Laserfiche WebLink
33 MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE <br />EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY/CITY COUNCIL <br />HELD AT EDIHd CITY HIEc;L <br />SEPTEHBER 5, 1989 <br />A joint meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City <br />Council was convened to consider concurrently: 1) Edina Homestead Development/RPI <br />Services, 3) Award of Bids - Centennial Lakes Phase I Residential Amenities, and <br />4) Centennial Lakes Phase IV. <br />recorded. <br />Action was taken by the HRA and Council as <br />R0I;LCAI;L Answering rollcall were Commissioners/Members Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith <br />and Richards. <br />MINUTES of the €IRA of July 24, 1989 and the Joint €IRA/Council Meeting of August 7, <br />1989 were approved as submitted by motion of Commissionerflember Paulus, seconded <br />by Commissionerflember Smith. <br />Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards <br />Motion carried. <br />PUBLIC HEBRING ON ED= HOMESTEBD DEVELOPMENT - RPI SERVICES CONTINUED <br />INDEFINITELY <br />Commissionerflember Smith to continue indefinitely the public hearing on the Edina <br />Homestead Development. <br />Motion of CommTssionerflember Rice was seconded by <br />Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards <br />Motion carried. <br />BID AWARDED FOR CENTENNIAL IAKES - PHASE I RESIDENTIAL AMENITIES Executive <br />Director Gordon Hughes explained that the bids are for the construction of <br />fountains in the common areas of Centennial Lakes Condominiums - Phase I and was <br />bid separately from some of the other amenities. <br />Rice for award of bid for construction of fountains in the common areas of <br />Centennial Lakes Condominiums - Phase I to recommended low bidder, Monette <br />Construction, at $15,600.00. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Smith. <br />Motion was made by Commissioner <br />Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards <br />Motion carried. <br />CENTENNIAL LAKES - PHASE IV DISCUSSED <br />asked Larry Laukka, the Centennial Lakes Condominium developer, to appear and <br />discuss further his plans for the Phase IV Condominiums. He recalled that the HRA <br />gave this concept approval at their July 10, 1989 meeting. <br />make Phase IV a totally market rate building containing 30 units instead of the 46 <br />units as in Phases I and 11. The HRA would make its normal contribution to Phase <br />IV but none of the units would qualify for second mortgage assistance. . Instead <br />the unused second mortgage potential would be transferred to other condominium <br />phases that would be eligible for purchase by moderate income individuals. <br />Executive Director Hughes said that he had <br />This concept would <br />After the meeting, staff was concerned that the HRA had not given approval for <br />that unrecoverable subsidy portion of the HRA assistance. Director Hughes <br />mentioned that in Phases I, I1 and 111, as well as in Edinborough, the HRA <br />provided an unrecoverable subsidy of $650,000 per phase which was used to reduce <br />the selling prices of the units. In Phase IV, Laukka Development is suggesting <br />that the unrecoverable subsidy be reduced from $650,000 to $250,000. <br />approximately to the land cost for the Phase IV site so in essence the HRA would <br />be transferring the land at no cost to construct the project. <br />Director Hughes said that the question for the HRA is: Should Phase IV, which is <br />designed for more affluent purchases, be subsidized by the HkA so as to reduce the <br />selling prices? He referred to his memorandum dated September 1, 1989, addressed <br />to the HRA which listed several pros and cons for the proposed Phase IV. <br />This equates