The URL can be used to link to this page

EDA Agenda 07-31-2019AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) Wednesday, July 31st, 2019 — 7:00 a.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners: President Steve Johnson, Vice President Bill Tapper, Treasurer Jon Morphew, Tracy Hinz, 011ie Koropchak-White and Councilmembers Lloyd Hilgart and Jim Davidson Staff: Executive Director Jim Thares, Jeff O'Neill, Angela Schumann, Wayne Oberg and Jacob Thunander 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Consideration of additional agenda items 4. Consent Agenda a. Consideration of approving Special Meeting Minutes — May 29, 2019 b. Consideration of Relocation Services Quotes for Block 52 and Authorization to enter into Professional Services Contract for Relocation Services-Administration related to Block 52 with WSB & Associates in the amount of $10,208.00 c. Consideration of Northland Securities Services Agreement for creation of TIF Economic Development District 1-41 in the amount of $8,820.00 d. Consideration of Quote for Well Monitoring related to follow up activity from Block 52 Soil Boings in the amount of $2,800.00 from Chosen Valley Testing Regular Agenda 5. Consideration of Authorizing Solicitation of Quotes for Substandard Building Qualifications Study related to Prospective Block 52 Redevelopment TIF District 6. Consideration of Resolution recommending City Council call for a Public Hearing to consider establishing a new Economic Development TIF District 7. Consideration of Ordinance Amendment Process Update establishing a 2"d Regular EDA monthly meeting 8. Consideration of appointing member to serve on Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee 9. Director's Report 10. Adj ourn MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) Wednesday, May 29th, 2019 — 4:30 p.m. Academy Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners Present: Steve Johnson, Bill Tapper, Jon Morphew, Tracy Hinz, 011ie Koropchak-White, Lloyd Hilgart, and Jim Davidson Staff Present: Angela Schumann and Jim Thares 1. Call to Order Steve Johnson called the special meeting of the EDA to order at 4:30 p.m. 2. Roll Call 3. Consideration of Downtown Fa�ade Improvement Grant Pro�ram proiect status report, authorizin� $50,000 in additional fundin� for Fa�ade Improvement Grant Pro�ram, and amendin� the Fa�ade Improvement Grant Pro�ram Guidelines Angela Schumann provided an update on the history of the fa�ade improvement program. She noted where each of the property owners are at in the program. Schumann provided a spreadsheet that proposed using the percentage of fa�ade to determined allocation. Bill Tapper also had brought forward an idea of allocation. TRACY H1NZ MOVED TO TABLE ACTION ON ALLOCATING $50,000 1N ADDITIONAL FUNDING. JON MORPHEW SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. Additional EDA discussion occurred regarding the funding allocation to various properties/projects. The EDA discussed having the fa�ade improvement program be a multi-year grant. They also discussed the importance of opening up a loan program for additional improvements in the downtown. Decision 2: Grant Fund BILL TAPPER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE AN ADDITIONAL $50,000 FROM TIF 1-6 TO THE MONTICELLO DOWNTOWN FA�ADE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. OLLIE KOROPCHAK-WHITE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 7- 0. 4. PUBLIC HEARING — Consideration of Adoptin� Resolution #2019-04 approvin� Fa�ade Improvement Grant A�reement with Tricambra Foods, Inc. dba Cornerstone Cafe Angela Schumann indicated that Tricambra Foods has submitted a complete application Economic Development Authority (Special Meeting) Minutes — May 29�', 2019 Page 1 � 4 for the Fa�ade Improvement Grant Agreement. They have selected the lowest quote at $149,335.89 (Purpose Driven Restoration). The contractor is licensed through the State of Minnesota. Schumann noted a gap in financing for the project. Schumann indicated that the owners have decided to provide private financing in the amount of 26 percent of the costs. An escrow agreement would have to be finalized along with a final rendering by Cuningham would be provided. Greg Ashfeld, owner of Cornerstone Cafe, introduced himself and expressed his excitement and commitment to the downtown. BILL TAPPER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE A$60,000 GRANT THROUGH THE FA�ADE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND A$100,000 LOAN AT 3.5% 1NTEREST. THE LOAN FUND WOULD NEED TO BE CREATED. STEVE JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Discussion regarding the complexity of the funding mix and available resources continued. The best formula for allocating funds to projects was also interjected into discussion. EDA members shared their views of idea of community impact from each proj ect and use of that as a measure as well as fa�ade square footage. BILL TAPPER WITHDREW HIS MOTION. STEVE 70HNSON CONSENTED TO THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE MOTION. TRACY H1NZ MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION #2019-04 APPROVING FA�ADE IMPROVEMENT GRANT AGREEMENT WITH TRICAMBRA FOODS, INC. DBA CORNERSTONE CAFE, CONTINGENT ON THE FOLLOWING: A. FINANCIAL COMMITMENT SATISFACTORY TO THE EDA ATTORNEY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE PROJECT COST B. COMPLIANCE WITH REMAINING GRANT GUIDELINE REQUIREMENTS C. EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT 1NCLUDING F1NAL PRO7ECT RENDERING AND CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT WITH TRICAMBRA FOODS MEETING ALL PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS FURTHER, THE EDA AUTHORIZES A$100,000 GRANT THROUGH THE FA�ADE 1MPROVEMENT PROGRAM, WITH $50,000 PER FA�ADE, A TOTAL OF TWO FACADES WITH THE CONDITION THAT TRICAMBRA FOODS IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE PRO7ECT COSTS AND FURTHERMORE TO AMEND THE EDA GUIDELINES ACCORDINGLY. LLOYD HTT,GART SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. 5. Consideration of Block 52 Redevelopment a. EDA Discussion - Impressions and Rankin�s of Developers b. Discussion of Next Steps in Block 52 Redevelopment Process Economic Development Authority (Special Meeting) Minutes — May 29�', 2019 Page 2 � 4 Jim Thares provided the staff report that highlighted each of the four development proposals for Block 52. Staff created a ranking activity for the EDA to complete during the meeting to vote on their favorite proposal. The EDA discussed each of the developer's proposals. The EDA voted the highest primary developer as the Beard Group with secondary going to Briggs Companies. JIM DAVIDSON MOVED TO DIRECT STAFF TO ENTER 1NT0 NEGOTIATIONS FOR COMPLETION OF A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE BEARD GROUP. OLLIE KOROPCHAK-WHITE SECONDED THE MOTION. BILL TAPPER AMENDED THE MOTION TO 1NCLUDE A TOUR OF THEIR FACILITIES. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. CONSENT AGENDA (ADDED) BILL TAPPER MOVED TO APPROVE ITEMS 6-8 AS A CONSENT AGENDA. OLLIE KOROPCHAK-WHITE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 7- 0. 6. Consideration of Authorizin� Solicitation of Quotes for WSRR Boundarv Survev for entire Block 52 Area Recommendation: Authorize solicitation of quotes for a W SRR survey of the entire Block 52 area. 7. Consideration of Authorizin� Parks Department to place "Event" si�na�e on EDA Propertv - 103 Pine Street Recommendation: Authorize event signage to be placed on EDA owned property located at 103 Pine Street. 8. Consideration of Authorizin� staff to attend 2019 EDA Summer Conference in Duluth, MN (June 13 and 14) Recommendation: Authorize Economic Development Manager to attend the 2019 EDAM Summer Conference. 9. Economic Development Director's Report Jim Thares indicated that the Volunteer Picnic would be June 27m at 6 p.m. Economic Development Authority (Special Meeting) Minutes — May 29�', 2019 Page 3 � 4 10. Adiournment JON MORPHEW MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:01 P.M TRACY H1NZ SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. Recorder: Approved Attest: Jacob Thunander July lOth, 2019 Jim Thares, Economic Development Director Economic Development Authority (Special Meeting) Minutes — May 29�', 2019 Page 4 � 4 EDA: 7/31/19 4b. Consideration of Relocation Services Quotes for Block 52 and Authorization to enter into Professional Services Contract for Relocation Services-Administration related to Block 52 with WSB & Associates in the amount of $10,208.00 (JaT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Staff is asking the EDA to consider entering into a Displacement Relocation Assistance Contract with W SB, Minneapolis, MN. The proposed contract for Displacement Relocation Services is anticipated as a follow-up step in the implementation of the Small Area Study plan and the recently executed preliminary development agreement with the Beard Group, Hopkins, MN. As indicated in the RFP, three to four privately owned properties are under consideration for acquisition by the EDA at this time. Any displaced businesses impacted by site assembly will require relocation assistance as per the Uniform Relocation and Assistance Act. Two quotes for Displacement Relocation Assistance services were received: WSB, Minneapolis, MN & HPS (Henning Professional Services), Chaska, NIN. Name of Firm Amount of Quote (Not to Exceed) WSB, Minneapolis $ 10,208.00 HPS (Henning Professional Services), Chaska $ 11,000.00 Both proposals differ slightly in price comparison, but both firms provided not to exceed values and will only bill the amount of hours and tasks worked. It should be noted that the hourly rates for staff is higher with WSB, however staff feels comfortable with the firm given the familiarity and recent assistance with relocation on Block 52. The complexity of the relocation statutes (Federal and State) is a concern for any public entity supporting redevelopment efforts. By utilizing a firm that specializes in the business of providing relocation assistance services, the EDA can be confident that the required URAA steps are being followed. Al. STAFF IMPACT: Staff impacts in considering the Displacement Relocation Assistance Contracts consist of time spent creating the RFP, drafting the staff report, and meeting with property owners of the block. A2. BUDGET IMPACT: The expected budgetary impact from considering entering into a Displacement Relocation Assistance Contract will be between $10,208 and $11,000. The funding required to cover this proposed expenditure is included in the redevelopment activities line item of the 2019 EDA budget. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to authorize entering into a Displacement Relocation Assistance Services Contract with W SB in the amount not to exceed $10,208. 2. Motion to deny authorization to enter into a Displacement Relocation Assistance Services Contract with WSB in the amount of $10,208. EDA: 7/31/19 Motion to table consideration of entering into a Displacement Relocation Assistance Services Contract for further review and/or discussion. 4. Motion of other. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative 1. The EDA has prior experience in working with WSB, most recently for Block 52 — related to the former Froslie Building and Union Speed and Style. The EDA can be confident that the required relocation steps are being completed in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance Act statute with selection of either firm. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a. RFP dated 7/1/2019 b. WSB Relocation Assistance Services Proposal c. HPS Henning Professional Services Relocation Assistance Services Proposal 2 RFP — Relocation Services 7-1-2019 Requested by City of Monticello Economic Development Authority (EDA) The City of Monticello EDA is seeking relocation services quotes related to a prospective redevelopment project in downtown Monticello. Interested parties are asked to respond through the following RFP description-scope of work. Scope of Services The reason for the RFP is due to the prospective Block 52 Redevelopment efforts in the core downtown area of Monticello, MN. Three to four privately owned properties are under consideration for acquisition by the EDA at this time. The specific scope of services is directly related to the tenant relocations from those properties and includes the tasks identified below. 1. Relocation services provided to three impacted businesses/displacements per the Uniform Real Property Acquisition and Relocation Act of 1970, as amended, 49CFR Part and Minnesota Statutes Chapter 117. 2. Prepare all required notices and conduct all necessary meetings and provide the types of assistance needed for a successful outcome of the relocation efforts associated with three businesses/displacements. 3. Complete all associated paperwork and follow up reports to the EDA regarding, costs for relocation of displacements, any issues encountered and proposed solutions, etc. Meet with the EDA, if needed, to accommodate resolution of protracted or difficult issues. 4. Provide communication updates to the Economic Development Manager as needed or on a schedule that is determined to be effective by all involved parties. 5. The estimated-approximated timeline of relocation process is August 1, 2019 through May 31, 2020. The activities may condense in time frame significantly depending on the nature of the discussions with property owners and/or other work activities that are experienced by staff or at the direction of the EDA. If you are interested in the RFP, please respond by submitting a proposal to Attn: Jim Thares, Economic Development Manager, City of Monticello, MN 505 Walnut Street, Suite #1, Monticello, MN 55362 or jim.thares@ci.monticello.mn.us by Friday, July 12, 2019 at 2:30 p.m. If you have questions about the RFP, please feel free to contact Jim Thares, Economic Development Manager at 763-271-3254 or at jim.thares@ci.monticello.mn.us. � 0 U C� z W m � � � � � z � � J 0 a Q W z z � � W � z W > Q Q z W x 0 � ws k� July 10, 2019 Mr. Jim Thares City of Monticello Economic Development Manager 505 Walnut Street Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 Re: Relocation Services Related to Downtown Redevelopment Project Dear Mr. Thares: WSB & Associates, Inc. is pleased to submit this proposal for the relocation services required for the Monticello Downtown Redevelopment Project. These services will be provided in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended and other applicable state and federal laws and rules. Based on information provided in the RFP dated 7-1-19, there are two commercial tenants and one business owner/occupant that will be displaced as part of the redevelopment project. Scope of services include: 1. Project Management: Penny Rolf will be providing the project management and will oversee WSB staff in the completion of all the tasks required as part of this RFP. Penny will be the main point of contact with the City on this project and will maintain communication with the City throughout the process to resolve any issues or concerns that arise quickly and efficiently. 2. Relocation Services: Individual meetings on-site will be held with the two tenants and the one owner/occupant to provide them with general information about the relocation program and discuss relocation benefits specific to their business. This is the relocation agent's opportunity to establish a relationship with the displacee and address their concerns early in the process. Information gathered during this meeting will be used to establish their needs and eligibility for reimbursement payments -moving costs, searching, business re-establishment or fixed payment. We will advise the business tenants of the different types of moving options, create a scope of the move and coordinate the estimate process with the professional moving companies, if needed. Estimates will be reviewed and displacees will be notified of the approved bid. WSB will notify displacees in writing of their eligibility for relocation benefits. All required relocation eligibility notices will also be sent to them. As part of the required services, we will research replacement sites and refer suitable, comparable sites to the tenants. 3. Acquisition Assistance Services WSB staff will assist the County in the preparation of the purchase agreement with the owner/occupant, Preferred Title. As part of this assistance, a summary of eligible relocation benefits would be determined and included as part of the agreement. Deliverables/Schedule: WSB takes pride in our reputation for accuracy and timeliness on our projects. WSB's team will provide the deliverables and will execute the tasks required per and as detailed in the cost estimate attached. Assumptions: 1. If the number of relocations is increased or reduced, our estimate will be adjusted accordingly. 2. Relocation services will be provided for 3 displacees (2 tenants and 1 owner/ occupant). WSB Relocation Services: Our total fees for these services will not exceed: $ 10,208.00 Additional Services: Relocation Appeals/Testimony: WSB's relocation team has experience in preparing the documentation for court to substantiate the relocation claims approved and/or denied as well as the testimony related to those claims. Upon request from the City, WSB will prepare, attend and present testimony as needed at our standard hourly rates. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to you. If you are in agreement with the terms of this proposal, please sign below on the space provided and return one copy to us for our records. If you would like to further discuss any aspect of our proposal, please do not hesitate to contact me at 763-231-4868 with any questions or comments. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Penny Rolf Project Manager ACCEPTED BY: City of Monticello Name Title Date 1 Project Management Meetings/Communication with City Staff/Task Coordination Monthly Status Reports 2 Relocation Assistance Services ( 3 Displacees - see assumption below) Relocation Tasks: Advisory services Notification Letters- Relocation Eligibility, 90 & 30 day notices Individual meetings with the displacees Referrals Move estimate coordination Determine eligible relocation benefits Claims assistance and preparation of relocation claims 3 Acquisition Assistance Services ( 1 Owner/Occupant - see assumption below) Assist City with acquisition of building owned by Preferred Title, Inc. Total Hours Average Hourly Fees (include overhead and profit) TOTAL RELOCATION COSTS 1. Relocation services will be provided for 3 displacees (2 tenants and one owner/occu 6 $1,056 4 2 48 $8,448 6 3 9 6 6 6 12 4 4 58 $1�6 2. If the number of relocations is increased or reduced. our estimate will be adiusted accordinalv. $704 $10,208 � N July 11, 2019 Jim Thares Economic Development Manager City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street Monticello, MN 55362 HENNING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Re: Request for Proposal Relocation Consultant Services Proposal Block 52 Redevelopment Business Relocations Dear Mr. Thares: 510 N Chestnut Street, Ste 200 Chaska, MN 55318 952.448.4630 800.448.4630 toll free henningprofessionalservices.com I am writing in response to your request for business relocation consultant services for projects centered in downtown Monticello. Project Understanding The City is working with the Beard Group to develop four parcels in the Central Business District. Property acquisition discussions are beginning, so occupants will require an introduction to their pending relocation rights, benefits, and claim process, as well as replacement site referrals reasonably soon. Displacement will not likely occur until Spring 2020. Presumably, this will be a voluntary acquisition with no threat of eminent domain being used. The City will want to be careful in coordinating the relocation eligibility process with the acquisition process, so that tenants are not prematurely moving out before acquisition is assuretl. Conversely, you will need to budget the 90-day Notice to Vacate, starting after date of closing. This will not be an issue if eminent domain is an option. Scope of Services for Business Relocation It is the intent of this proposal to provide relocation consultant services to successfully complete the displacements, in accordance with the Uniform Real Property Acquisition and Relocation Act of 1970, as amended, 49CFR Part 24 and Minnesota Statutes Chapter 117. Typical Business Relocation Services Maintain relocation files to be turned over to the CityIEDA at completion. Maintain a log of all contacts with businesses. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Meet with business owner or representative to explain process, procedures, program benefits and responsibilities under the Uniform Relocation Act. Provide ativisory services to displacees. Determine eligibility for relocation assistance. Prepare preliminary relocation budget after initial contacts. Prepare General Information Notices (GIN). Prepare Notice of Relocation Eligibility. Prepare 90-day and 30-day Notice to Vacate. Prepare moving specifications and secure competitive bids. Prepare all claims and provide proper documentation as required by the Uniform Relocation Act. Meet with stafflattorney on a timely basis to maintain communication and keep staff informed. Service by others — Property Acquisition, title, closing, property management, and interpreters, if necessary. Meetings with Developer and EDA would be billed separately, above and beyond the relocation Maximum Not to Exceed amount. Relocation Appeals We tlo not expect any relocation appeals, but if they do occur, we will assist, at the City Attorney's direction, on a time and materials basis. Project Price The above relocation services will be provided for a Maximum Not to Exceed price of $11,000 based upon monthly time and materials agreement using the following 2019 hourly charge rates: 2019 Charge Rates Dan Wilson, Relocation Consultant Leah Traxler, Associate Helen Flowers, Associate Charlie Peterson, Associate Sara Flagstad, Office Manager Mileage Copies Postage (3) Business Relocation Mileage $150 $120 $120 $110 $95 IRS Rates $.20 Actual Cost Estimate (3 x $3,500) _ Maximum Not to Exceed Amount $ 10,500 $ 500 $ 11,000 We will only charge for the actual time provided up to the Maximum Not to Exceed Amount. The challenge in a Maximum Not to Exceed proposal is in understanding the level of assistance the displacees may need, and the availability of replacement sites. We do need to budget for sufficient advisory services to insure a timely and successful relocation. The church may be very cooperative, but they do frequently make decisions by committee, and that takes time. We only charge for the services provided. It would be easy to provide a low Maximum Not to Exceed figure, but that provides little or no meaningful assistance to the displacee. We seek to be compliant with the intent of the URA, providing necessary assistance while maintaining the City's and our reputation for treating people fairly. We have budgeted 25-30 hours per file. We have found that hours per file may vary widely with 1/3 going quickly, 1/3 normally, and 113 challenging for multiple reasons. We only charge for the actual time and assistance that we provide. We do reserve the right to request additional budget authorization in the case of unique, unforeseen circumstances, or simple displacements with uncooperative displacees. The proposal does assume a basic level of cooperation from the tenants. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this proposal. Please call with any questions or comments. Sincerely, ��a��`. � Sonya Henning President EDA: 07/31/19 4c. Consideration of approvin� Contract with Northland Securities, Inc. (NSI) for Financial Planning Services related to creation of Economic Development Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District (#1-41) (JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This item is to ask the EDA to consider approving a specific project-based contract with Northland Securities, Inc. (NSI) related to creation of an Economic Development Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District (#1-41). The development proposal being considered by Proj ect Novus warrants that the EDA consider entering into the NSI contract to obtain financial planning and analysis services as well as guidance in the required steps in establishing a new economic development TIF District. The attached proposal outlines services related to development parcel valuation data, review of the developer finance structure and "but for" findings. It also covers preparation and distribution of various notices, planning documents, completion of a TIF Plan and attendance at two meetings. It does not include legal documents such as resolutions and development agreements. NSI will only bill for actual work performed based on an hourly rate of $180 with the total amount of billings capped at $8,820. This light industrial development proposal is on a fast track schedule per request from the applicant. The elements of the proj ect warrant waiving the usual concept review as a first step and rather moving ahead to consider asking the City Council to call for a public hearing (see Item #6 on Agenda). At the August 14, 2019, meeting the concept review of the development proposal will be presented to the EDA if the firm is ready. At a minimum, staff believe a future workshop in late August will be needed to review the entire development concept and the proposed financing structure with the EDA. Suffice it to say, at this point, staff have a high level of confidence that the proposal will meet the but for test required under state statutes. A TIF review and action calendar is attached for your review. Al. STAFF IMPACT: TIF Districts are extremely complicated tax based financial assistance tools used to support new development. There are a number of legal and critical financial review processes that are required in establishing a new TIF District. Under the proposed contract, NSI will analyze property and financing data and prepare a TIF Plan specifically tailored to the proposal and the site. They will also prepare the essential "but- for" findings. In-house staff will support and collaborate with NSI by providing application submittal materials and guidance as to EDA discussion regarding the policy of using TIF for a new economic development district. A2. BUDGET IMPACT: The funds to pay for the proposed NSI contract will come from the $10,000 TIF application fee per the TIF Guidelines. NSI's quote of $8,820 for the Financial Planning Services leaves a balance of $1,180 for other expenses (primarily legal fees) needed to complete the entire TIF review and approval process. Even if the EDA wanted to in the future waive the $10,000 application fee, it could recover the NSI Planning expense via recapture of the full allowed 10 percent TIF administrative charge to the District. EDA: 07/31/19 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to approve Northland Securities, Inc's. Financial Planning Agreement for services related to creation of a new economic development TIF district as presented. 2. Motion to deny approval of the NSI Financial Planning Agreement for services related to creation of a new economic development TIF District. Motion to table consideration of the NSI Financial Planning Agreement for services related to creation of a new economic development TIF district. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1. TIF districts have impacts across several taxing jurisdictions and variety of financial implications. The NSI Financial Planning Services Agreement is essential to ensure the EDA stays within the bounds of all required steps and notices when creating a new TIF District. Therefore, it important that staff have the support of consultants such as NSI to perform highly specialized TIF Plan analytical work as well as for preparation of specific plans and documents that are part of a creating a new TIF District. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a. NSI Financial Planning Services Agreement 2 FINANCIAL PLANNING AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND NORTHLAND SECURITIES, INC. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT) This Agreement made and entered into by and between the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority, Minnesota (hereinafter the "EDA") and Northland Securities, Inc., of Minneapolis, Minnesota (hereinafter "NSI"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the EDA desires to use the services of NSI for financial planning assistance related the establishment of a new tax increment financing economic development district (the "TIF District") to provide financial assistance for the construction of an approximate 40,000 square foot commercial building for manufacturing (the "Project"). WHEREAS, the Project is intended solely for financial planning and NSI is not providing advice on the timing, terms, structure or similar matters related to a specific bond issue. WHEREAS, NSI desires to furnish services to the EDA as hereinafter described. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows: SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY NSI The scope of work will undertake the process and financial planning to establish the TIF District Legal services to draft or review the plan for the establishment of the TIF District (the "TIF Plan"), resolutions, and agreements are not provided by NSI and are not subject to this agreement NSI will provide the following services: 1. Collect data for the TIF District and the Project, including: a. Parcel identification numbers for all parcels within the Development District and theTIF District b. Estimated market value and tax capacity value for all parcels within the TIF District. c. Current property tax rates for all jurisdictions. d. Map showing project location and parcel boundaries. 2. Evaluate and advise the EDA on the type of tax increment financing district and provide guidance on statutory findings. 3. Collect data about the Project, including: a. Type, size, value, and timing of proposed development. b. Activities and estimated costs (project budget) to be paid by the TIF District Agreement (Economic Development TIF Page 1 4. Review basis for findings for establishing TIF District, including: a. Statutory criteria for proposed district. b. Developer justification ("but for") for the use of tax increment. c. Review and analyze Developer construction pro forma and operating pro forma for the Project d. Prepare memorandum for the EDA presenting the findings. 5. Determine basic understanding of key criteria for the process including: a. Boundaries of Development District and the TIF District. b. Specific development objectives to address in the planning documents beyondthe Project, including decertification of an existing tax increment financingdistrict. c. Official newspaper and publication schedule. 6. Obtain any additional data not collected in item #1, including: a. Building permits issued for parcels in the TIF District over the past 18 months. b. Current comprehensive plan. 7. Set and distribute calendar of ineetings and key dates. 8. Assist with preparation of notice of hearing and comply with statutory requirements for mailing and publication. 9. Assist the EDA's attorney with drafting of the development agreement for the Project 10. Prepare planning documents including modification of the Redevelopment Project,if necessary, and Tax Increment Financing Plan for the TIF District 11. Distribute draft planning documents with letter ofexplanation and other supporting information to the county and the school district 12. Assist with preparation of resolutions authorizing the TIF District and approvingthe TIF Plan. 13. Prepare and distribute resolution for planning commission findings, if necessary(scope does not include NSI attendance at planning commission meeting). 14. Prepare and distribute packet for public hearing including the TIF Plan andapproving resolution and interfund loan resolutions (if loan is proposed). 15. Attend and facilitate the EDA meeting to consider approval of the TIF Districtand agreement for the Project 16. Assist City staff in preparing presentation for the public hearing and City Council meeting to consider approval of the TIF District 17. Prepare electronic transcript of documents for the establishment of the TIF District 18. Submit request to the county for certification of the TIF District 19. File district with the Office of the State Auditor and the State of Minnesota. Agreement (Economic Development TIF Page 2 COMPENSATION The budget for undertaking the tasks in this agreement is an amount not to exceed $8,820. The amount is based on the estimated number of hours required to complete these tasks at an hourly billing rate of $180 per hour plus reimbursable expenses for travel, printing, and mailing. NSI will bill on a monthly basis for actual services performed and reimbursable expenses. The EDA may at its discretion authorize NSI to undertake additional tasks, including meeting attendance, beyond the tasks listed above. Additional planning services will be billed monthly at a rate of $180 per hour. Invoices will detail the work performed, requested compensation for the period and show amounts previously billed. ASSIGNED NSI EMPLOYEE The NSI employee responsible for providing services pursuant to this agreement and for the services performed is Tammy Omdal, Managing Director. SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS The terms and provisions of this Agreement are binding upon and inure to the benefit of the EDA and NSI and their successors or assigns. DISCLAIMER In performing service under this agreement, NSI is relying on the accuracy of information provided by the developer for the proposed project and the EDA and the services provided by NSI are based on current State Law. The parties agree that the Minnesota property tax system and other laws may change and may affect the accuracy and validity of services provided by NSI. NSI will perform its work using the best available information. The EDA recognizes and accepts that future property values, tax levies and tax rates may vary from the assumptions used byNSI and such changes may affect the work product produced and provided by NSI. TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT This Agreement may be terminated by thirty (30) days written notice by either the EDA or NSI. In the event of early termination by the EDA, NSI shall provide the EDA with an itemized hourly statement of services already provided. All billable hours by NSI shall be billed at the stated hourly rates should early termination occur. Dated this day of , 2019. Agreement (Economic Development TIF Page 3 Northland Securities, Inc. By:_ Ta my Omd �� Managing Director, Public Finance City of Monticello Economic Development Authority : Title Agreement (Economic Development TIF Page 4 EDA Agenda - 07/31/19 4d. Consideration of Quote for Well Monitorin� Services related to follow up activitv from Block 52 Soil Borings in the amount of $2,800 from Chosen Vallev Testing (JaT) A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND During the May EDA meeting, staff were authorized to enter into a contract with Chosen Valley Testing (CVT) in Eden Valley, MN to complete soil borings on Block 52 in the amount of $5,655. The EDA sought the soil boring quotes to reliably assess whether Block 52 soil- geotechnical conditions-qualities are acceptable for development of underground parking structures as part of future redevelopment considerations. Staff received the preliminary Geotechnical Report and the report came back favorable. CVT installed one well on Block 52 and it was recommended to monitor the water levels from the location monthly for one year. CVT provided a quote to the EDA in the amount of $2,800. The testing would begin immediately starting in September, 2019 if approved. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to authorize Chosen Valley Testing, Inc. in the amount of $2,800 to complete well monitoring. 2. Motion to deny authorization of Chosen Valley Testing Inc. 3. Motion of other. 4. Motion to table authorization a contract to provide well monitoring. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the EDA select CVT in an amount of $2,800. CVT completed the soil borings and developed the Geotechnical Report. It is recommended to continue working with the company as they are familiar with the site and are able to complete the task. D. SUPPORTING DATA A. Geotechnical Report for Block 52 B. Proposal for the Collection Water Levels - Chosen Va11ey Testing, Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Block 52 Development SW Quadrant of River St. W. and Pine St. Monticello, Minnesota Prepared for: Mr. Jacob Thunander Community and Economic Development Coordinator July 19, 2019 15043.19.MNS `�ti�illlfl// � �� S. �ER� '�. � G��O ••LICENSED•��L y _ ;� PR�FESSI�NAL '; _ - ENGINEER - �cJ�� . 18983 ,; �Q,, : �j.'••. .� �� : �� F M lN��: l�%11�11��, I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly licensed engineer under the laws of the State of Minne sota. �`.��. �.�. Colby T. Verdegan, PE Geotechnical Engineer Registration Number 18983 Date: July 19, 2019 M I N N E S O T A I O W A W I S C O N S I N Chosen Valley Testing, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering and Testing, 414 37t" Ave N, St. Cloud, Minnesota (320) 774-3500 Fax: 1-320-774-3554 Email: stcloud(a�chosenvalleytestinq.com Mr. Jacob Thunander Community and Economic Development Coordinator The City of Monticello Jacob.thunander@ic.monticello.mn.us Re: Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Services Proposed Block 52 Development SW Quadrant of River St. E. and Pine St. Monticello, Minnesota CVT Number: 15043.19.MNS Dear Mr. Thunander, July 19, 2019 As authorized, we have completed the preliminary geotechnical evaluation for the proposed residentiaUmixed use building in Monticello, Minnesota. This letter briefly summarizes the findings in the attached report. Summarv of Borin� Results Three borings were drilled in traffic areas, and resulted in one meeting 4 inches of asphalt, another meeting 12 inches of aggregate base and the third meeting about 4 inches of asphalt over 18 inches of aggregate base. The fourth boring was drilled in a lawn are and met 4 feet of topsoil fill. Below the topsoil or pavement materials, three of the borings encountered fill to depths of about 6'/2 feet. The fill consisted primarily of generally clean sands. The fill was underlain by a dark B-Horizon layer two locations. The natural soils below to surface materials and fill were dominated by generally clean sands and most borings terminated in these soils at the planned 30-foot termination depth. All of the borings encountered a layer of clayey sand in the mid to lower profiles of the borings, and the southern most boring (Boring B-04) terminated in the clayey sand at the planned 30-foot depth. The top of the clayey sand layer appears to slope down towards the east. Water or water bearing soils were observed in the borings at depths of or water-bearing soils were in most of the borings during drilling at typical depths of approximately 11 to 14 feet below the surface. Groundwater levels on site would be expected to fluctuate seasonally with local weather patterns and similarly to levels in nearby creeks and rivers. A piezometer was installed in Boring B-02 to more accurately define groundwater elevations and provide ability to make water level readings throughout the year. To the best our knowledge, no readings have been taken to date. M I N N E S O T A I O W A W I S C O N S I N Block 52 Monticello July 19, 2019 Project: 15043.19.MNS Page - 2 Summarv of Analvsis and Recommendations The topsoil, pavement materials, and fill are not suitable for foundation support and should be removed from below all building areas, along with any old foundations, trees and root systems, utilities, or otherwise deleterious materials that may be discovered during construction. At most locations, corrections are expected to be on the order of 6'/2 foot or less. The basement grade would presumably be below these depths, unless dictated by water levels. We recommend using clean sands or gravels to attain final grades for buildings and pavements. The existing clean natural sands are considered suitable for this purpose and some of the fill also appeared to be usable. The structure will have a basement. The lower level foundations would be expected to bear on soils potentially ranging from clayey sands on the west part of the site and clean sands to the east. Presuming that water likely perches on the clay sands, we would recommend partially removing the clayey sands to allow placement of a clean sand layer on top of the clayey sands for drainage and to protect the clayey sands from disturbance. Based on the soil boring data and implementation of our earthwork recommendations, we are of the opinion that foundations for the facility can likely be sized to exert pressures of up to 4,000 pounds per square foot (�sfl. As mentioned before, groundwater could potentially be close to or even above proposed slab grade. Depending on the building elevation, it may have to be raised to provide separation from the water table. Rem arks CVT appreciates the opportunity to provide geotechnical services on this project. The attached report provides further details of our preliminary analysis and recommendations for the proposed building and pavements. If you have any questions about our report, please feel free to contact us at (320) 774-3500. Sincerely, Chosen Valley Testing, Inc. , � Hannah Fischer Graduate Engineer � � ��. ��-� � � Colby T. Verdegan, PE Sr. Geotechnical/Materials Engineer M I N N E S O T A I O W A W I S C O N S I N TABLE OF CONTENTS A. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................2 A.1. PURPOSE ...............................................................................................................................................................2 A.2. SCOPE ..................................................................................................................................................................2 A.3. BORING LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS .........................................................................................................................2 A.4. GEOLOGIC BACKGROUND .........................................................................................................................................2 B. SUBSURFACE DATA ...........................................................................................................................................3 B.1. STRATIFICATION ......................................................................................................................................................3 B.2. PENETRATION TEST AND LABORATORYTEST RESULTS .....................................................................................................4 B.3. GROUNDWATER DATA .............................................................................................................................................4 C. DESIGN DATA ....................................................................................................................................................5 D. ANALYSIS ..........................................................................................................................................................5 E. RECOMMENDATIONS — EXCAVATION / BACKFILL ..............................................................................................6 E.1. GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................................................6 E.1.a. Stripping and Excavation ............................................................................................................................6 E.1.b. Subgrade Evaluation ..................................................................................................................................6 E.1. c. Oversizing ................................................................................................................................................... 6 E.1.d. Filling, Compaction, and Surface Compaction ............................................................................................6 E.2. BUILDING DESIGN ...................................................................................................................................................6 E.2.a. Foundation Depth .......................................................................................................................................6 E.2.b. Bearing Capacity and Settlement ...............................................................................................................6 E.2.c. Slab Design .................................................................................................................................................7 E.2.f. Below-Grade Walls .....................................................................................................................................7 E.2.g. Drainage ....................................................................................................................................................7 F. PAVED AREA RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................................7 F.1. STRIPPING AND GRADING .........................................................................................................................................7 F.2. PAVEMENT DESIGN ..................................................................................................................................................7 G. ADDITIONAL EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................7 H. LEVEL OF CARE ..................................................................................................................................................7 APPENDIX .............................................................................................................................................................. 8 BORING LOCATION SKETCH LOG OF BORING # 1-04 LEGEND TO SOIL DESCRIPTION M I N N E S O T A I O W A W I S C O N S I N Block 52 Development P roject: 15043.19. M NS Preliminary Geotechnical Report Proposed Block 52 Development SW Quadrant of River St. W. and Pine St. Monticello, Minnesota CVT Project Number: 15043.19.MNS Date: July 19, 2019 A. Introduction July 19, 2019 Page 2 The intent of this report is to present our findings to the client in the same logical sequence that led us to arrive at the opinions and recommendations expressed. Since our services often must be completed before the design is finished, assumptions are often needed to prepare a proper scope and to analyze the data. A complete and thorough review of the entire document, including its assumptions and its appendices, should be undertaken immediately upon receipt. A.1. Purpose This geotechnical report was prepared to aid in the design and construction of a potential residential/ mixed use building for the Block 52 Development in Monticello, Minnesota. Our services were authorized by Executive Director Mr. Jim Thares of Monticello. A.2. Scope To obtain data for analysis, a total of four borings were drilled for the proposed facility, and one piezometer was installed for monitoring water levels at the site. All the borings were drilled to their planned depths of 30 feet. Specific plans for the development are not available. Consequently, our engineering scope consisted of providing a report presenting our findings and providing preliminary analyses as regards geotechnical aspects affecting potential development. A.3. Boring Locations and Elevations Boring locations were indicated to Chosen Valley Testing (CVT) on the site plan provided by the client. The Boring Location Sketch in the Appendix of this report shows the approximate locations as-drilled. Ground surface elevations at the borings were estimated by using a laser level. The top nut on the fire hydrant north of Boring B-01 on River St. W. was used as a benchmark. This reference was assigned and assumed elevation of 100.0 feet. Elevations are indicated on the respective Log of Boring sheets in the Appendix. A.4. Geologic Background A geotechnical report is based on subsurface data collected for the specific structure or problem. Available geologic data from the region can help interpretation of the data and is briefly summarized in this section. Geologic maps indicate that the dominant soils in the area are alluvial deposits of sand. Bedrock is typically more than 50 feet below the surface and not a consideration for this project. M I N N E S O T A I O W A W I S C O N S I N Block 52 Development P roject: 15043.19. M NS B. Subsurface Data July 19, 2019 Page 3 Procedures: The borings were performed using penetration test procedures (Method of Test D1586 of the American Society for Testing and Materials). With the penetration test procedures method, a hollow-stem auger is drilled to the desired sampling depth. A 2-inch OD sampling tube is then screwed onto the end of a sampling rod, inserted through the hole in the auger's tip, and then driven into the soil with a 140-pound hammer dropped repeatedly from a height of 30 inches above the sampling rod. The sampler is driven 18 inches into the soil, unless the material is too hard. The samples are generally taken at 2'/2 to 5-foot intervals. The core of soil obtained was classified and logged by the driller on site and a representative portion was then sealed and delivered to the geotechnical engineer for further review. B.1. Stratification Three borings were drilled in traffic areas, and resulted in one meeting 4 inches of asphalt, another meeting 12 inches of aggregate base and the third meeting about 4 inches of asphalt over 18 inches of aggregate base. The fourth boring was drilled in a lawn are and met 4 feet of topsoil fill. Below the topsoil or pavement materials, three of the borings encountered fill to depths of about 6'/2 feet. The fill consisted primarily of generally clean sands. The fill was underlain by a dark B-Horizon layer two locations. The natural soils below to surface materials and fill were dominated by generally clean sands and most borings terminated in these soils at the planned 30-foot termination depth. All of the borings encountered a layer of clayey sand in the mid to lower profiles of the borings, and the southern most boring (Boring B-04) terminated in the clayey sand at the planned 30-foot depth. The top of the clayey sand layer appears to slope down towards the east. The boring data has been summarized in the following cross-section. Please refer to the individual Log of Boring sheets in the Appendix for more detailed information. M I N N E S O T A I O W A W I S C O N S I N Block 52 Development P roject: 15043.19. M NS 110 105 100 � d L�.�.- 95 c 0 � ca � 90 W d r� � 85 X O a 80 � a 75 �o B-1 B-3 B-4 B-2 Boring Number B.2. Penetration Test and Laboratorv Test Results July 19, 2019 Page 4 ■ Topsoil � Pave. Mat'I � FI�� B-Horizon o Sand � Clayey Sand ❑ Below Boring The number of blows needed for the hammer to advance the penetration test sampler is an indicator of soil characteristics. The results tend to be more meaningful for natural mineral soils, than for fill soils. In fill soils, compaction tests are more meaningful. Penetration resistance values ("N" Values) of 2 to 16 blows per foot (BPF) was recorded in the fill. The sands returned N Values ranging between 6 to 35 BPF indicating they were loose to dense, but were mostly loose to medium dense. N Vales in the clayey sand ranged between 8 and 18 BPF, indicating it was loose to medium dense. A key to descriptors used to qualify the relative density of soil (such as soft, stiff, loose, and dense) can be found on the Legend to Soil Description in the Appendix. B.3. Groundwater Data During drilling, the drillers may note the presence of moisture on the sampler, in the cuttings, or in the borehole itself. These findings are reported on the boring logs. Because water levels vary with weather, time of year, and other factors, the presence or lack of water during exploration is subject to interpretation and is not always conclusive. Water or water bearing soils were observed in the borings at depths of or water-bearing soils were in most of the borings during drilling at typical depths of approximately 11 to 14 feet below the surface. These depths roughly correspond to elevations 91 to 94 feet on the datum used to survey the borings. M I N N E S O T A I O W A W I S C O N S I N Block 52 Development July 19, 2019 Project: 15043.19.MNS Page 5 Groundwater levels on site would be expected to fluctuate seasonally with local weather patterns and similarly to levels in nearby creeks and rivers. A piezometer was installed in Boring B-02 to more accurately define groundwater elevations and provide ability to make water level readings throughout the year. To the best our knowledge, no readings have been taken to date. C. Design Data Because each structure has a different loading configuration and intensity, different grades, and different structural or performance tolerances, the results of a geotechnical exploration will mean different things for different facilities. If the facility changes, Chosen Valley Testing should be contacted to discuss possible implications of the changes. Without a chance to review such changes, the recommendations of the soils engineer may no longer be valid or appropriate. The project potentially consists of the construction of a five-story residentiaUmixed use building with below grade parking and an adjacent parking lot and drive. Maximum foundation loads were not provided, but typically may be in the range of 350 kips to about 500 kips, depending on the materials used, spacing of parking area columns, etc. We have assumed that the pavements will experience primarily automobile traffic with daily delivery trucks, garbage trucks, etc. Main level slab grade was assumed to be near elevation 106 feet. D. Analysis The topsoil, pavement materials, and fill are not suitable for foundation support and should be removed from below all building areas, along with any old foundations, trees and root systems, utilities, or otherwise deleterious materials that may be discovered during construction. At most locations, corrections are expected to be on the order of 6'/2 foot or less. The basement grade would presumably be below these depths, unless dictated by water levels. We recommend using clean sands or gravels to attain final grades for buildings and pavements. The existing clean natural sands are considered suitable for this purpose and some of the fill also appeared to be usable. The structure will have a basement. The lower level foundations would be expected to bear on soils potentially ranging from clayey sands on the west part of the site and clean sands to the east. Presuming that water likely perches on the clay sands, we would recommend partially removing the clayey sands to allow placement of a clean sand layer on top of the clayey sands for drainage and to protect the clayey sands from disturbance. Based on the soil boring data and implementation of our earthwork recommendations, we are of the opinion that foundations for the facility can likely be sized to exert pressures of up to 4,000 pounds per square foot (ps fl. As mentioned before, groundwater could potentially be close to or even above proposed slab grade. M I N N E S O T A I O W A W I S C O N S I N Block 52 Development P roject: 15043.19. M NS July 19, 2019 Page 6 Depending on the building elevation, it may have to be raised to provide separation from the water table. E. Recommendations — Excavation / Backfill E.1. Grading Recommendations E.l.a. Stripping and Excavation: The topsoil, pavement materials, and fill are not suitable for foundation support and should be removed from below all building areas, along with any old foundations, trees and root systems, utilities, or otherwise deleterious materials that may be discovered during construction. At the locations explored, the depth of topsoil and fill appeared to be about 6'/2 feet. Removal of the B-Horizon soil below the fill does not appear warranted, but should be reviewed during constriction. E.l.b. Subgrade Evaluation: The bearing soils in the excavations should be evaluated by CVT personnel before placing any fill, concrete, or pavements. Any unsuitable materials observed should be removed and replaced with engineered granular fill. E.l.c. Oversizing: Any stripping or corrective excavations should be oversized at least 1-foot beyond the foundations for each foot of fill needed below footing grade. This oversizing can be reduced by up to 50% if rather precise staking is present during grading. E.l.d. Filling, Compaction, and Surface Compaction: For ease in construction, we recommend using clean sands or gravels having less than 12% particles passing a#200 sieve, where fill is needed below the foundations or in the building area. The natural poorly graded sands and poorly graded sands with silts found in the borings would be expected to meet this specification, and much of the e�sting fill appears to be similar materials. Fill placed in or close to the water table should have less than 5% particles passing a #200 sieve. Engineered fill should be placed in lifts adjusted to the compactor being used and the material being compacted. We recommend limiting lifts to no more than 1-foot. This assumes large, self-propelled or tow-behind compactors are used. All materials below the building, in the oversized areas, or used as backfill for walls should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of its maximum standard Proctor density (ASTM D 698). E.2. Building Design E.2.a. Foundation Depth: We recommend placing foundations at least 42 inches below the exposed ground surface for frost protection. Interior foundations in heated areas may be placed directly below slabs. Footings for unheated structures should be placed at least 60 inches below the exposed ground surface. E.2.b. Bearing Capacity and Settlement: Based on the assumed loads, we are of the opinion that foundations may likely be designed to exert pressures of up to 4,000 psf. Total post-construction settlements are expected to be on the order of 1 inch or less. M I N N E S O T A I O W A W I S C O N S I N Block 52 Development July 19, 2019 Project: 15043.19.MNS Page 7 E.2.c. Slab Design: As noted before, if the slab will be close to the clayey sands, we would recommend placing a layer of clean sand or gravel between the slab and the clayey sands, to help keep water that might trapped on the clayey sand away from the slab. E.2.f. Below-Grade Walls: We recommend using clean, free-draining sands having less than 10% particles passing a#200 sieve as backfill against below-grade walls. The natural poorly graded sands on site could plausibly be reused for this purpose. E.2.g. Drainage: Basement walls are typically provided with perimeter draintile to prevent hydrostatic pressure from forming on the walls by allowing removal of any water that may collect in the excavation during or after construction. F. Paved Area Recommendations F.1. Strippin� and Gradin� We recommend stripping all topsoil and existing pavement materials from below all planned paved areas. Foundations or other unsuitable materials more than 3 feet below the surface can likely be left in place, but should be reviewed. If new fill is needed in paved areas, it should consist of a uniform soil type similar to the near-surface soils already present — which were primarily generally clean sands. F.2. Pavement Desi�n After stripping and grading, the soils present at subgrade elevation are expected to generally consist of clean sands. These materials would be expected to have an R-value ranging from 50 to 70. We recommend using an R-value of 50 for design. In the absence of traffic loading data, we would suggest a light duty bituminous pavement section consisting of at least 3 inches of bituminous over 6 inches of aggregate base. If concrete pavement is to be used, we recommend a section consisting of a minimum of 5 inches of 4,000 psi concrete over 4 inches of aggregate base. G. Additional Exploration and Analysis The analyses and recommendations in this report were based on a very small number of borings inconsideration of the likely size of the development, and in the absence of design information. Additional borings are strongly recommended to be performed when plans are more complete, and may have to extend deeper as well depending on the loads. The information should be used to prepare a project specific geotechnical specific analysis for the planned construction. H. Level of Care The services provided for this project have been conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in this area, under similar budget and time constraints. This is our professional responsibility. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. M I N N E S O T A I O W A W I S C O N S I N Block 52 Development P roject: 15043.19. M NS Appendix Boring Location Sketch Log of Boring # 1-04 Legend to Soil Description July 19, 2019 Page 8 M I N N E S O T A I O W A W I S C O N S I N � � � U L (6 J � L � � U � �L ��♦ � ryW� � m W J � � f� i�, a � � � % `7' • �r;1 7� �• i� �'�r �� , " - � ' +Y• � .l�� '+i' '' 4►� - �I � �� y - �'�, ,��a ,'� � ' `a�. ,,� ` � �f`',.`' '' 4 ' M� *.,.� i�� , l ,�' ..r y� .�_ y„ , �� i��.'�il�..� �1 �'! �,, f, r ti N , 'y : t .�., ;� �. 4� ` � � �, '�� °� •x „ � '�+�� `�� . � . " +�' � rv�_ • f . _ � � ',� � " �1 � � `� `�, . �� `"�� r 1* '� � � � P � �,^ 1� . �' Y • , � fe _.,� � . �t t� � ' � � � � 7� - �i; y � � . � '�,' �. ! �` � �r � i �M � / I 1�� i . �� ,�� .� '+ /� °'4 �y . . , �., _ ! . � �1 f ' N f , �r � �. ;r �� . *"!' �, �! �.'� . �' 1, i -�J,. �f -•� �J�� . � 6� rt. � L� F A �' #t i r�,, 1 � s i + ' � �#� , o n, `-• ! �� - , t ;�>,. � � . � � + � a. � � � �. �r �r e �.': � :� � r�l ��r y�i � r� , � w . � ;� /� � r I ,,i 4 � � ,�'., � � .+� � � � ` �' Iy� . �. f . ' R � L ' ��..� � .,. f � �: °� �`.•�'�� fl�l�i_� � .. � 3 * � �� , . , J �� , . � r �. k'' / � �. �� ' � �� - . �., � ��`y ,� � � `.�y.:k"� %'''� __-� v � � �, j � :# ��.4 - . ,��" k ., '�'� �, �w_� 'Z �� ` '�� '� "*'!'j,:� �.•� f. *� ' � � � j•'�! '� l� �'•r��n4•l� ��Y/f �1.�'�+ ��1 �.`�i� 'F��' ��ZrZ��r CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT: 15043.19.MNS BORING: B-U � Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION: Blocic 52 Development See attached slcetch. Blocic 52 Monticello, Minnesota DATE: 6/10/19 SCALE: 1" = 4' ASTM Elev. Depth D2487 Description of Materials BPF WL Tests or Notes 105.5 0.0 Symbol (ASTM D2488) , , 4 INCHES OF BITUMINOUS Benchmarlc: Top nut of the — 18 INCHES OF AGGREGATE BASE fire hydrant on the north 103.6 1.9 = side of River St W., SP FILL, Poorly Graded Sand, fine-to-medium 8 assumed=100feet. � grained, trace Gravel, brown, moist. 0 a 0 � 12 � x � 99.0 6. SP POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, � SM . fine-to-medium grained, trace Gravel, darlc brown, 14 MC=2.8% � moist, medium dense. � (B-Horizon) w Q 16 z � 94.0 11. o SC CLAYEY SAND, fine-to-medium grained, trace � Gravel, gray, wet, medium dense. 18 MC=16% � (Glacial Till) � � � 18 0 w � w H � a 87.5 18.0 � SP POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-to-medium Q grained, trace Gravel, brown, water bearing, loose to z dense. 35 � � (Alluvium) MC=17.4% � Q � H x 0 a w x � 6 a � � � x � 0 a w 0 a a � $ F 0 74.5 31.0 � End boring. � Water was observed at 20 feet during drilling. °� Boring caved in at 12 feet after auger removal. o Boring was sealed upon completion. � w 0 a 1504319.MNS B-Ol roaee 1 of 1 ��ZrZ��r CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT: 15043.19.MNS BORING: B-UZ Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION: Blocic 52 Development See attached slcetch. Blocic 52 Monticello, Minnesota DATE: 6/10/19 SCALE: 1" = 4' ASTM Elev. Depth D2487 Description of Materials BPF WL Tests or Notes 102.2 0.0 Symbol (ASTM D2488) , , - TOPSOIL, Slightly Organic Silty Sand, OL — fine-to-medium grained, trace Roots, blacic, wet. — FILL, Slightly Organic Silty Sand, fine-to-medium � — grained, trace Roots, blacic, wet. 5 MC=S% � — 0 98.2 4.0 — z SP FILL, Poorly Graded Sand, fine-to-medium � grained, trace Gravel, grayish brown, moist. � x � 95.7 6. � SP POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-to-medium a grained, trace Gravel, brown, moist, medium dense. 11 � (Alluvium) � � w Q 12 z MC=83% � 90.7 11. o SP POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, � � SM . fine-to-medium grained, trace Gravel, brown, water 15 a bearing, medium dense. � (Alluvium) � w 15 p MC=15% w � w H � a 84.2 18.0 � SC CLAYEY SAND, fine-to-medium grained, trace � Gravel, gray, wet, medium dense. � (Glacial Till) 11 � MC=17% � Q � � 79.2 23.0 o SP POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-to-medium � grained, trace Gravel, grayish brown, water bearing, � �.� loose. 10 � (Alluvium) a � � � x � 0 a w 0 a a � 9 0 71.2 31.0 MC=173% � End boring. � Water was observed at 12 feet during drilling. °� Water was observed at ll feet 1 hour after auger o removal. � Boring caved in at 24 feet after auger removal. � Borin was sealed u on com letion. 1504319.MNS B-02 roaee 1 of 1 ��ZrZ��r CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT: 15043.19.MNS BORING: B-U3 Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION: Blocic 52 Development See attached slcetch. Blocic 52 Monticello, Minnesota DATE: 6/10/19 SCALE: 1" = 4' ASTM Elev. Depth D2487 Description of Materials BPF WL Tests or Notes 107.0 0.0 Symbol (ASTM D2488) , , sP 4 INCHES OF BITUMINOUS . POORLY GRADED SAND, fine grained, trace Gravel, brown, moist, medium dense. � (Alluvium) 12 � 0 a 0 � 12 � x w H w � 12 a � v � w Q 13 z MC=4.7% � z 0 � 14 � '� 93.0 14.0 � w SC CLAYEY SAND, fine-to-medium grained, trace x Gravel, gray, wet, loose. 10 � (Glacial Till) � w H � a a Q x � Q �¢ g � MC=16% � z � � x 0 a w x � 10 a � 80.0 27.0 � SP POORLY GRADED SAND, fine grained, gray, o water bearing, medium dense. `° (Alluvium) 0 a a � 11 0 76.0 31.0 MC=19.1% � End boring. � Water was observed at 14 feet during drilling. °� Boring caved in at 10 feet after auger removal. o Boring was sealed upon completion. � w 0 a 1504319.MNS B-03 roaee 1 of 1 ��ZrZ��r CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT: 15043.19.MNS BORING: B-U4 Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION: Blocic 52 Development See attached slcetch. Blocic 52 Monticello, Minnesota DATE: 6/10/19 SCALE: 1" = 4' ASTM Elev. Depth D2487 Description of Materials BPF WL Tests or Notes 1063 0.0 Symbol (ASTM D2488) 1053 1.0 = AGGREGATE BASE SP FILL, Poorly Graded Sand, fine-to-medium grained, trace Gravel, brown, moist. g � 0 a 0 z 2 � � 99.8 6. � SP POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT, a SM . fine-to-medium grained, trace Gravel, darlc brown, g � moist, loose. � (B-Horizon) w Q 10 z MC=7.6% � 94.8 11. o SP POORLY GRADED SAND, fine-to-course � � grained, trace Gravel, brown, water bearing, loose to 11 MC=10% � medium dense. �¢ (Alluvium) � w g x 0 w � w H � a a Q x � Q � 18 H � � 843 22.0 � SC CLAYEY SAND, fine-to-medium grained, trace � Gravel, gray, wet, loose to medium dense. 0 � (Alluvium) � 11 � MC=19.9% a � � � � 0 a w 0 a a � 9 F 0 753 31.0 � End boring. � Water was observed at 12 feet during drilling. °� Boring caved in at 13 feet after auger removal. o Boring was sealed upon completion. � w 0 a 1504319.MNS B-04 roaee 1 of 1 Chosen Val ley Testi ng, I nc. Geotechnical Engineering and Testing • 1410 Seventh Street NW • Rochester, MN 55901 • Telephone (507) 281-0968• Fax (507) 289-2523 7uly 24, 2019 Mr. Ryan Melhouse City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street Monticello, MN 55362 RE: Proposal for the Collection of Water Levels 103 Pine Street Project Monticello, Minnesota Dear Mr. Melhouse: On June 10, 2019 Chosen Valley Testing, Inc. (CVT) installed one monitoring well at the above referenced location in Monticello. The intent of this letter proposal is to provide you with a quote to collect water levels from the well on a monthly basis for a period of one year starting in late July. CVT will provide you with the appro�mate water level from the top of casing and the ground surface at the end of the year. CVT is prepared to mobilize to the site in late July and will collect a water level measurement monthly for one year. CVT will complete this project on a time and materials basis in accordance with this proposal and the General Conditions, which are attached and become part of this contract. Based on the proposed scope of work and our experience completing similar work, CVT proposes to complete this project for a fee of $2,800. Add an addition $200 if you need the water level in mean sea level. A breakdown of the costs is provided below: Cost CVT Professional Services Project Management/ Admin $ 130 Travel/Water level collection Time (24 hrs @$75/hr $1,800 Mileage 80 miles per trip @ 0.75/mile $ 720 Letter Report $ 150 TOTAL Sincerely, Chosen Valley Testing, Inc. C ��f �''c�/J`c� v � � Matthew Gikas, PG Senior Environmental Geologist $2,800 2�' � u Authorization to Proceed Proposal for Collecting Water Levels in Monticello. Project: City of Monticello Property 103 Pine Street Monticello, Minnesota Prepared by: Chosen Valley Testing, Inc. Commencement of the above Project or Work Package, as outlined in the attached proposal document from Chosen Valley Testing, Inc., is hereby authorized. Authorizing Person(s): Signature Name / Title Date Minnesota lowa Wisconsin GENERAL CONDITIONS Payment - Payment shall be due within 30 days after date of invoice. Interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 30 days after date of invoice to date payment is received will be added to all amounts not paid within 30 days after date of invoice. In the event that any law limiting the amount of interest or other charges permitted to be collected is interpreted so that this charge violates such law for any reason, the interest charge is hereby reduced to the extent necessary to eliminate such violation. All attorney fees and expenses associated with collection of past due invoices will be paid by the Client. Insurance — Chosen Valley Testing, Inc. (CVT) maintains Worker's Compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance in conformance with state law. In addition, we maintain Comprehensive General Liability Insurance and Automobile Liability Insurance with bodily injury limits of $1,000,000 and $500,000, respectively. CVT also carries $2,000,000 Errors and Omission Professional Liability and Pollution Liability coverage. A certificate of insurance can be supplied evidencing such coverage which contains a clause providing that fifteen days written notice be given priorto cancellation. Right-Of-Entry - Unless otherwise agreed, Client will furnish right-of-entry on the property for CVT to make planned borings, surveys, and/or explorations. CVT will take reasonable precautions to minimize damage to the property caused by its equipment and sampling procedures, but the cost of restoration or damage which may result from the planned operations is not included in the contracted amount. If Client desires to restore the property to its former condition, CVT will accomplish this and add the cost to its fee. Sub-Contractor Markup— CVT shall markup all sub-contractor invoices up to 15% to cover overhead, time & materials, and labor. Damage to Existing Man-made Obiects - It shall be the responsibility of the Owner or his duly authorized representative to disclose the presence and accurate location of all hidden or obscure man-made objects relative to field tests, sampling, or boring locations. When cautioned, advised or given data in writing that reveal the presence or potential presence of underground or overground obstrudions, such as utilities, CVT will give specific instructions to its field personnel. As evidenced by your acceptance of this proposal, Client agrees to indemnify and save harmless CVT from all claims, suits, losses, personal injuries, death and property liability resulting from unusual subsurFace conditions or damages to subsurFace structures owned by Client or third parties, occurring in the perFormance of the proposed work, whose presence and exact locations were not revealed to CVT in writing, and to reimburse CVT for expenses in connection with any such claims or suits, including reasonable attorney's fees. Warranty and Limitation of Liability - CVT shall perForm services for Client in a professional manner, using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by and consistent with the standard of competent consultants practicing in the same or a similar locality as the project. In the event any portion of the services fails to comply with this warranty obligation and CVT is promptly notified in writing prior to one year after completion of such portion of the services, CVT will re-perForm such portion of the services, or if re-perFormance is impracticable, CVT will refund the amount of compensation paid to CVTfor such portion ofthe services. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties. No other warranty, expressed or implied, including warranties of inerchantability and fitness for a particular purpose is made or intended by the proposal for consulting services, by furnishing an oral response of the findings made or by any representations made regarding the services included in this agreement. In no event shall CVT be liable for any special, indirect, incidental or consequential loss or damages. The remedies set forth herein are exclusive and the total liability of consultant whether in contract, tort (including negligence whether sole or concurrent), or otherwise arising out of connected with or resulting from the services provided pursuant to this Agreement shall not exceed the total fees paid by Client or $20,000, whichever is greater. At additional cost, Client may obtain a higher limit priorto commencement ofservices. For services involving or relating to pollution, it is further agreed that the Client shall indemnify and hold harmless CVT and their consultants, agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, direct and indirect or consequential damages, including but not limited to fees and charges of attorneys and court and arbitration costs, arising out of or resulting from the perFormance of the work by CVT, or claims against CVT arising from the work of others. This indemnification provision extends to claims against CVT which arise out of, are related to, or are based upon, the disposal, discharge, escape, release or saturation of vapors, fumes, acids, alkalis, toxic chemicals, liquids, gases or any other material, irritant, contaminant or pollutant in or into the atmosphere or on, onto, upon, in or into the surFace or subsurFace. Sampling or Testing Location - Unless specifically stated to the contrary, the unit fees included in this proposal do not include costs associated with professional land surveying of the site, or the accurate horizontal and vertical locations of tests. Field tests or boring locations described in our report or shown on our sketches are based on specific information furnished to us by others or estimates made in the field by our technicians. Such dimensions, depths or elevations shall be considered as approximations unless otherwise stated in the report. Sample Handling and Retention - Generally test samples or specimens are consumed and/or substantially altered during the conduct of tests and CVT, at its sole discretion will dispose (subject to the following) of any remaining residue immediately upon completion of tests unless required in writing by the Client to store or otherwise handle the samples. (a) NON HAZARDOUS SAMPLES: At Client's written request, CVT will maintain preservable test samples and specimens or the residue therefrom forthirty (30) days after submission of CVT's report to Client free of storage charges. After the initial 30 days and upon written request, CVT will retain test specimens or samples for a mutually acceptable storage charge and period of time. (b) HAZARDOUS OR POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS SAMPLES: In the event that samples contain substances or constituents hazardous or detrimental to human health, safety or the environment as defined by federal, state or local statutes, regulations or ordinances ("Hazardous Substances" and "Hazardous Constituents", respectively), CVT will, after completion of testing and at Client's expense: (i) return such samples to Client; (ii) using a manifest signed by Client as generator, will have such samples transported to a location selected by Client for final disposal. Client agrees to pay all costs associated with the storage, transport, and disposal of such samples. Client recognizes and agrees that CVT is acting as a bailee and at no time does CVT assume title of said waste. Minnesota lowa Wisconsin 4�' . . Discovery of Unanticipated Hazardous Materials - Hazardous materials or certain types of hazardous materials may exist at a site where there is no reason to believe they could or should be present. CVT and Client agree that the discovery of unanticipated hazardous materials constitutes a changed condition mandating a renegotiation of the scope of work or termination of services. CVT and Client also agree that the discovery of unanticipated hazardous materials may make it necessary for CVT to take immediate measures to protect health and safety. CVT agrees to notify Client as soon as practicable should unanticipated hazardous materials or suspected hazardous materials be encountered. Client encourages CVT to take any and all measures that, in CVT's professional opinion, are justified to preserve and protect the health and safety of CVT personnel and the public. Client agrees to compensate CVTfor the additional cost of working to protect employee's and the public's health and safety. In addition, Client waives any claim against CVT, and agrees to defend, indemnify and save CVT harmless from any claim or liability for injury or loss arising from CVT's discovery of unanticipated hazardous materials or suspected hazardous materials. Client also agrees to compensate CVT for any time spent and expenses incurred by CVT in defense of any such claim, with such compensation to be based upon CVT's prevailing fee schedule and expense reimbursement policy relative to recovery of direct project costs. Joint and Several Liabilitv - The concept ofjoint and several liability is basically this: When two or more parties are considered responsible for causing injury or damage, any of the parties may be made to provide compensation for as much as 100% of the damages assessed. When applied to hazardous materials projects, it is possible that the concept of joint and several liability could be construed to make CVT partly or wholly responsible for damages created directly or indirectly by the hazardous materials. Client agrees that it would be unfair for CVT to be exposed to such an action, because CVT had nothing whatsoeverto do with the creation of the hazardous condition. Accordingly, Client waives any claim against CVT, and agrees to define, indemnify and save CVT harmless from any claim or liability for injury or loss arising from application of a joint and several liability concept that would, in any manner, hold or seek to hold CVT responsible for creating a hazardous condition or permitting one to exist. Client also agrees to compensate CVT for any time spent and expenses incurred by CVT in defense of any such claim, with such compensation to be based upon CVT's prevailing fee schedule and expense reimbursement policy relative to recovery of direct project costs. Legal Jurisdiction - The parties agree that any actions brought to enforce any provision of the Agreement shall only be brought in a court of competentjurisdiction located in Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota. Force Maleure - CVT shall not be held responsible for any delay or failure in perFormance of any part of the Agreement to the extent such delay or failure is caused by fire, flood, explosion, war, strike, embargo, government requirement, civil or military authority, acts of God, act or omission of subcontractors, client or other similar causes beyond its control. Minnesota lowa Wisconsin EDA Agenda - 07/31/19 5. Consideration of Authorizin� Solicitation of Substandard Buildin� Qualification Inspection Quotes for Block 52 (JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This item is to ask the EDA to authorize solicitation of quotes for substandard building qualification inspections for Block 52. In order to establish a redevelopment TIF District in Block 52, the EDA would have to certify that at least 51 percent of the principal buildings are substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. The two properties with buildings, acquired by the EDA in the spring of 2018, along with any other parcels that the EDA may consider purchasing in the future will need to be inspected to determine if they meet the substandard threshold. It is a critical step that must be completed to know with a certainty the potential of creating a new redevelopment district. By having a qualified inspection firm under contract, any future property purchases considered by the EDA will allow the principal building(s) to be inspected as part of the terms and conditions of a negotiated purchase agreement. Al. STAFF IMPACT: The staff impact involved in reaching out to the firm(s) that are qualified to complete the blight test inspections consists of contacting them and obtaining quotes for inspection costs is a part of the regular duties. If the EDA approves the solicitation of quotes, staff will obtain the quotes and bring them back to the EDA for consideration at a future meeting. A2. BUDGET IMPACT: Expenses that of soliciting the quotes are minimal consisting of staff time to make calls and County Information data files and photos to the vendor. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: L Motion to authorize solicitation of quotes for substandard building qualifications inspections related to redevelopment TIF district requirements for Block 52 2. Motion to deny authorizing solicitation of quotes for substandard building qualifications inspections related to redevelopment TIF district requirements for Block 52 3. Motion to table consideration of authorizing solicitation of quotes for substandard building qualifications inspections related to redevelopment TIF district requirements for Block 52 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the EDA authorize the solicitation of quotes for substandard building qualification inspections related to redevelopment TIF district requirements for Block 52. Completing the inspections will provide certainty to the EDA the question of whether a a redevelopment TIF district can be used to undertake redevelopment or if it has to look at other options to facilitate new development on the block If the EDA approves the solicitation of quotes for the inspections, they will be provided to the EDA at a future meeting for consideration of the proposal. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A. Aerial Photo - Block 52 - � •s �� -. � , � � ,��'� " a ?�'� " • � � .�`� . ��: -�, � . � ,i _ ` °� s � 4 ,� a " �.,. , a� _ . ;,,�, �ey r ; ' � '� � - ! . � � 4 �r, <:t ' � , m ... .r. _ � , �a , � ,+ ' y � _ � 'wi^ �j s -.J' � � i�. ' n�'_ �� .I � . � �. � . ...� . ' �.. . "; :.� �" � ,,. . • "A,:' � ..,.... ' � ♦:� - ��.� �� i : . � % . �:aj � '� . � o ' - �. � � , � . ..-_ ,. x . r 'f, ,s� �`r� . . .�� y, ��. F N � ' ... 5�1�+,... F� , .� �,.,�y�`.., o. ' �. '� � - *�'r . . �* - x � � o � �� ' � . h. � . '� b °: %�� ' � 4 � ' � � . , `i�q, r. 7' �n - . � / � � ,'� �, � ,� � iw,� '""�� J\• �'�, ,.., k� %�f �r , % ` � �. /� 'E>;�; f e /�y�yy,�� f Y _ r/ � r:�P•, � .. .�' �//L/ •"� ,�'�'e�`�,,,.., .' • . :� � �� ✓ � "- I o � � ° � �� k � � � �� ;_ ;�,. � e �� ` ' ` ,�� *�� ' � � � I �f �� J ,.��+ � . `� :r � ,�nj . �� _(� � '�i� Ad'�. `I 43 �., y, �' �s / ��I� � � = s / .. �`` . �i; . , ' � ��. ` � ^ '" `t�'i . / � � . r � � �.._- ! .,P � '�.. . ` � � � �, � -��- fl� � , ��, �' . � �,� ' q � ` � .8,, � > ivp / �� , � . ''� � �'��' � Q� �. � �� ? 4 � �� . � -.,:�- � �► �� . � � '�f, ' ,� �'� %,�r � .�. � �. �� Q �` �� , ; �.. � � � � ' ' � �/�` � ' � ., � - -- � Q� � � , � r v- � � ' �' � , � �. �= � �Q � P �,� 93 �,9F3 �� r,�` �,� . `�'��"��. , � � ��f. .� T�� <� t � �f� . i� �, ' �b � �°�TM + � � � �.w. _�� . --�',�.." �'�'' � �, '" � _ `'��' :'� . �' '� c�, , t� '�'"� � - '`. '� .�,� �. . ��_ �' �► �� ., . . � +� . -� . � 1 `� ,,� ^ . � , t � .. •'� � . �/:.�W 1 � � A , _ ' � � � � � � � �� :� �, ' ,% � � - �. � f� � � . _ , ,,�� . _.1!� �,,� °� . ,,�,� �� . ,�� % - � � � � � � :t. � , �r�� .. �� i, / C :.� � -� ��,,` . ° f � � ' �' 1;� �.,,A� � � g � . � ;� � �, _ ,r � ,� � d► � ;�, °�.,�' - . � ��. �. � �,� � ,�,; � �. � N ,��°� ��TY,o� 1� Block 52 � � M011t1Cell0 City of Monticello MN � wSB ��_�� 1 inch = 80 feet � EDA:7/31/19 6. Consideration of Adoptin� Resolution #2019-06 recommendin� Citv Council call for a Public Hearing related to creation of Economic Development TIF District #1-40(JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: A manufacturing company has indicated interest in developing a new facility in Monticello. The proposed development concept is complicated and will require the creation of a new TIF District to assist in making the proj ect happen. The initial concept for the firm would involve construction of a manufacturing facility and the addition of approximately 60 jobs. The proposed development schedule would ideally focus on a 2019 construction start and as such, the EDA is being asked to move forward with the consideration of a resolution calling for the City Council to hold a public hearing in the near future on the potential creation of a new economic development TIF District. More information about the proposed development, including a proj ect summary and a TIF Application, will be provided to the EDA in the future. If the EDA approves the Resolution, an item related to the TIF District and public hearing would be brought to the City Council for consideration at the August 12, 2019 regular meeting. As can be seen in the attached TIF calendar, if all processes stay on track, a hearing could possibly be held as early as September 23, 2019. Al. STAFF IMPACT: The EDA attorney drafted the attached resolution. Numerous other staff will be involved in the TIF District creation process as it unfolds. They include: Northland Securities (Financial Advisory), City Finance Director, Community Development Director and Economic Development Manager. A2. BUDGET IMPACT: The cost to call for the public hearing involves the time of the consultants. The expected TIF application fee typically is used to pay for the consultant involvement in the process. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: L Motion to adopt resolution #2019-06 recommending the City Council call for a public hearing regarding the creation of a new economic development TIF District (#1-41). 2. Motion to deny adoption of Resolution #2019-06 recommending that the City Council call for a Public Hearing for the creation of a new economic development TIF District (#1-41). 3. Motion to table adoption of Resolution #2019-06 recommending the City Council call for a Public Hearing for the creation of a new economic development TIF District (#1-41). 4. Motion of other as determined by the EDA. EDA:7/31/19 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the EDA proceed per Alternative #1. The potential to add a new manufacturing facility with 60 well-paying jobs is dependent on the use of a new economic development TIF District as part of the financing structure. The proposed concept is also in line with the stated Comprehensive Plan goal of supporting quality j ob creation and quality manufacturing development proj ects. The development is on a fast track To allow the proj ect to meet the hoped-for timeline of a fa112019 start is the reason the resolution is presented to the EDA prior to receipt of a completed TIF application. An application has been provided to the developer and staff expect to receive it with the next two weeks from the developer. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a. Resolution #2019-06 b. Proposed Preliminary TIF District #1-41 Calendar CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REQUESTING A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-41 BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Commissioners (the `Board") of the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority (the "Authority") as follows: WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City") previously established its Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. 1(the "Redevelopment Project") and has previously created multiple tax increment financing districts within the Redevelopment Proj ect, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended (the "TIF Act"), in an effort to encourage the redevelopment of certain designated areas within the City; and WHEREAS, the City has transferred the administration and control of its tax increment financing districts to the Authority; and WHEREAS, the Authority recognizes an ongoing need to encourage economic development opportunities within the Redevelopment Proj ect; and WHEREAS, the Authority is proposing the creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-41 (the "TIF District"), an economic development district, within the Redevelopment Project, and the approval of a Tax Increment Financing Plan ("TIF Plan") for the TIF District, pursuant to and in accordance with Section 469.175 of the TIF Act, for the purpose of assisting the expansion of a manufacturing facility and fostering the creation of jobs within the City; and WHEREAS, the creation of tax increment financing districts must be approved by the City Council of the City after a duly noticed public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board as follows: The Authority hereby requests that the Council call for a public hearing to be held on September 23, 2019 to consider the proposed establishment of the TIF District and the adoption of a TIF Plan for the TIF District, and to cause notice of said public hearing to be given as required by law. 2. The Authority directs the Executive Director to transmit copies of the TIF Plan to the Planning Commission of the City and requests the Planning Commission's written opinion indicating whether the proposed TIF Plan is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, prior to the date of the public hearing. The Executive Director of the Authority is hereby directed to submit a copy of the TIF Plan to the Council for its approval. 593617v2MN190-101 4. The Authority directs the Executive Director to transmit the TIF Plan to Wright County and Independent School District No. 882 (Monticello Public Schools) not later than August 23, 2019. 5. Staff and consultants are authorized and directed to take all other steps necessary to prepare the TIF Plan and related documents and to undertake other actions necessary to bring the TIF Plan before the Council. Adopted by the Board of Commissioners of the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority this 24th day of July, 2019. President Attest: Executive Director 593617v2MN190-101 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Preliminary for Discussion Purposes Only City of Monticello Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. 1 Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-41 Economic Development TIF District Project ATDC4J Public Hearing on September 23 July 24 August 12 August 23 August 24 EDA request City Council call for hearing City Council calls for public hearing Last day for notice and TIF plan and fiscal implications to County and School District First day to publish hearing notice September 3 Planning Commission review September 9 Last day for notice to newspaper September 11 EDA approval of TIF, subject to Council approval September 12 Actual publication date September 23 Public hearing and establishment of TIF District October 7 Request certification by County October 7 Submit plan to State June 30, 2020 Certification of TIF District by this Date N otes: 1. Inspection of property and findings of substandard report was completed on December 9, 2015. 2. Denotes city council meeting dates. 3. Denotes EDA meeting dates 4. City publication dates need to be confirmed and added to calendar. NORTHLAND NUBLIC FINpNCE TIF for Economic Development 7/2/2019 EDA Agenda - 07/31/19 7. Consideration of Update re�ardin� Proposed EDA Bv-Laws Amendment Process establishin� a second monthlv re�ular meetin� (JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This item is provided as an update to the EDA regarding establishing a second monthly meeting. Staff plan to bring the ordinance changes to the EDA for consideration at the August 14, 2019 meeting. As was noted at the July 10, 2019 meeting, there are a number of projects that are in the pipeline at this time. To review and take appropriate action steps for relevant requests such as future TIF Districts, loan request, potential development agreement review, etc., the EDA should and will need to meet more often. In light of that view, staff feels that the it is easier and provides better communication flow and routine to have a second regular meeting than to call for numerous special meetings as the next year or two unfold. Accordingly, at the August 14, 2019 meeting the EDA will be asked to consider action to amend the relevant bylaws to formally establish a second meeting each month. As was previously discussed and ended up as the consensus thought, it would work best for most members to schedule the second meeting on the 4th Wednesday of the month as a morning meeting; 7:00 a.m. and to hold the meetings in the Academy room. Staff are planning to not video record the meetings but to audio-tape them at a minimum as required by State statute. Al. STAFF IMPACT: The staff impact involved in changing the EDA By-Laws to establish a second regular monthly regular meeting is minimal. A2. BUDGET IMPACT: Expenses related to establishing a second regular monthly EDA meeting are very minor and are part of staff duties. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. No motion needed; update only C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Information is provided as an update and precursor to a proposed By-Laws amendment that will be presented to the EDA for consideration at the August 14, 2019 meeting. D. SUPPORTING DATA: None EDA Agenda - 07/31/19 8. Consideration to appoint one representative to the 2040 Monticello Communitv Vision & Comprehensive Plan Advisorv Sub-Committee (JT/AS) The EDA is being asked to appoint a member to serve on the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Subcommittee. The sub-committee will meet regularly throughout the two year Comp Plan process to review and guide the consultants and staff through the various issues that arise in a planning process such as this. The Comprehensive Plan will reflect the community's vision and articulate the goals for how Monticello will take shape during in the future. Other bodies proposed for representation on the sub-committee include the City Council, Planning Commission, IEDC and Parks & Recreation Commission. Meeting dates and an information packet will be provided to the representative once the Council establishes the group. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to nominate Commissioner as the EDA representative to 2040 Monticello Community Vision & Comprehensive Plan Advisory Sub-Committee, pending Council approval of a sub-committee. 2. Motion of other. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff defers to the EDA on matters of appointment. D. SUPPORTING DATA: None EDA Agenda: 07/31/19 9. Economic Development Report (JT) A. Ausco Design and Graphics GMEF loan request update — to be provided at meeting B. Other