2014-01-29_HRA_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HRA Meeting Minutes – Tuesday, November 19, 2013 Page 2 1 7.Public Hearings 2 3 8.Presentations 4 5 9.Action/Discussion Items 6 7 a.Dale Street Redevelopment 8 Ms. Kelsey briefly summarized the staff report dated November 19, 2013; with the Greater 9 Metropolitan Housing Corporation (GMHC) proposal from those three (3) received better 10 meeting the guidelines of the Corridor Development Initiative (CDI) process; and the 11 preferences expressed by the neighborhood. Ms. Kelsey noted that GMHC was also, as part of 12 their proposal, interested in promoting regeneration of single-family homes in Roseville, which 13 would further address the housing needs and interests of the community. Therefore, staff 14 recommended that the HRA enter into a PREdevelopment Agreement with GMHC to further 15 explore the viability of their proposal. 16 17 Ms. Kelsey advised that HRA Attorney Steve Bubal had recently retired, and that the HRA 18 was now being served by his associate Martha Ingram, also from Kennedy & Graven. Ms. 19 Kelsey advised that Ms. Ingram was present at tonight’s meeting. 20 21 Martha Ingram, Kennedy & Graven 22 Ms. Ingram introduced herself and briefly provided her credentials; noting that she had been 23 working with Mr. Bubal for a number of years, specializing in work with other HRA’s, EDA’s, 24 and cities on their economic and redevelopment efforts. 25 26 Ms. Ingram briefly reviewed the process in responding to the three (3) proposals, and staff’s 27 recommendation for GMHC, with the next step to enter into a Preliminary Development 28 Agreement for the Dale Street Project, designating GMHC as the sole developer of the site for 29 a certain period of time. 30 31 Ms. Ingram clarified that this did not create a commitment that they would be the final 32 developer; however, it provided an agreement to move forward toward a definitive 33 Development Agreement for the property. Ms. Ingram advised that this assured the GMHC 34 that the HRA was not working with someone else on this project; and that it provided 35 assurances to the HRA of GMHC’s seriousness as a developer for the site as they did their due 36 diligence in preparation for a final agreement. Ms. Ingram noted that the Preliminary 37 Development Agreement would lay out terms and conditions for both parties in moving 38 forward; including due diligence on the part of GMHC to provide a proforma to the HRA for 39 confidence in moving toward purchase and development of the property. Ms. Ingram noted 40 that, during the process, the HRA would be working on a financing package or determining 41 what assistance was feasible; again emphasizing that this created no commitment, but an 42 exploration of all possibilities. Ms. Ingram noted that the GMHC’s current proposal included a 43 land write-down using pooled tax increment financing monies; however, she noted that there 44 may be other subsidies or assistance for consideration down the road, depending on the 45 proforma provided by the GMHC. 46 47 Chair Maschka questioned if the HRA needed to formally select one of the three proposals; 48 and then order the agreement as two distinct steps. Chair Maschka noted that it appeared 49 obvious at the recent joint meeting of the City Council and HRA that they were supportive of 50 the GMHC proposal as well, a position that he also shared as the best fit for the community. 51 52 HRA Members concurred with their support of that proposal as well. 53 54 Ms. Ingram clarified that in approving this Preliminary Development Agreement that was in 55 fact what the HRA was doing.