PL MINUTES 11031986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-5- 1 - asked not to be forced to put $14,000,000 more into a building which can't 2 be marketed, but indicated he was willing to withdraw his request to rent to 3 anyone in response to their opposition; 4 - perceived "the worst thing that could happen would be to have those in attendance 5 that evening to go home with a negative feeling about the developers and 6 the building" since "you are our market"; 8 - considered the questions raised about the occupancies in the Kenzington to be 9 valid because "if the senior market isn't there the building probably won't 10 succeed"; 11 - corrected what might have been an incorrect statement about the buildings being 12 subsidized because the bonding for the buildings requires 20% of the project 13 to be rented to low and moderate income persons and if the project were 14 closed to that population, the developer's would lose their bonding. In 15 this case, however, moderate is defined as 80% of the median for the area, 16 17 a criteria under which most seniors would easily fall . 18 RESPONSE TO FEARS ABOUT COLLEGE STUDENT OCCUPANCY IN THESE UNITS 19 20 Both the City Manager and Commissioner Madden reported the City is seriously 21 22 considering changing the Ordinance to prohibit any more than three "non related" 2 3 occupants in a single housing unit. Mr. Childs said the most roommates a unit could have would be three in that case. 24 25 PROJECT MANAGER YURICK'S COMMENTS ON KENZINGTON AND WALKER PROJECTS 26 • 27 - indicated he had been involved in the Kenzie Terrace Redevelopment Project 28 almost from the beginning and will be connected with the management of 29 this building after it's constructed; 30 31 - reported the original projections for the Kenzington had not anticipated the 32 apparent desire of seniors in this area to remain in their own homes as 33 long as they are able, which, he added, iE true, not only of the Kenzingtorn, 34 but of every project being built in the Twin Cities; 35 - there is basically nothing the developers can do to change that desire before 36 the seniors are ready to leave their homes; 37 38 - Arkell is no longer associated with the Kenzington project and was never 39 involved in the Walker senior project; 40 - Mr. Tushie is still the architect-for the Kenzington; 41 42 - the developer would love to have another 202 project where the renter pays 43 1/3 of their income and the government pays the developer up to $440 per 44 unit but that type of funding has all but dried up; 45 - responded to the statement that it was because the Kenzington owners wanted 46 the condo buyers to give them 60% of the equity they had in their own homes which 47 were all paid for, rather than to let the buyers make monthly payments and 48 keep the intererest on their invested equity, that the Kenzington sales had 49 been so disappointing, by saying 90% of the condos which had been sold had 50 been paid for in cash, in spite of the fact that mortgages were available to 51 them; • 52 53 - reported the commercial originally planned for Phases II and III had 54 included very little retail but rather anticipated some low level office 55 services and perhaps a restaurant;