CC MINUTES 11261985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-8- by the developers and approved by the City for that site several years ago. Public • input would also be sought during the Commission hearing related to the 33,000 square feet of service oriented commercial the developers were now proposing for the first building, proposed to be started in the spring of 1987. If the Commission reaction to these changes is positive, the Council would be acting on their recommendations the following evening, December 3rd, and the sale of;.the tax increment bonds would be held late in the afternoon the following day, .December 4th, Mr. Childs said. However, if approval is not gained for any portion of the proposal , the bond sale could be cancelled, he added. Before turning the discussion over to,:the developers, the Manager commented, that, as with the housing revenue bonds just issued for the Chandler Place project, the City would only be lending the City's tax exempt status to the investors to purchase the bonds tax free and allowing a lower rate of interest for the developers. Councilmember Ranallo indicated he had gotten a different perspective related to the urgency of action from what he had recently heard during a meeting of the League of Cities Federal Legislative Committee, which made him think December 31st might only be a "presumptive deadline" since there had been speculation that the change in legislation might not come as early as December. John Arkell , President, and Pat Brinkman of Arkell Development as well as the architect for the redevelopment project, Gary Tushie, were present and Mr. Brink- man responded to comments about the December 31st date being a "presumptive date" by agreeing that the Chairman of the Congressional Tax Committee had said the effective date of the legislative changes might be pushed forward to July 1st, • but adding that the uncertainty until after the first of the year, would effective- ly cause bond counsels. such a degree of discomfort that in all probability they would hesitate to advise issuance of bonds after December 31st and until the actual effective date is determined, whether it be December 31st or June 30th . Councilmember Makowske said she wanted assurance that the merchants in the exist- ing St. Anthony Shopping Center had been alerted to the possibility that there might be 33,000 square feet of commercial space added to this project. Mr. Childs told her the developers and staff would be meeting with the merchants the next day and would be seeking their reaction to the change at that meeting. Mr. Arkell commented that he perceived a Council decision on the commercial was not being sought that evening, but only the use of the City's power to issue housing bonds which would result in lower interest rates for the developers, which, he added, would in turn enable them to charge lower rental rates to make the project viable. To prove this point, the developer drew the Council 's attention to their neighbor, Roseville, where he said, similar projects of between 500 and 600 units are going up, with the anticipation of charging rents ranging from $1 ,000 to $1 ,500 for each unit. Mr. Arkell said his company' s ability to use revenue bonds for this project would make about $100 or $150 difference in the amount the developers would be passing through to the renters, in addition to the service package Arkell was also proposing. Councilmember Ranallo indicated he perceived the Council would only be giving preliminary approval to the issuance of the bonds that evening because the • action they would take December 3rd could be greatly affected by the reaction of the merchants the following day and of the Planning Commission the following Monday. Mr. Brinkman added that the final bond approval would not be given until the Council 's December 17th meeting.