The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1989 05-01 EDAP Regular Session EDA AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER MAY 1, 1989 (following adjournment of the Board of Equalization meeting) 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Resolution: a. Accepting Bids and Awarding Contracts for Heritage Center Amenities Project No. 89 -02 b. Rejecting Bids and Directing Staff to Draft New Specs and AdvRrtise for Bids for Mechanical 4. Adjournment Member introduced the following resolution.and moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND APPROVING CONTRACTS FOR HERITAGE CENTER AMENITIES PROJECT NO. 89 -02 WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Heritage Center Amenities Project No. 89 -02, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the EDA Director and EDA Coordinator on April 5, 1989; and WHEREAS, the bid tabulation for Project No. 89 -02, which is attached to this resolution, provides a listing of the lowest responsible bidders for the various categories of Project No. 89 -02. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Economic Development Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The President and EDA Director are hereby authorized and directed to enter into contracts with the following contractors in the amounts listed below in the name of the Economic Development Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center for Heritage Center Amenities Project No. 89 -02 according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the EDA Board and on in office of the EDA Director: BID CATEGORY BIDDER BID AMOUNT 2 Schletty- McCann $ 28,850 3 Maertens- Brenny $875,021 4 Acoustical tical F loors 5,485 8 Maertens -B renn y $934,910 11 Intex Insulation $ 22,678 12 Dalsin & Sons, Inc. $268,648 20 Thompson Lumber Co. $107,189 21 Westco Builders, Inc. $113,927 22 Grazzini Bros. $175,700 23 Acoustic Associates $ 41,960 25 Pink Companies $ 84,910 26 Swanson & Youngdale $153,800 29 Hauenstein Burmeister $ 31,524 31 Lagerquist Elevator $114,000 33 New Mech Companies $109,500 34 Weber Electric $614,941 39 Noble Nursery, Inc. $280,011 2. The EDA Director is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders any deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. r ` EDA RESOLUTION NO. Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Brad Hoffman, EDA Coordinator DATE: April 28, 1989 , SUBJECT: Earle Brown Farm Monday evening the EDA will be asked to consider a resolution awarding 17 contracts totaling $4,043,454 for the restoration of the Earle Brown Farm. By accepting or passing the resolution, the EDA will be committed to a specific course of action and will assume significant liabilities. First, the EDA did not receive bids in all of the categories or bid packages. Our follow up on the bids suggested a number of reasons for this. In the material packages, we required a bid bond. It has been our experience that bid bonds for items such as materials are bid with very small profit margins. The requirement of a bond apparently was enough to discourage a bid. Others provided bids to generals who in turn did not submit a bid. Because they submitted a bid to a general, they did not want to compete with their client. Still others submitted improper bids (no bonds) or late bids. Staff will review the entire bid package Monday evening including those bids recommended for acceptance and those recommended for rejection. Currently, in all of the bid categories except the mechanical package and those being recommended, the EDA is seeking new bids to be opened May 8, 1989, and before the EDA that evening. We feel we have a good handle on the cost associated with the bids to be opened then. If you accept the bids Monday, you will be entering into a contract with those bidders and committed to this approach and cost. The following Monday you will receive the rest of the bids except the mechanical. The mechanical bid came in $600,000 over our estimate. There are several reasons for the high cost of the mechanical. Frankly, the scope of the kitchens has grown since the last estimate and to some extent is overdesigned. Also it was probably a bad estimate, although the estimates in the other packages have been right on the money. Staff would recommend that the EDA reject this bid and instruct us to redraft specs to help reduce costs. Also, staff should be directed to review and present a list of items that could be negotiated change orders to help reduce cost. This recommendation would be reviewed with the advisory committee and the EDA before they would be pursued. Second, as you are aware, Hennepin County has recently adjusted the base value of our increment district. In fact, the county is just now reacting to a letter from the City dated October 1985 pointing out the discrepancy of the base value. When they certified the value following that letter, we projected all of Memo to Gerald G. Splinter Page 2 April 28, 1989 our financial scenarios according to that base value. While the new base value is correct as mandated by law, it leaves the tax increment district poorer by an annual amount of $250,000. All of our revious financial p projects had a financial safeguard of approximately $100,000 per year. The adjustment to he base value has taken away all of that and makes the financial feasibility of this project risky if the tax increment district had to assume the entire cost of the development at one time. Attached are a number of amortization schedules for this project. You will note that the total liability of this package can be amortized, however, there is little room to accommodate problems or errors. Any financial setback would require a special levy to cover the shortfall. Potentially this could amount to as much as a full mil levy. Our tax increment revenue projection assumes that the Council will combine the Brookwood and Earle Brown Farm tax increment districts to help offset the loss of increment from the Farm. None of these projections anticipate any future growth (Ryan IV and Earle Brown Commons II) in the district. Realistically, these two projects should come on -line during the life of this district. Our need to borrow money will be reduced by approximately $1 million by - acquiring the furniture, fixtures, and equipment on a lease -to -buy basis. We would then carry those costs as an operational expense. However, if the project fails to generate adequate revenue, the tax increment will have to cover that cost. In review, your liabilities are committing to these bids now (they are good bids) without actually knowing the final cost until we bring in the mechanical bid in June. Also, the financing of this project is at its absolute limit. Monday evening nin we should ould hav e some runs from Springsted, :Inc.. to discuss. Failure on an part could y ! require levy support. If .you reject this process, we would have to go back and change specs and rebid the process. The start -up time would probably be pushed to this fall with an opening late next year. Obviously this is not a straightforward decision. Monday, following the Board of Equalization meeting, we will want to review this in detail. r 4/26/89 PUBLIC BID #1 EARLE BROWN FARM - RENOVATION *Public Bid as Tabulated 4/5/89 26- Apr -89 BID PROJECT CATEGORY SECTION DESCRIPTION SUBCONTRACTOR TOTAL --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 02113 Sandblasting Schletty- McCann $28,850.00 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 02110 Demo - Masonry- Concrete Maertens - Brenny $875,021.00 02200 Excavation- Footing & Foundation 02400 Dewatering 02500 Foundation Drainage 03300 Cast -in -Place Concrete 03400 Precast Concrete 03500 Concrete Topping 04200 Unit Masonry 04230 Reinforced Unit Masonry 05500 Metal Fabrication(embed,loose lintel) 05510 Steel Windows 06100 Rough Carpentry (1.1.6 Anchors) 07100 Waterproofing 07150 Dampproofing 07900 Sealants 08100 Hollow Metal 0 03310 Add Alt #1 CIP Struc.Conc for fountain $80,400.00 15440 Installation of fountain hardware 02500 Add Alt# in landsc 2 Concrete Sidewalks p 02515 Precast Concrete Pavers --------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- ---------------------------- 4 03510 ; Gypsum Concrete Underlayment Acoustical Floors $5,485.00 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 02110 Demolition Maertens - Brenny $934,910.00 05500 Metal Fabrication(embed,loose lintel) 06100 Rough Carpentry pentry 062 Finish 00 Carpentry 06400 Architectural Woodwork 07900 Sealants 08100 Hollow Metal 08200 Wood Doors 08520 Aluminum Windows(Link & Gazebo) 08600 Wood Windows 08700 Finish Hardware ------ - - - - -- -- - - - - -- 11 07200 Insulation Intex Insulation $22,678.00 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- - -- 12 07300 A Shingles Dalsin & Sons, Inca $268,648.00 07600 Flashing and Sheet Metal 07900 Sealants 07410 B Preformed Roof Panels 07600 Flashing and Sheet Metal 07900 Sealants 07500 C Membrane Roofing 07600 Flashing and Sheet Metal 07800 Roof Accessories 07900 Sealants --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 08600 Wood Windows Thompson Lumber Co. $107,189.00 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21 09250 Gypsum Drywall Westco Builders, Inc $113,927.00 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22 09300 Ceramic Tile Grazzini Bros. $175,700.00 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23 09500 Acoustical Ceiling Acoustic Associates $41,960.00 09520 Acoustical Wall Panel --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25 09650 Resilient Flooring Pink Companies $84,910.00 09680 Carpeting --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26 09900 Painting Swanson & Youngdale $153,800.00 09950 Wallcoverings --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29 10650 Operable Partitions HauensteinBurmeister $31,524.00 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31 14200 Elevators Lagerquist Elevator $114,000.00 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 33 15300 Fire Protection New Mech Companies $109,500.00 0 4 16000 Electrical Weber Electric $614,941.00 16010 General Provisions 16050 Basic Materials and Methods 16400 Service and Distribution 16500 Lighting /Site Lighting 16630' Emergency Power and Light 16700 Communications 16721 Fire Alarm System 16770 Paging and Communication 16900 Motors and Controls ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- - - -- 39 02050 A Demolition Noble Nursery, Inc. $280,011.00 02225 Soils 02461 Misc. Site Amenities 02490 Plants 02938 Sodding 02500 B Concrete Sidewalks 02515 Precast Concrete Pavers 02810 C Irrigation 03310 D Cast -in -Place Struc.Conc. for fountain 15440 Installation of fountain hardware 1 .c (\ cI 1 A [�I w Cj/ic �?1 Yc> �J• It �$'�� /^ it l�l.� s- �1i�- c.L - {'• w " ' [.4C.IL' 7 Y1�� ; a l :(i l (• ( \ � .,mac -- .� _ ( ��? �'n �► ��`c.. .u4�- G`GiC.Gif.4l� .�plLta�`' . (JC nth!_ �3'nl�`CC Y'rl Q � October 8, 1985 ^� tt / 11,1 .:�inngiiFCi[. Mr. Gerald W. Pahl Principal Administrative Assistant Hennepin Count. Department of Property Tax A607 Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 -0067 D enn , E: 0 B „2•. E. D!.,,._ "a: s J. tie'rl'd\ RE: Earle Brown Farm Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 2101 _iienn E. Furd,.r City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Dear Mr. Pahl: G kBS3c: After receiving your Certification as to Original Assessed Value of Real Property in the above - mentioned F "�- tax increment district, I was informed by the City that a -�,_,.;_ number of building permits have been issued for `` ``' m construction in the District. Minnesota Statutes- Sec. 273.76, Subd. 4 requires that the original assessed value '•I:; of a district be increased to include the assessed valuation of improvements for which building permits were >a e, E issued 16 months immediately preceding approval of the F s: i- tai: increment district. F,E, I have enclosed a copy of the building permits which were issued during the 18 month period, Permit No. 21675 and Permit No. 21719. Please increase the original assessed value for the district by the amounts listed on those two permits. I apologize for any inconvenience that this correction may cause you. In addition to the two permits mentioned in the previous paragraph, I have also included permits #21985, 22008, 22013, 22014, 22015, 22060, and 22070. These permits should not increase the original assessed value since they were issued during the three month period immediately preceding approval of the tax increment financing plan t If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact either myself or John Dean of this office. Sincerely, Terry'L. Hall TLH:krs Enclosures AVAILABLE EDA FUNDS Fund Balance $2,345,349 Excess Increment (89) 559,000 CDBG 220,000 Contract for Deed Interest 40,600 Investment Interest 120,000 Available Revenue $3 Development Cost (Pricing #4) $ 9,603,489 FFE 600,000 Pre - Opening 350,000 $10,553,489 Current Expenditure (450,000) $10,103,489 Available Funds (3,284,949) Additional Funding Required $ 6,818,540 .v (EDAEBF) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EARLE BROWN FARM PROJECT TO DATE SUMMARY Program 1985 1986 1987 1988 Project Number Description Actual Actual Actual Actual To Date - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- 000 Land Acquisition $2,289,593 $2,289,593 000 Interest Expense 44,645 920 General Administration 14,305 $36,072 $79,317 $50,950 180,644 921 Operation and Maintenance 14,101 16,652 3,757 6,016 40,526 923 Storm Sewer (86 -08) 144,185 (85,467) 58,718 924 Phase I Streetscape (86 -09) 73,074 73,074 925 Summit Drive Sidewalk (86 -14) 10,831 10,831 926 Phase II Streetscape (86 -15) 44,690 6,707 51,397 927 Commons Water System (86 -20) 39,124 39,448 78,572 928 Phase III Streetscape (86 -21) 5,041 580,623 10,525 596,189 929 Jim Ryan Agreement 9,695 17,761 275 27,731 930 Earle Brown Commons 958,118 1,616 4,751 964,485 931 Streetscape Planning 34,716 1,596 36,312 932 E.B.F. Market Study 11,221 421 11,642 933 E.B.F. Restoration 301,557 301,557 934 E.B.F. Management Start -up 104,585 104,585 - - - - -- --- - - - - -- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- TOTAL BUDGET $2,362,644 $1,383,419 $645,779 $478,659 $4,870,501 EARLE BROWN FARM TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT Bond Excess Year Income* Payment Increment 1988 927,800 410,725 517,075 1989 969,816 410,725 559,091 1990 1,086,212 459,150 627,062 1991 1,107,936 465,625 642,311 1992 1,130,095 500,300 629,725 1993 1,152,697 532,095 620,602 1994 1,175,751 565,698 610,053 1995 1,199,266 605,320 593,946 1996 1,223,251 640,548 582,703 1997 1,247,716 680,629 567,087 1998 1,272,670 719,780 552,890 1999 1,298,124 762,395 535,729 2000 1,324,086 803,195 520,891 2001 1,350,568 846,794 503,774 2002 ' 1,377,579 891,998 485,581 2003 1,405,131 832,400 572,731 2004 1,433,234 2005 1,461,898 2006 1,491,136 200 1,520,959 2008 1,551,378 2009 1,582,406 * Assumes a 2% inflation , BROOKWOOD TAX INCREMENT Year Available Increment* 1991 $180,000 ** 1992 175,354 1993 178,861 1994 182,438 1995 186,087 1996 189,808 1997 193,605 1998 197,477 1999 201,426 2000 205,455 *2% annual inflation * *Bond call 2/92 excess cash of $180,000 by 1991 $6.7 MILLION AT 9.5% THROUGH 1995 AND 10% THEREAFTER YEAR INTEREST PAYMENT BALANCE 1990 $318,250 $313,531 $6,704,719 1990 318,474 313,531 6,709,662 1991 318,709 411,155 6,616,672 1991 314,292 411,155 6,519,809 1992 309,691 402,539 6,426,961 1992 305,281 402,539 6,379,703 1993 300,661 399,733 6,230,631 1993 295,955 399,733 6,126,853 1994 291,026 396,245 6,021,634 1994 286,028 396,245 5,911,417 1995 280,792 390,016 5,802,193 1995 275,604 � 390,016 5,687,781 1996 284,389 386,255 5,585,915 1996 279,296 386,255 5,478,956 1997 273,948 380,346 5,372,558 1997 268,628 380,346 5,260,840 1998 263,042 375,183 5,148,699 1998 257,435 375,183 5,030,951 1999 251,548 368,577 4,913,922 1999 245,696 368,577 4,791,041 2000 239,552 363,173 4,667,420 2000 233,371 363,173 4,537,617 2001 226,880 356,669 4,407,829 2001 220,391 356,669 4,271,551 2002 213,578 349,668 4,135,461 2002 206,773 349,668 3,992,566 2003 199,628 395,380 3,796,814 2003 189,840 395,380 3,591,274 2004 179,564 716,617 3,055,221 2004 152,761 716,617 2,490,365 2005 124,518 730,949 1,883,934 2005 94,197 730,949 1,247,182 2006 62,359 745,568 563,973 2006 28,199 745,568 (153,396) $6 MILLION AT 9.5% THROUGH 1995 AND 10% THEREAFTER YEAR INTEREST PAYMENT BALANCE 1990 $285,000 $313,531 $5,971,469 1990 283,645 313,531 5,941,583 1991 282,226 411,155 5,558,654 1991 264,036 411,155 5,411535 1992 257,048 402,539 5266 1992 ' ' 250,137 402,539 5,113,642 1993 242,898 399,733 4,956,807 1993 235,448 399,733 4,792,522 1994 227,645 396,245 4,623,922 1994 219,636 396,245 4,447,313 1995 211,247 390,016 4,268,544 1995 202,756 390,016 4,081,284 1996 204,014 386,255 3,899,043 1996 194,952 386,255 3,707,740 1997 185,387 380,346 3,512,781 1997 175,639 380,346 3,308,074 1998 165,404 375,183 3,098,295 1998 154,915 375,183 2,878,027 1999 143,901 368,577 2,653,351 1999 132,668 368,577 2,417,442 2000 120,872 363,173 2,175,141 2000 108,757 363,173 1,920,725 2001 96,036 356,669 1,660,092 2001 83,005 356,669 1,386,428 2002 69,321 349,668 1,106,081 2002 55,304 349,668 811,717 2003 40,585 395,380 456,922 2003 22,846 395,380 84,388 2004 4,219 716,617 (628,010) 2004 716,617 (1,344,627) i LOAN AMORTIZED AT 9.5% YEAR PAYMENT INTEREST PRINCIPAL ` BALANCE $5,500,000 1990 313,531 261,250 52,281 5,447,719 1990 313,531 258,766 54,765 5,392,954 1991 321,155 256,165 64,990 5,327,964 1991 321,155 253,078 68,077 5,259,887 1992 314,862 249,844 65,018 5,194,869 1992 314,862 246,756 68,106 5,126,763 1993 310,301 243,521 66,780 5,059,983 1993 310,301 240,349 69,952 4,990,031 1994 305,026 237,026 68,000 4,922,031 1994 305,026 233,796 71,230 4,850,801 1995 296,973 230,413 66,560 4,784,241 1995 296,973 227,251 69,716 4,714,519 ** * Balance paid in 12 years at 10% per annum. ** If we combine tax increment districts and capture Brookwood, the principal balance by 1995 would be $3,600,553. When the current bond issue is terminated, the outstanding principal balance would be approximately $900,000. r Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REJECTING ALL MECHANICAL BIDS FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE EARLE BROWN FARM AND DIRECTING STAFF TO DEVELOP NEW SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE MECHANICAL PACKAGE WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center accepted bids for the restoration of the Earle Brown Farm and publicly opened and read such bids on April 5, 1989, at 2 p.m.; and WHEREAS, the EDA received a bid from Kumar Mechanical, Inc. in the amount of $1,118,000 for the mechanical bid package as specified; and WHEREAS, the bid of Kumar Mechanical, Inc. exceeded the estimate of the EDA by approximately $600,000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center to reject all bids received for the mechanical package and to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bid. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the EDA shall prepare new specifications for the mechanical package and such specifications shall be brought to the EDA for approval prior to publication. Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REJECTING ALL BIDS RECEIVED FOR EXCAVATION SITE AND PAD WORK; PARKING; CURB AND GUTTER; AND SITE UTILITIES WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center accepted bids for the restoration of the Earle Brown Farm on May 8, 1989, and publicly opened and read the same at 2 p.m.; and WHEREAS, Excavation, Site, and Pad; Parking; Curb and Gutter, and Site Utilities were separate bid packages; and WHEREAS, there were technical problems and confusion as to the correct bid process. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center that: 1. Reject all bids for bid packages 35, 36, 37, and 38 and return to all bidders forthwith their bid deposits. 2. Direct the Economic Development Authority Coordinator to prepare and cause to be inserted at least once in the official newspaper an advertisement for bids upon making such improvement to the plans and specifications to bid packages 35, 36, 37, and 38. Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.