My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 08181987
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
1987
>
PL PACKET 08181987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 3:35:36 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 3:35:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
15
SP Folder Name
PL PACKETS 1987
SP Name
PL PACKET 08181987
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
83
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).
View images
View plain text
1 -3- <br /> commercial; the P. J. Gaughan Corporation for a 50/50 combination of <br /> 3 elderly and general occupancy; and finally, the Sherman Boosallis <br /> 4 Corporation, who have indicated they had some real problems with <br /> 5 providing elderly housing, but who Mr. Krier expected.to submit a <br /> 6 proposal nevertheless. <br /> 7 The consultant. indicated that in his opinion, each, of the prospective <br /> 8 developers had a very good track record in doing the type of project <br /> 9 St. Anthony wanted and all seemed to have the financial capability to <br /> 10 put such a project together. He said the schedule he was requesting <br /> 11 should result in everything being..in place and ready to go in a month <br /> 12 and a half. Mr. Krier indicated he had requested each .of the <br /> 13 developers ha,,e his proposal in his hands by- August 10th to be <br /> 14 presented to the H.R.A. for acceptance at their August 11th meeting. <br /> 15 It was agreed that no formal presentations would be made at the August ' <br /> 16 11th meeting but it would rather be during a work session scheduled for <br /> 17 6: 00 P.M. , August 20th, when the proposals would be ranked by the <br /> 18 H.R.A. in order of preference. The developers who were not selected at <br /> 19 that work session. would be advised that the City intended to work with <br /> 20 the first ranked company for a month and if all the H.R.A. requirements <br /> 21 had not been met and a Redeveloper Agreement not signed by .the end of <br /> 22 the month, the other developers would be contacted in order of their <br /> 23 ranking to resubmit their proposals. <br /> Mr. Soth suggested Mr. Krier advise the developers that they should <br /> 25 present the best proposal they could right at the outset because that <br /> 26 might well be the last opportunity they would be given to do the <br /> 27 project. <br /> 28 Mr. Krier reported his negotiations with the Minneapolis Communitv <br /> 29 Development Association -related to that or providing <br /> 30 financing for a low income large family townhouse rental project had. <br /> 31 been delayed because of a death in the family of one of the MCDA staff <br /> 32 persons, but he was confident those talks would be resumed the <br /> 33 following day. <br /> 34 Mr. Krier said one of the criteria he told each prospective developer <br /> 35 would have to be addressed to do the project was that they would have <br /> 36 to work with St. Anthony to make a presentation of the project to the <br /> 37 adjacent St. Anthony residents as well as the nearby Minneapolis. <br /> 38 residents. <br /> 39 Commissioner Ranallo said he thought it was essential to have Mr... <br /> 40 Childs be very involved in that presentation because of the spirit of <br /> 41 distrust which had evolved around the failure of the first developer to <br /> 42 provide ,a' satisfactory project. <br /> 43 other criteria which Mr.. Krier perceived had to be met by the developer <br /> 44 the H.R.A. selected included: <br /> IR5 *financial capability to do the project; <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.