Memo - East CBD Redevelpment Project
Planning & Economic
Development
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: East CBD Redevelopment Project
The purpose of the discussion regarding this item at the June 12, 2001, worksession is to review
the redevelopment proposals received to date, to further define the City's goals for the project,
and to establish a developer selection process.
Review of Proposals
Eight proposals have been received as well as a letter of interest from Shah Properties. Attached
is a matrix highlighting the key components and issues identified in the various proposals. In
many instances key items were left to be negotiated. In other proposals, the land purchase price
was offered contingent upon receiving Livable Communities Demonstration Account funds.
Many expressed flexibility in regards to the type(s) of housing they would be willing to consider.
Staff will discuss the proposals in more detail at the worksession. The projects are described
fairly concisely in the first sections with supporting information also included.
Define City of Hopkins Goals
Staff feels it is important at this point to further define the goals for the components of the
project. For example, a variety of housing types and styles have been proposed and most appear
to be viable given the current market conditions. Given these options, the City is in a position to
be selective regarding the housing element.
Possible City goals include:
Economic benefit for Hopkins businesses
Meeting an identified housing need
Providing a type of housing currently not available in.Hopkins
Increasing the City's tax base
A variety of retail, office and restaurant uses were also proposed. Similar goal-setting discussion
for the commercial space would be beneficial in the developer selection process.
Developer Selection Process
There are a number of options regarding how to proceed with developer selection. Staff is
recommending the following process:
Narrow the list of developers to those whose project meets the broad goals of the Council
and appear to have the capability to undertake the project
Schedule1l2 hour interviews for Council worksession
Select top 2-3 proposals
Tour examples of similar projects completed by developer
Conduct second interview
Select developer
Attached is a list of possible questions for the interview process as well as an evaluation form.
This can be refined prior to the interviews based on Council input and the time given to the
interview. Staff is also recommending that Ehlers and Associates be involved in the interview
process as they have considerable experience in assisting other cities with the developer selection
process.
Other options include interviewing all developers who submitted proposals or to narrow the list
of developers to 2-3 based on their proposal and conducting longer, more in-depth interviews
with these candidates. These and other options will be discussed at the worksession.
Developer Components Land Additional Project Comments:
Purchase Public CostlMarket
Price Subsidy Value
Requested
Cornerstone Retail/Restaurant $652,000 Livable $18.4 million Alternative
Group -18,000 sq ft Communities site plan
(with a Grant $180,000- incl udes
Owner Occupied Financial gap $300,000 Hopkins
Lofts & condos of $1.2 (lofts) Home Store
- 64 units million) $140,000-
$220,000
(condos)
Dunbar Commercial - $200,000 90% of TIF $6.9 million 20% of
Development 12,800 sq ft +5% of net for 20 yrs units
Corporation sales proceeds ($80,000/unit affordable
Senior Rental - for housing; for low
81 units $35/sq ft income
commercial) renters
Very low
per sq ft
commercial
value
Stuart Retail/Restaurant Unknown Unknown Unknown Proposal
Companies (no sq ft includes
detailed) acquisition
Senior Rental - of Hopkins
75+ units Home Store
Dunbar Retail/Restaurant To be TIF/Livable $10.6 million Above-
Strandness, Inc. - 11,700 sq ft negotiated Communities ground
(fixed + Grant $150,000 - parking
Owner-Occupied contingent) $280,000 along 7th
Condominiums - (condos) AveS
43 units
United Retail- 9,000 sq To be To be Est. $8.9 No
Properties/B aton ft negotiated negotiated million restaurant
use detailed
Owner Occ~pied
Housing - 48 to $125,000-
64 units $175,000
( condos)
West Suburban Retail/Restaurant Approximatel y Livable Value
Housing - 11,760 Sq Ft $1 million Communities described as
Partners, LLC Grant "high
Senior Co-op end/upscale"
Housing-89 units
Developer Components Land Additional Project Comments:
Purchase Public Cost/Market
Price Subsidy Value
Requested
DominiumIThe Retail/Restaurant Market Rate Livable $14.8 million Site plan
Beard Group 13,000 sq ft Communities utilizes
Grant some
General existing
Occupancy parking
Rental- 91 units north of
Hopkins
Home Store
Freeman's Retail - 1,200 sq $0 None $7.5 million
ft ( construction
Co-op Housing cost)
for 55+
- 80-90 units
City of Hopkins
East CBD Redevelopment Project
Developer Interview
1. Briefly describe your project and why it would be good for Hopkins?
2. How would you test the market? If your market research does not reflect
favorably for Hopkins, would you be willing to change your project?
3. If the City is not able to purchase the rest of the desired properties, are you
willing to downsize your project?
4. What is your proposed financial structure? Would you be able to complete this
project without TIF and/or Livable Communities Grant funds?
5. Do your project plans include partnering with another firm for project design
and development? Have you worked on similar projects together in the past?
6. Why do you want to do this project in Hopkins?
7. Describe your approach to move from concept stage to construction
completion within a reasonable time frame.
8. Would your project require any variances?
9. What is unique or creative about the design of your project?
"
CD
~
""'W"'~O
1 1 1 1 1
OCi>C<Z
CD CD 30) 0
0) ~ _. CC ~
..,CD-C:1
.., CD CD m
S~o.c:en
oc:C:~'O
~;j~o.o
-o.o.CD:::S
CD CD CD CiJ ~.
,~ Cii CiI - <
Ci)-D)'O) CD
0) :::s_
0~5.9:0
-fI a. -.:::s -.
c;;' :i' ~ CC ~
enccccoc:
C:CD 0 0 -fI CD
-fI -fI -.
. c;;'~' ~
(J)enc:C:
ic:CD~
(') ~ .
-. Z
~r-zo
(') -'0
0)3..,0
~;::;:CD-'
a. CD CD -.
..,0.<3
CD 0 0);::;:
(i)-,;jCD
<:::s-o.
O)OCDCD
;j ;j )( )(
-1'0'0
CD(J)CDCD
)( 16 ::1.::2.
Cl.)(')CDCD
3 -. ~ :::s
'0 ~ Q (')
_ (') CD
CDCD~~
en >< _'_.
oO):;t-
-fI 3 :r
a. 0.0.
CD"2.~CD
~. m :;. ~.
(iJ CD (D
a. a 0.0.
~o.g(')
.,..m'O~
Q) -.0) 0)
(') m Q. g.
-. Q. - -
~ '<,<
:"" ~. .
'0
0)
(')
;::;:
~
c
CD
en
<5'
:::s
(')
m
0)
-
<'
;::;:
'<
-I
o
~
!:"
c
CD
en
<5'
:::s
-fI
CD
><
g
;::;:
'<
c
CD
en
<5'
:::s
g
'0
0)
(')
;::;:
'<
II
5'
0)
:::s
(')
eI
'0
Di'
~
~
5'
cc
g
'0
0)
g
;::;:
'<
II
5'
0)
:::s
(')
eI
~
'0
0)
g
;::;:
'<
"'C
0)
;::a.
~
CD
..,
S'
cc
><
'0
CD
::I.
CD
~
~
'0"
a ~
~ ~
(J) CD
en a.
cc
CD
o
-fI
Q.
CD
<
CD
0'
'0
3
CD
~
-
"'C
a
CD'
n
'0
Di'
:::s
:::s
:;'
cc
g
'0
0)
g
;::;:
'<
~ "
CD :::s
CD 0
fE~
o CD
-flQ.
:J:cc
o CD
'00
';1I;-fI
-. -
~:T
en CD
3
0)
~
-
"'C
m
<
o'
c:
en
m
or
-
CD
a.
CD
)(
'0
CD
::l.
CD
:::s
Q
o c
:::a CD
=i (i
m 0-
:::a "C
)> CD
:"1
o
o
i:
i:
m
z
-I
en
en
o
o
:::a
m
~
...
CD
:"!
c
CD
~
0-
-0
CD
.,
()
c
e!.O
~~
aO
0.'"
::s :I:
-0
a-c
~ 2S
-. z
~cn
m
<
e!.
c
Q,)
,...
o.
:s
C)
~
z
C
-I
o
~
r-
. .
-I
o
~
r-
en
. .
o
(D
en
cO.
:J
o
(ti
0)
-
<.
::+
~
o
(D
en
cO.
:J
:::!!
(D
><
g
::+
~
o
(D
en
cO.
:J
~
"C
0)
o
::+
~
-n
5.
0)
:J
o
eI
"C
or
~
~
5.
ce
~
"'C
0)
g
::+
~
."
:;.
0)
:J
(")
eI
~
"C
0)
g
::+
~
""0
0)
;:+
~
(D
:J.
:J
ce
(D
><
"C
(D
..,
CD.
:J
(")
(D
-0"
a ~
Q~
~ (D
0-
ce
(D
o
-1\
0-
(D
<
(D
0"
"C
3
CD
:J
-
""0
..,
.2.
(D
Sl
"C
or
:J
:J
5.
ce
~
"'C
0)
g
;:::0:
~
:J"
(D :J
CD 0
O-~
en_
o (D
-1\0-
::tce
o (D
"'Co
,,-1\
-. -
:J~
tJJ (D
3
0)
~
~
""0
(iJ
<
o.
c:
tJJ
al
or
-
(D
0-
(D
><
"'C
(D
..,
CD.
:J
~
o
::0
=t
m
::0
i>
en
o
o
::u
m
en
en
o
o
::u
m
en
en
o
o
::u
m
en
en
o
o
::u
m
en
en ::u
o a
o CD
::u :1
m
en
::u
~
:1
::u
a
CD
:1
::u
rt
:1
::u
a
CD
:1
c
CD
<
CD
0"
"
:1
c
(1)
<
(1)"
0"
"C
(1)
.,
()
c
!!..
3i
n
an
g.~
-0
a."
3 :J:
-.0
; ~
I -
mZ
< en
!!..
c
a
cS-
::J
en
c
3
3
S>>
~