adverse impacts on
the ability of the HRA to operate future redevelopment projects of any
kind.
C. LEGAL
• Legal counsel concurs that the lack of a feasible financing plan is
sufficient cause to begin the process of terminating the Contract.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Give Lyndale Gateway LLC a notice of intent to terminate their Contract for
Private Redevelopment.
• Defer consideration of any action to terminate the Contract to allow the
developer and staff to further evaluate the funding needs of the project.
• Direct staff to work out the details of the provision of an additional $1.15
million in public assistance in order to allow the proposed project to proceed.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• NA
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• Colleen Carey, The Cornerstone Group
• John Dean, Kennedy & Graven
• Sid Inman, Ehlers & Associates, Inc.