Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 05-23 EDAM Regular Session MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION MAY 23, 2005 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Regular Session and was called to order at 8:38 p.m. by President Myrna Kragness. 2. ROLL CALL President Myrna Kragness and Commissioners Kay Lasman, Diane Niesen, and Mary O'Connor. Commissioner Kathleen Carmody was absent and excused. Also present were Executive Director Michael McCauley, Assistant City Manager/Director of Operations Curt Boganey, Public Works Director /City Engineer Todd Blomstrom, Community Development Director Brad Hoffman, City Attorney Bob Vose, and Deputy City Clerk Maria Rosenbaum. Commissioner Kathleen Carmody arrived at 9:14 p.m. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA There was a motion by Commissioner Lasman, seconded by Commissioner Niesen to approve the agenda and consent agenda. Motion passed unanimously. 3a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There was a motion by Commissioner Lasman, seconded by Commissioner Niesen to approve the May 9, 2005, Regular Session minutes. Motion passed unanimously. 4. COMMISSION CONSIDERATION ITEMS 4a. PRESENTATION BY DAN VANG Dan Vang, representing the Hmong - America Shopping Center, addressed the Commission and discussed since the meeting in February they have new renderings of the project. He informed that he had several people with him this evening who have been helping with the project and that they would like to share where they are and are going with the project. 05/23/05 -1- Mr. Vang outlined the new renderings of the project and the previous concerns regarding height and parking. He expressed that he believes those concerns were addressed and discussed they have come down from 178 units to 122 units. That alone has helped the project along with the adjustments of turning the building close to the freeway into two buildings of town homes and leaving the building in the corner of the site with condominiums. He informed that the view from 57 Avenue North had been changed to a calm look with some space; and that he believes the condominiums would be a good focal point coming into Brooklyn Center. He discussed he believes that the changes so far have been acceptable by staff and expressed that staff has worked diligently with them on their project. Commissioner O'Connor asked about the pond in the area. Mr. Vang discussed that there is a water retention pond that they will use as a water feature. He believes that would bring a focal point to the project and informed that there is an easement between the power poles and the buildings. Commissioner O'Connor asked about the pathway over Highway 100. Mr. Vang discussed that the pathway over Highway 100 had been eliminated due to the amount of traffic. They were hoping to put another water feature that could flow down and recycle into the pond. Commissioner Lasman questioned the financial concerns that had been raised by the Commission and if he would be discussing those concerns. Mr. Vang responded that he would be discussing the financial concerns later in the presentation. Commissioner Lasman asked if the area around the water feature would be roadway. Mr. Vang discussed it would be a roadway so people are able to drive around the water feature. Commissioner Niesen questioned if the presentation was to get an update on the project or if it was to have the financial concerns addressed. Mr. Vang discussed that they currently wanted to discuss the design of the project and that they are hoping they have done the correct site planning that is necessary for this site to work. President Kragness asked if the cost of the units will be affected with the decrease in the number of units for the town homes. Mr. Vang discussed it should not affect the cost. Attorney Gordy Jensen addressed the Commission and discussed that he believes the direction given at the February 14, 2005, meeting, was to meet with staff, the architects, and consultants, and to find a contractor that would be able to give numbers for this project and for them to report to the EDA at the end of May 2005. He discussed that in terms of the project they wanted to bring the Commission up to date and if there are any further concerns they would like to have them addressed at this time. They have reduced the density, the height of the building, made modifications to the traffic flow, and have maintained the integrity of the entire project. It is the opinion of their client that they have accomplished that and will continue to accomplish that. What they are looking for is direction on whether or not they need to go back for further drawings. They would like to come away from this meeting with a direction so that they can proceed with the development. 05/23/05 -2- Mr. Jensen discussed that he was under the impression that this meeting was not for the purpose of financial discussions; however, the only thing they are asking at this point from the EDA would be a write -down on the land. With a write -down on the land, they would be in a position to proceed with the project with financing in place to develop it in the manner that the Commission has seen. They cannot do that until they have a development agreement. They had hoped there would have been a development agreement to review and be considering by this time. Mr. Lee, owner of the Hmong- America Shopping Center, addressed the Council and Mr. Vang interpreted for Mr. Lee. He expressed that he is thankful for being able to help make a change in Brooklyn Center and that he wished to say thanks to Community Development Director Brad Hoffman for all his help and patience in working with them. This being the third round in the development design they are hoping that Mr. Hoffinan and the EDA will continue their efforts on working with them. Mr. Jensen discussed that even though this is a presentation of what the site plan is and what the proposal is for the EDA they would like and respectfully request that the EDA give direction to staff in regards to this project. They are dealing with a developer that does not have development experience and there may have been some miscommunications or misspoken words in terms of how they refer to the Hmong - American Shopping Center as being a developer. They are the owner of the property in connection with the pending condemnation at the present time. They are seeking to be the developer; they have approached this in an orderly manner by engaging consultants, a major contractor, Maxfield, and have looked at the alternatives of financing with having financing arrangements in the process of being negotiated. This is something they believe they can accomplish and want to go forward within the City. If the EDA provides direction to cooperate that a resolution based upon the site plan that is proposed and staff prepares for discussion and approval a development agreement, they would expect that they could have all issues involved in this property resolved within the next 30 days. President Kragness discussed that there is still discussion regarding the negotiation proceedings. Mr. Jensen expressed that he is aware of that and he would expect that if they can resolve these issues in terms of going forward with the development that they anticipate all issues would be resolved simultaneously. President Kragness expressed that she would not be prepared to commit to a proposal until she knows that everything else is done and believes it would be premature to move ahead. She expressed that she likes what has been done but believes that the EDA owes it to the citizens to solicit requests for proposals for redevelopment. Commissioner Niesen expressed thanks for the presentation and discussed that the financial aspects of this plan is not before the EDA this evening; however, she would like to talk about that. She inquired if the EDA should be involved with the financial discussion at all. Mr. McCauley discussed that it is difficult since the City has not been able to come close to money matters and have been working on various ideas for proposals since 2000. 05/23/05 -3- She inquired about the suggestion of a resolution for acceptance by EDA. Mr. McCauley discussed that there are a number of different options before the EDA. Mr. Jensen suggested that he believed all of the issues could be resolved in 30 days if the EDA directed staff to prepare a development agreement. A development agreement could certainly be developed but coming up with an agreement that would involve things that have not been able to be bridged, and with a number of contingencies, as there would be with any development, other issues in terms of direction are that the City has not solicited proposals for development, has not resolved issues with acquisition, and is not currently prepared to go out for development proposals. The policy question is since a great deal of money, staff resources, and eminent domain litigation, where does the EDA want staff to direct its resources with respect to the site and whether or not the EDA wishes to consider going out for request for proposals at the end of this process. Dean Dovolis, DJR Architecture, addressed the Commission to ask if there was a big gap on the financial aspects for the project. Mr. McCauley discussed that since the City is now in litigation the discussion with respect to resolving the litigation are between the City's and Mr. Vang's attorneys. If the City is to provide a cleaned up site with the buildings removed that should be a sufficient inducement to receive a development that would be on par with the quality of what is being proposed and that unless the City were shown to be incorrect in that a request for proposals in a competitive environment, the City would expect that the starting point of discussion would be what is going to be built and what value will be provided for a cleaned site. Mr. Dovolis asked if the financial gap is relatively close on this project. David Croket discussed that in his opinion the financial gap is quite small considering the size of the project. Mr. Jensen discussed that he believes he addressed that issue and that all they are asking for is a cleaned up site with a write -down of the entire site to one dollar. He is not sure how the numbers would work but that is the proposal they have made and has been rejected. Commissioner Niesen discussed that a different venue for the financial questions should be used because of the litigation. Commissioner Kathleen Carmody arrived at 9:14 p.m. Commissioner Niesen expressed that she is concerned about the financing and believes that the EDA should discuss the financing at a closed session since there is still litigation pending; and as far as the design presented she likes it. Mr. Dovolis expressed that he believes that the design works for this project and he hopes that the developers can take advantage of the 30 days to get a proposal approved. Commissioner Carmody discussed that when the EDA set this date it was to get past the eminent domain process and since then it has gotten more mired down. She expressed she is not willing to go another 30 days and believes that will not resolve anything. While the design is nice she is not willing to look at developments until the eminent domain is done. 05/23/05 -4- Mr. Vang wished to discuss that he does not believe they are that far apart with the financial aspects for the project. He believes they have come a tremendous way and weighing all of the costs compared to the gap is very minuscule. He also believes that they have come to good faith in making sure this project is affected by that and that this is a decent project. Community Development Director Brad Hoffman discussed that he has some mixed feelings about this project. He has been working for many years with Mr. Lee and Mr. Vang and he likes them as individuals; but to characterize the financial gap as minuscule is not true. He believes that it is not remotely close. The City has gone with condemnation where the EDA is the owner of the property and in the process of getting ready to secure the property, raised the property to clean up the pollution, and has spent a great deal of money. Mr. Hoffinan expressed that he believes that the Community owes it to itself to see what the market will bring. Commissioner Lasman discussed with all things considered she feels that she would not be able to make a decision to commit at this point and that the EDA needs more information. She feels the proposal is excellent and with the great work done it should be able to compete in the open market. She feels that the EDA has an obligation to its taxpayers to make sure that the City is getting the best deal that they can with the most efficient process and the most financially wise decision. She would lean towards request for proposals and would like to see some competition. Commissioner Niesen expressed she agrees with Commissioner Lasman and that she is not willing to go ahead with a development agreement at this time. She appreciates the request for the additional 30 days; however, she is not ready to make a mandate to staff. Mr. Vang discussed he believes that the gap is minimal compared to what others will ask in their request for proposals. Councilmember Niesen asked if there is anything that could be put in writing so that the EDA could see the numbers being discussed this evening. Mr. McCauley discussed that since the City is in litigation he would suggest that the EDA leave those discussions in litigation. If the EDA wished to review a settlement offer again with legal counsel, a closed session should be considered. President Kragness discussed that she believes the majority of the EDA is that until there is a settlement with the court proceedings it would be uncomfortable with committing to anything. Commissioners Lasman and Carmody agreed. 5. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Commissioner Lasman, seconded by Commissioner Carmody to adjourn the meeting at 9:36 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 1�7�1 6X4XA,� President Pro Tem 05/23/05 -5-