My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HRA MINUTES 02081983
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
HRA Minutes
>
1983
>
HRA MINUTES 02081983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2016 3:32:31 PM
Creation date
7/27/2016 3:32:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Housing Redevelopment Authority
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
2/8/1983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
S= <br />Tony Vavoulis <br />• (Knutson Co.) Have we read the contract for private redevelopment, <br />the redevelopers agreement, do we agree with all the provisions of that <br />\ contract? <br />Tony Vavoulis <br />(Knutson Co.) We have read it and we agree basically with the contract. <br />We are looking to negotiate some of the points and the next question that <br />you have in regard to the letter of credit, I guess that is one of the <br />items that we are particularly sensitive to. The developer's agreement <br />had a point of not to exceed, I_guess we would need to be talking about <br />that and with regard to what our obligations would. be. Clearly, we <br />would not be able to post a letter of credit for the full 25% of all <br />your costs that you would be incurring in the acquisition of.phase 2. <br />That would not enable us to perform business as usual in either phase 1 <br />or our company in general, so that, I guess, is a particular item of <br />negotiation. Also, how the developer's agreement is structured in regard <br />to phase 1 and phase 2 would also be something,that we would like to <br />talk about more. It talks about it all at once. We are very sincere <br />about moving forward.on the entire project, but everything is based on <br />the success of phase 1. Phase 1 has to be successful to enable phase 2 <br />and I'm sure you understand that and.we would have to get some basic <br />agreement on that going forward. Is there any further questions on that <br />subject? <br />Tony Vavoulis <br />(Knutson Co.) Question # 6 is will you be using a housing management <br />corporation for the homeowners association and who do you plan to use? <br />Tony Vavoulis <br />•(Knutson Co.) Yes, we would, the Knutson organization would not be the <br />managing entity in this area. We have found this area an area of great <br />specialization and we admit at this point that it is not our area of <br />specialization. We have not come.to any agreement at this time with any <br />management organization. We currently, the way we did it on Lakeshore <br />Drive, was that prior to occupancy, roughly 6 months prior to that, we <br />on behalf of the homeowners association, is the role and responsibility <br />that we have as being the developer entered into an agreement with the <br />Health Central management group and.they then are acting as the manager <br />on Lakeshore Drive. They have that contract. All of the employees, <br />management employees, are employees of the Health Central organization. <br />They are not employees of Lakeshore Drive condominiums. That was some- <br />thing that we felt was very important that they be responsible for the <br />manpower because manpower can be a major management problem in itself <br />and we don't want to add that to the resident's concerns, particularly <br />because of its nature of being an elderly project. Certainly, at this <br />point, Health Central would be the leading candidate as far as our <br />conversations, but we do not have any agreement other than a good working <br />relationship that we developed in Richfield. <br />Tony Vavoulis <br />,Knutson Co.) What will we do if 202 financing is not available? <br />Tony Vavoulis <br />Knutson Co.) I addressed that briefly before. Not being available and <br />not being successful are both possible resultants. If we were simply <br />not successful and there was financing, I think we would probably try <br />again the following year. If it just did not develop or Washington <br />• eliminated it, of course, which is a possiblity or did not make it <br />available in this geographical location which is also a possibility, <br />we would just attempt to proceed with our other aspect of phase 2, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.