My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
01/18/11 Special
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Housing & Redevelopment Authority
>
Agendas
>
2010's
>
2011
>
01/18/11 Special
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/18/2025 10:57:27 AM
Creation date
2/7/2013 5:52:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Document Title
Housing & Redevelopment Authority - Special
Document Date
01/18/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
95
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Commissioner Jeffrey stated when he had asked for more information as to Landform's <br />involvement, he had not received anything until tonight's workshop meeting. <br />Commissioner Wise stated the City should not play developer because in the real world deals <br />were done by relationships and he did not have a problem with the development. With respect to <br />subsidies, he noted the City Hall was subsidized and the return to the City for City Hall was <br />nothing. He indicated a development as large as this one did not go on its own. <br />Chairperson Dehen stated he was not anti -development, but when was enough going to be <br />enough. <br />Commissioner Ramsey stated the reality was that the HRA worked on a pro -forma and numbers <br />did not lie. He stated he did not have an issue with this and he did not believe there was a <br />conflict. <br />Commissioner Elvig stated he was comforted with the equity Flaherty was putting into the <br />project. He asked if more retail could be worked into the development. He stated he wished he <br />would have received a pro -forma as he had requested. He stated he did not want this project to <br />be undercapitalized. He wanted assurances Flaherty had sufficient capital to complete the <br />project. He questioned the management of the project. He noted he had concerns about the <br />dashboard. He stated the group had to do better in the future. He asked Mr. Flaherty if he had <br />sufficient funding or did he need more. <br />Mr. Flaherty noted he had not received the financing yet, but the City did not need to do anything <br />until he had the funds. He stated they were not going to rule anyone out for financing. He stated <br />he would also like to have more retail in the project, but retail right now was not doing much of <br />anything right now. He indicated retail needed to see sufficient people in the area to support it <br />before they would be willing to put a retail store in. He noted it was their intent to come back <br />with phases, which would attract retail into the area. <br />Commissioner Look stated he was not concerned about the perceived conflict. He stated if Mr. <br />Flaherty went bankrupt on the property, there was still a future for that property. He stated this <br />project added people, viability, and ridership for the rail, which was what the Council wanted for <br />this area. He believed this project would bring in further development. He believed the merits <br />of the case satisfied the City's goals and visions. He stated it should not be the HRA's concern <br />as to who was financing the project. <br />Motion by Commissioner Ramsey, seconded by Commissioner McGlone, to approve the <br />Purchase Agreement for The Residence at The COR — Lot 3, Block 1, COR ONE. <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Commissioners Ramsey, McGlone, Elvig, and Look and Wise. <br />Voting No: Chairperson Dehen and Commissioner Jeffrey. Absent: None. <br />Housing and Redevelopment Authority / December 14, 2010 <br />Page 4 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.