HRA Agenda 07-18-2005
.
.
.
AGENDA - SPECIAL MEETING
MONTICELLO HOlJSING ANn REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Monday, August 18,2005 - 6:00 p.m.
505 Walnut Street - Bridge Room
Commissioners:
Chair Darrin Lahr, Vice Chair Dan Frie, Steve Andrews, Brad Aarger, and Aill
Fair.
Council Liaison:
Wayne Mayer.
Staff: Rick Wolfsteller, Ollie Koropchak, and Angela Schumann.
I. Call to Order.
2. ^. Consideration to approve entering into a Preliminary Development Agreement between the
HR^ and Rocky Mountain Group, LLC.
B. Consideration to adopt a resolution requesting the city council call for a public hearing date on
the proposed modification to the Redevelopment Plan f()l' Central Monticello Redevelopment
Project No. I and the proposed establishment ofTIr District No. 1-36.
C. Consideration to adopt a resolution calling for a puhlic hearing on the proposed Business
Subsidy to Rocky Mountain Group LLC.
3.
Consideration to hire a firm for Redevelopment TIF District No. 1-35 inspection service.
4. Other Business.
Next HRA meeting - Wednesday, August 3, 2005.
5 Adjournment.
.
.
.
2A.
HRA Agenda - .July 18,2005
Consideration to approve enterim! into a Preliminarv Development A~reement
between the HRA and Roekv Mountain Group. LLC.
A. Referenee and baek1!:round:
In Septembcr 2004, prior to completion of the City transaction to purchase the Monticello
Business Centcr from Chadwick, the City began negotiations with the Dahlheimer's to retain
their distribution center within the City of Monticello and offered land for $.95 per square foot
based on the established criteria. Thereafter, did the price of the land raise to $1.00 per square
foot.
The Dahlheimer's have made a decision to stay within the City and are on a fast track to begin
construction in order to vacate their existing facility to accommodate the construction of the
Target Super Store.
The project consist of a 54,000 sq ft office/distribution center on approximately 8.64 acres of
land within the Monticello Business Center. The company currently employs 28 full-time
people at an average wage level of $20.21 per hour (base) without benefits. Within the next
two years, the company plans to hire an additional three people bringing the average wage level
to $19.90 per hour without benefits.
'fhe Dahlheimer's will purchase 5 acres of land at $.95 per square foot with no assessment,
trunk, and park fees. The additional land of 3.64 acres will be purchased at $2.15 (market
rate) and the City Administrator agreed to accept payment of the trunk fees for the additional
land at the current trunk fee rate.
Because of the time frame and after receipt of the $10,000 non-refundable deposit, WSB, Inc.
was advised to begin surveying in preparation of the plat. The site location is at the southeast
corner of Chelsea Road and School Blvd. Nelson Builders of Buffalo are the general
contractors.
B. Alternative Action:
I. A motion to approve entering into the Preliminary Development Agreement between
the lIRA and Rocky Mountain Group, LLC.
2. A motion to deny approval of entering into the Preliminary Development Agreement
between the !-IRA and Rocky Mountain Group, LLC.
.
HRA Agenda - .July 18,2005
3.
A motion to table any action.
c.
Recommendation:
To encourage Dahlheimer Distributing to stay within the City of Monticello, the job creation and
the ratio of the land to building are a little slim. It has been the recommendation ofthe City
Administrator, Economic Development Director, Council, and community to negotiate and
retain Dahlheimer within the City as the company has been a major contributor to the
community and community organizations.
D. Supportillf,! Data:
Offer, Preliminary Agreement, deposit, job and wage levels, site plan, and building elevations.
.
.
2
MONTICELW
"INVEST IN A CITY WITH A FUTURE"
MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
INTERST ATE 94 ACCESS
June 22, 2005
PREPARED FOR:
Dahlheimer Distributing Company, Inc.
107 Rocky Mountain Drivc
Monticello, MN 55362
Assumptions: At least 29 full-time jobs at an hourly wage of $22.00 without benefits.
Construction of at least a 54,600 sq ft distribution center at a minimum
asscssed value of $40. per square foot.
Execution of a Contract for Private Development.
Valuc:
.
YOUR COST:
- 5.00 acre site.
_ 1-94 location with direct access via Trunk l-lighway 25 and Chelsea Road
Wcst.
_ Nine-ton all-weathcr road constructed to 44 foot width curb to curb (Chelsea
Road West and School Blvd.)
~ Eight-inch water and sanitary sewcr service lines extended to adjacent lots
approximately every 400 feet.
- Storm sewer stub inlet pipes to undeveloped property.
~ Eight-foot wide bituminous pathway along south side of Chelsca Road West
and east side of School Blvd.
- General sitc grading.
- Public improvcments completcd Fall of 2005.
- NO assessments.
_ NO water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer trunk fees.
- NO park fees.
_ Recorded Declaration of Covenants to protect your investment.
$.95 per square foot or $206,910 for 5.00 acrcs.
$2.] 5 per square foot or $341,721 for 3.64 acres
Developer pays thc trunk fees at the current rate
at time of expansion.
MAXIMUM ADDITIONAL ACRES:
.
Ollie Koropchak
Economic Development Director
763-271-3208
Monticello City Hall, 505 Walnut Street, Suite I, Monticello, MN 55362-8831 . (763) 295-271 J . Fax: (763) 295-4404
Office of Public Works, 909 Golf Course Rd., Monticello, MN 55362 . (763) 295-3170. Fax: (763) 271-3272
.
.
.
Execution Copy
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Monticello Business Center)
THIS AGREEMENT, dated this ~ day of July, 2005 by and between the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota, a public body corporate and
politic under the laws of Minnesota ("Authority") and Rocky Mountain Group, LLC ("Developer"):
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Authority or the City of Monticello ("City") owns certain property within
the City of Monticello, which property is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto
("Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Developer has submitted a preliminary proposal (the "Proposal") for the
acquisition and development ofthe Property (the "Development"), which proposal is attached hereto
as Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has requested the Authority to explore the use of certain public
assistance to assist with the Development; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has determined that it is in the Authority's best interest that the
Developer be designated sole developer of the Property during the term of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Authority and the Developer are willing and desirous to undertake the
Development if (i) a satisfactory agreement can be reached regarding the Authority's commitment
for public costs necessary for the Development; (ii) satisfactory mortgage and equity financing, or
adequate cash resources for the Development can be secured by the Developer; and (iii) the
economic feasibility and soundness of the Development and other necessary preconditions have
been determined to the satisfaction of the parties; and
WHEREAS, the Authority is willing to evaluate the Development and work toward all
necessary agreements with the Developer if the Developer agrees to makes the nomefundable
deposit described herein, which is intended, in part, to reimburse the Authority for its costs if the
Development is abandoned by Developer or necessary agreements are not reached under the terms
ofthis Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual covenants and
obligations set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:
1. Negotiations between the parties shall proceed in an attempt to formulate a definitive
development contract and purchase agreement ("Contract for Private Development" or "Contract")
SJB-200895v2
MN190-41
.
.
.
based on the following:
(a) the Developer's Proposal, which shows the scope of the proposed
Development in its latest form as of the date of this Agreement, together with any changes
or modifications required by the Authority;
(b) a mutually satisfactory Contract to be negotiated and agreed upon III
accordance with negotiations contemplated by this Agreement;
(c) such documentation regarding economic feasibility of the Project as the
Authority may wish to undertake during the term of this Agreement; and
(d) other terms and conditions of this Agreement.
2. It is the intention of the parties that this Agreement: (a) documents the present
understanding and commitments of the parties; and (b) will lead to negotiation and execution of a
mutually satisfactory Contract for the Development prior to the termination date ofthis Agreement.
The Contract (together with any other agreements entered into between the parties hereto
contemporaneously therewith) when executed, will supersede all obligations of the parties
hereunder.
3.
During the term of this Agreement, the Developer shall:
(a) Submit to the Authority a design proposal to be approved by the Authority
showing the location, size, and nature of the proposed Development, including floor layouts,
renderings, elevations, and other graphic or written explanations of the Development. The
design proposal shall be accompanied by a proposed schedule for the starting and
completion of all phases of Development.
(b) Submit an over-all cost estimate for the design and construction of the
Development.
(c) Submit a time schedule for all phases of the Development.
(d) Undertake and obtain such other preliminary economic feasibility studies,
income and expense projections, and such other economic information as the Developer
may desire to further confirm the economic feasibility and soundness of the Development.
(e) Submit to the Authority the Developer's financing plan showing that the
proposed Development is financially feasible, and, to the extent Developer seeks public
financial assistance in any form (including reduced land cost, waiver of fees, and tax
increment financing), evidence that such assistance is reasonably necessary to make the
Development financially feasible.
(f) Furnish satisfactory, financial data to the Authority evidencing the
Developer's ability to undertake the Development.
SJB-200895v2
MNI90-4!
.
.
.
(g) Cooperate with the Authority and City in replatting of the Property as
described in Section 4.
4. During the term of this Agreement, the Authority agrees to:
(a) Commence the process necessary to undertake such public assistance as is
necessary pursuant to the terms of the Proposal, including without limitation
commencement of actions necessary to create a tax increment financing district that includes
the Property.
(b) Proceed to seek all necessary information with regard to the anticipated
public costs associated with the Development.
(c) Estimate the Authority's level and method of financial participation, if any,
in the Development and develop a financial plan for the Authority's participation.
(d) Either acquire the Property and grant to the Developer, or cause the City to
grant to the Developer, a right of access to the Property for purposes of environmental
and soil testing. Developer agrees to indemnify, save harmless, and defend the Authority
and City, their officers, and employees, from and against any and all claims, actions,
damages, liability and expense in connection with personal injury and/or damage to thc
Property arising from or out of any occurrence in, upon or at the Property caused by the
act or omission of the Developer in connection with Developer's entry on the Property.
Further, Developer shall not pennit any mechanics', materialmens' or other liens to stand
against the Property or any part thereof for work or materials furnished to Developer in
connection with the right of entry granted pursuant to this Agreement and Developer
grees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Authority and City from and against the
same.
(e) Commence replatting of the Property, or cause the City to commence such
replatting, in order to create the parcel described on Exhibit A.
5. It is expressly understood that execution ofthe Contract shall be subject to:
(a) A determination by the Authority in its sole discretion that its undertakings
are feasible based on (i) the projected tax increment revenues and any other revenues
designated by the Authority; (ii) the purposes and objectives of any tax increment,
development, or other plan created or proposed for the purpose of providing financial
assistance for the Development, including the detennination that such assistance is
reasonably necessary in order to make the Development possible; (iii) the best interests of
the Authority.
(b) A determination by the Developer that the Development is feasible and in
the best interests of the Developer.
6. This Agreement is effective for 60 days from the date hereof. After expiration ofthe
SJB-200895v2
MN190-41
.
term neither party shall have any obligation hereunder except as expressly set forth to the contrary
herein.
7. The Developer shall be solely responsible for all costs incurred by the Developer. In
addition, the Developer shall deposit with the Authority the amount of $10,000 upon execution of
this Agreement, which amount is nonrefundable in the event of termination of this Agreement. If a
Contract is executed before termination of this Agreement, the parties agree and understand that the
Contract will obligate the Developer to reimburse the Authority for Administrative Costs, as
hereafter defined, and that the deposit under this Agreement will be applied toward such Developer
obligation. For the purposes of this Agreement and the Contract, the term "Administrative Costs"
means out of pocket costs incurred by the Authority and City together with staff costs of the
Authority and City, all attributable to or incurred in connection with the negotiation and preparation
of this Agreement, the Contract, and other documents and agreements in connection with the
Development, including without limitation all costs in connection with replatting of the Property.
The parties further agree that Developer's reimbursement obligations under the Contract will be
subject to accounting and notice procedures to support the Administrative Costs.
.
8. The parties agree and understand that the final Contract is expected to provide for
conveyance of all or a portion of the Property from the Authority to the Developer or its assigns,
under terms agreed upon in the Contract. The parties currently anticipate that the Property will
be conveyed for a purchase price to be determined and subject to satisfaction of contingencies
specified in the Contract. As noted in Section 10 hereof, the Authority shall not sell, or negotiate
for the sale of, any portion of the Property to any other person or entity during the term of this
Agreement.
9. This Ab'Teement may be terminated upon 5 days written notice by a party to the
other party if:
(a) if, in the respective sole discretion of the Authority or the Developer, an
impasse has been reached in the negotiation or implementation of any material term or
condition of this Agreement or the Contract; or
(b) a party fails to perform any of it's obligations under this Agreement.
If either party terminates the Agreement under this Section 9, the Developer acknowledges
that it has no right, title or interest in the deposit made under Section 7 hereof.
.
10. During the term of this Agreement, the Authority agrees that it will not negotiate
or contract with any other party concerning the sale or development of the Property. The
Developer shall not assign or transfer its rights under this Agreement in full or in part, or enter
into any subcontracts to perform any of its obligations hereunder, without the prior written
consent of the Authority; provided that Authority consents to any assignment or transfer by
Developer to Commercial Partners Exchange Company, LLC and/or its nominee Rocky
Mountain Exchange Holding Company 25254, LLC. The Authority further agrees that the
permitted assignee of Developer may, upon execution of the Contract, substitute or replace the
SJB-200895v2
MN190-41
.
.
.
deposit (as provided in Section 7 above) in the same amount as deposited by Developer and
Authority will promptly deliver the deposit made by Developer to Rocky Mountain Group, LLC.
11. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such decision shall not affect the validity of any remaining portion of the Agreement.
12. In the event any covenant contained in this Agreement should be breached by one
party and subsequently waived by another party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular
breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent
breach.
13. Notice or demand or other communication between or among the parties shall be
sufficiently given if sent by mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested or delivered personally:
(a) As to the Authority: Housing and Redevelopment Authority
in and for the City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362-8822
Attn: Executive Director
(b)
As to the Developer: Rocky Mountain Group, LLC
PO Box 336
Monticello, MN 55362
Atin: Gregory Dahlheimer
With a copy to:
Moss & Barnett, a Professional Association
4800 Wells Fargo Center
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Attn: David Johnson
14. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts, all
of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
15. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of
the state of Minnesota. Any disputes, controversies, or claims arising out of this Agreement shall be
heard in the state or federal courts of Minnesota, and all parties to this Agreement waive any
objection to the jurisdiction of these courts, whether based on convenience or otherwise.
16. The Developer hereby agrees to protect, defend and hold the Authority, the City
and their officers, elected and appointed officials, employees, administrators, commissioners,
agents, and representatives harmless from and indemnified against any and all loss, cost, fines,
charges, damage and expenses, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys fees,
consultant and expert witness fees, and travel associated therewith, due to claims or demands of
any kind whatsoever caused by Developer or arising out of actions of Developer (and excluding
those caused by or arising out of the Authority's or City's own acts or conduct) with regard to (i)
SJI3-200895v2
MNI90-4!
.
.
.
the development, marketing, sale or leasing of all or any part of the Property, including, without
limitation, any claims for any lien imposed by law for services, labor or materials furnished to or
for the benefit of the Property, or (ii) any claim by the state of Minnesota or the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency or any other person pertaining to the violation of any permits, orders,
decrees or demands made by said persons or with regard to the presence of any pollutant,
contaminant or hazardous waste on the Property; and (iii) or by reason of the execution of this
Agreement or the performance of this Agreement. The Developer, and the Developer's
successors or assigns, agree to protect, defend and save the Authority, and its officers, agents,
and employees, harmless from all such claims, demands, damages, and causes of action and the
costs, disbursements, and expenses of defending the same, including but not limited to, attorneys
fees, consulting engineering services, and other technical, administrative or professional
assistance. This indemnity shall be continuing and shall survive the performance, termination or
cancellation of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a limitation of
or waiver by the Authority of any immunities, defenses, or other limitations on liability to which
the Authority is entitled by law, including but not limited to the maximum monetary limits on
liability established by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in
its name and behalf and its seal to be duly affixed hereto and the Developer has caused this
Agreement to be duly executed as ofthe day and year first above written.
ROCKY MOUNTAIN GROUP, LLC
~~~
~Pf~LI~~
~aJ.. p~
By
Its:
By
Its:
SJB-200895vl
MN190-41
.
.
.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
By
Its Chair
By
Its Executive Director
SJB-200895v2
MN190AI
.
1-~~ii~MJT~' ~~~~~-._--_.~---_.._,u._,. ~1~11671 -----~;~-.
I P.O, BOX 336 3081864690
MONTICELLO,MN 55362 Date '7-/3-06-
~:::;;~'-Lf@I/lkc'//cJ~ A_~ $ /t) CJtY? ~"
---2?~--:;'?f4'4.,s-'fftZ_~a _D,,,,O 61
II Well; Fargo Bank Minnesota, N.A
fT' ~ Monticello
. . · 40/Plnl'S" ~ t2
- Monrlc,=I!o MN 55 ~62
wwwwell''''oooom b~
Memo . ~~~. ~. __ . _ liP
.:-09-.0000 ~g-I: -iOB .B-~ ~ b gO"" 0 so {.7--
-~._~-_."'--""-,.-------......,--"'~-,-~,_._,,--"'-_.,~,._-,..,"___."'N_.'.~,___.--------,,,,~.,____,_~,,_.,,_,~~
.
07/06/2005 14:29 FAX 763 295 4947
JUL raS'05 "'1 : 58PM
DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING
l(lJ uu",
P.V.:l
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
El;onomic Developmllllt Director
Phone: 063) 271-3208
fax: ('63) 295-4404
ElfleH: o1l1eJcoroDcbaktalci.mont.l;cllo, mn.us
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
I
JOB AND WAGE LEV5L a EXISTING JOBS
I
Please indIcate number of current employees at ea.ch level and indicate the corresponding benefit leyel.
Number of Jobs
Hourlv Wue
~
Hourlv Value
ofVoluntal'.Y
Benefits (5)
Full-time
ran-time
(Excl. benefits)
.-
Less than $7.00
$7.00 to 57.99
I
s~ /Ifr lP1e-r 1ft') r
5~d+
$8.00 to $9.99
\e .Cl.. C\
$10.00 to $11.99
$"12.00 to $13.99
, '
it ').'.}.. ~ ~tt
$14.00 to $15.99
\\c. a..C\
$16.00 to$17,99
\q,q~
$18.00 to S 19,99
~"'.'
, '
.- '
~:,
t' -
..;l.~
.(: ;"5
J'). \ ~ .. 0 b:::'
\ \ q" , l,{ '\ ~
$20,00 to $21.99
/'6
?--~
I
131#91 f;//.S
&7 ;"..,.,(S -6""$
$22.00 and higher
fo'~
i ? ~.l.sgO
~
-
t/tjrbpY'
~OCJ.y. IJ '3 g~ 6 J :1 i ~-o
\\\r"\"\.a'l':L
.TOasWAOEEXISTINO.FO.RM
.
tt ~o . ~ \
~~~
MollaQll1lo City Hall.. 50S Walnut Stre=, Sllitlll, Mouticello, MN 55362-8831 .. (763) 295.2711 · :flu: (763) 2954404-
OfflceofPublic Worb, 909 Oolf' Course RO.. Mgll.yQQ11o, MN 55362.. (7153) a9S.3110' Pax: (763) 271-32.72
07/06/2005 14:29 FAX 763 295 4947
,.~
~-'-'-."--"
'"," ....,.. .', " ,."-
'''\\,I'/,{', 1\,0,.\,\"..
.J
.I
.
DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING
1{lJ00J
r
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Economi~ Developmenr. Dircotor
PhOJllll:
Fax:
Emall;
(763) 271.3208
(76.3) 29$-4404-
oUie.koronch!lkl&lcl.montlc:ellD. n'ln.tlS
MCJN1'JCBU.O
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
~
JOB AND WAGE LEVEL GO.ALS - NEW JOBS
~
Please indicate number of additiona.l employees at each level and indicate the corresponding benefit level. Number of
new jobs created over the first two years of relocation or cxpansion.
-
lob Creation
FuB-time
.
I
l
3
$
Hourly Wage
~
Hourlv Value
ofVoluntalY
Benefits (S) .
Part"time
(&xc!. benefits)
Less than $7.00
$7.00 to $7.99
$8.00 to $9.99
$] 0.00 to S 11.99
$12.00 to $13.99
$14.00 to $] 5.99
tl~_. ct~
$16,00 to $1,7.99
S I 8.00 to $19.99
/"'''''"-+3-
t.? d- ~
,. /) ,,-
L 0-"'":;
\or..e~~.
'$20.00 to $21,99
/jp $ r" /' ~ ..$ $22.00 and higher
r-,c. H7..-.I'GSio-.-S
",...
r; tl- 'j
.
3\
.TOBWAOBSNEW,PORM
.
~- -,.-.~._'-~-,,"""""",,---
:. Y t! a v f f/' 03"'(' c.:+ :0 """'-"
,~~ "'l~~..lS.~
~'~ fI>\~. <Act.q
Mon~o City ~ 50$ WalQUt Slnlet, Suire J. Monticello. MN SSS62.QS31 · (163) 295-2.711 . Fu: (763) 295-4404
Office of Public W~. 909 CoIf Course R.d.. Monticello, MN 55362 · (763) 295.3170 . Pax; (763) 2710.3272
~ 1
. eI
IS ~n.~
..
! Iii. ~
-, . ! i'll II
I is";1 It ! i
~ 9 i j
""i. , A;~ ~ II
I rl ! U ~ ffi~~ ~:\: ~!l! P !~~l
Ii ~ ~:I il ~Ef J ~ ~ Hil'. i&u
i" III 1111 ~~- AJ, IJ.o I
I,:>" :I:s8 --- ("i
I; III Gt.:i:...:lIlJ:: ~ Iii
1]!!~Llli ~ -I~~l ~~ !~J!! i
r: I.
, ;'11'1
I. ,,~!~..:
. "il..
,,1M
, t:jil
~ ~~~!1
~1 !j~;e'
~ !! 1<:
~ li~!~
;; Ii.l"
e -
I: II if :~:
:. :! i' 1
JIo ..I ~. ,
~ !l~i HI
"II! _....i,":'. t
i: Il'll 1
" ro Hhf! nl,
~ '\1" Iii
U i! lid~1 H:
~
I' I u I.. j, ij:
lfi ..-" - -
. I , .J', . i
! l'! ~fJ!11 ;. II
:. i ,;:~~~ - II
, ,1:1' ,'Id,' n I.
:l ~l ~ " dJ:iI ~ .; ....
~ ,- ,.' ;~'!!\ " II
.. '1 P' 'l""~ "
;:. I, t'lll "1,,1 Ii .'
:.:. ~~!..I. JI: 1;1' f !'
2 !. ilj ijjr "'l i!
~ 11 iil 111in~ ~ ;i
.
<!,','
~~:-'~/
.l?' ,
,;/'....
1/
//
}?
/
i__
^
/ '1
)
/
~~
.
I; ml I:
,
", --.. ::t.:I:
~ i~i1 il
~ I 'I'
~ . 11 ;1
. ,M: Ir;
t
~(F ~:
..;;1=
.,I- ~
/
..-
~.-
~.-
/'
.-"'
~.
. ,
""
"I
.-I
,
\. .
\ "
\
, '~
\",
\
\ -
\ "
m
"';l
~~
.
,
\
\
.,
zoo III
S3INVdWOJ H3133HlS
9ZL099SZT9 YVd SC:OT NOW SO/ST/LO
S g
I" 1
~ ~
-l
!\. m
~
t{ g
z
s ~
10, 1
~ ~
-l
q m
~
~
t{ 0
z
~I
I
.
2B.
.
.
HRA Agenda - July 18,2005
Consideration to adopt a resolution requestine the eitv council call for a public hearine
date on the proposed modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello
Redevelopment Proiect No. t and the proposed establishment of TIF District No. 1-36.
A. Reference and backeround:
In the previous agenda item, the liRA approved entering into the Preliminary Development
Agreement with Rocky Mountain Group, LLC. That action authorized Ehlers, Kennedy &
Graven, and WSB to begin preparation of respective consultant work for the establishment of
TIF District No. 1-36, an Economic District; preparation of the Contract for Private
Development and Purchase Agreement; and the survey and re-plat of Lot I, Block 2, Otter
Creek Crossing.
The resolution for adoption requests the city council call for a public hearing date of September
12, 2005, for TIF District No. 1-36 and its plan.
B. Alternative action:
1.
Motion to adopt a resolution requesting the city council call for a public hearing date on
the proposed modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello
Redevelopment Project No.1 and the proposed establishment of TIF District No. 1-
36.
2. Motion to deny adoption of the said resolution.
3. Motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
The City Administrator and Economic Development Director recommend alternative
no.!.
D. Suvportine Data:
Schedule f()[ TIF District No. 1-36 and resolution for adoption.
-
PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE OF EVENTS
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AND THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
-
FOR THE MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.1
AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-36
(an economic development district)
AND THE AWARDING OF A BUSINESS SUBSIDY TO MOUNTAIN GROUP LLC
July 18,2005
-
.,
July 25, 2005
July 26, 2005
N/A*
August 1, 2005
.
Draft as of Julv 15. 2005
HRA considers entering into a Preliminary Development Agreement with
Mountain Group LLC.
HRA calls for public hearing on Business Subsidy Agreement.
HRA requests that the City Council call for a public hearing on the proposed
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment
Project No. I and the proposed establishment of Tax Increment Financing District
No. 1-36.
City Council calls for public hearing on the proposed Modification to the
Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No. ] and the
proposed establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-36.
Project information (property identification numbers and legal descriptions,
detailed project description, maps, but/for statement, and list of sources and uses of
funds) for drafting necessary documentation sent to Ehlers & Associates.
Project information submitted to the County Board for review of county road
impacts if necessary* (at least 45 days prior to public hearing). *The County
Board, by law, has 45 days to review the TIF Plan to determine if any county roads
will be impacted by the development. Because the City staff believes that the
proposed tax increment financing district wi II not require unplanned county road
improvements, the "I'IF Plan was not forwarded to the County Board 45 days prior
to the public hearing. The County Board, by law, has 45 days to review the TIF
Plan to determine if any county roads will be impacted by the development. Please
be aware that the County Board could claim that tax increment should be used for
county roads, cven after the public hearing.
Ehlers & Associates confirms with the City whether building permits have been
issued on the property to be included in TIF District No. ] -36.
e
EHLERS
PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE OF EVENTS - PAGE 2
.
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AND THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
FOR THE MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.1
AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-36
(an economic development)
AND THE AWARDING OF A BUSINESS SUBSIDY TO MOUNTAIN GROUP LLC
August 12, 200S
Fiscal/economic implications received by School Board Clerk and COllnty Auditor
(at least 30 days prior to public hearing). [Ehlers & Associates to fax & mail on
August 11 or 12. 2005.}
August 22, 200S
City Council approves final plat.
August 2S, 200S
Date of publication of HRA hearing notice for granting a business subsidy (at least
10 days but not more than 30 days prior to hearing). [Monticello Times puhlication
deadline, August 22, 20()5 - Ehlers & Associates to suhmit notice to new,\paper via
email on August 19. 2005. Kennedy & Graven to provide languagefc)r the notice
to Ehlers by August 17. 2()05.}
.
August 26, 200S Ehlers & Associatcs conducts internal revicw of Plans.
September 6, 200S Planning Commission reviews Plans.
September 7, 200S HRA holds public hearing at 6:00 P.M. on Business Subsidy Agreement with
Mountain Group LLC and approves Development Agreement with Mountain
Group LLC.
HRA considers the Plans and adopts a resolution approving the Plans.
September 1,2005 Date of publication of hearing notice and map (at least 10 days but not more than
30 days prior to hearing). [Monticello Times publication deadline, August 29, 2005
_ Ehlers & Associates to submit notice and map to new5paper via email on August
26, 2005.]
September 12, 200S City Council holds public hearing at 7:00 P.M. on a Modification to the
Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1 and the
establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-36, and passes resolution
approving the Plans. [Ehlers & Associates to email Council packet information to
the City on ,)'eptember 2, 2005.}
City Council approves Development Agreement with Mountain Group LLC.
.
By Decembcr 31, 200S
Ehlers & Associates files Plans with the MN Department of Revenue and the
Office of the State Auditor, and requests certification of the TIF District with
Wright County.
e
EHLERS
a. ASSU!.:I"'TE& 1"1(:
.
.
.
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF MONTICELLO
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MONTICELLO CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A MODIFICATION TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT NO.1 AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-36 (AN ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT) THEREIN AND THE ADOPTION OF A TAX
INCRMENT FINANACING PLAN THEREFOR.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the Monticello Housing and
Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA") as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City")
established Central Monticello Redevelopment Project No.1 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1799, inclusive, as amended, in an effort to encourage the
development and redevelopment of certain designated areas within the City; and
WHEREAS, the HRA is proposing a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello
Redevelopment Project No. I and the establishment of a Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment
Financing District No. ] -36 therein and the adoption of a Tax Inerement Financing Plan therefor, all
pursuant to, and in accordance with, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1799 and Sections
469.001 to 469.047, inclusive, as amended;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED hy the Board as follows:
I. The HRA hereby requests that the Council call for a public hearing on September 12, 2005, to
consider the proposed adoption of a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Central Monticello
Redevelopment Project No. I (the "Redevelopment Plan Modification") and the proposed adoption
of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-36,
an economic development district, (the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan are referred to
collectively herein as the "Plans") and cause notice of said public hearing to be given as required by
law.
2. The HRA directs the Executive Director to transmit copies of the Plans to the Planning Commission
of the City and requests the Planning Commission's written opinion indicating whether the proposed
Plans are in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, prior to the date of the public
hearing.
3. The Executive Director of the HRA is hereby directed to submit a copy of the Plans to the Council
for its approval.
4. The HRA directs the Executive Director to transmit the Plans to the county and the school district(s)
in which Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-36 is located not later than August 12,2005.
.
.
.
5. Staff and consultants are authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to prepare the Plans and
related documents and to undettake other actions necessary to bring the Plan before the Council.
Approved by the Board on July 18, 2005.
Chair
A TTESl':
-
...
.
.
2C.
liRA Agenda - July 18,2005
Consideration to adopt a resolution calline for the public hcarim!: on the proposed
Business Subsidy to Mountain Rockv Group, LLC.
A. Reference and backeround:
As you recall, Dahlheimer's will be paying cash up-front for the 8.64 acres ofland plus the
trunk fees due on the 3.84 acres at time of closing. The TIF District is being created to
reimburse the City for costs associated with the construction of the improvements, trunk fees
and grading. The Council recently authorized proceeding with a bond sale to finance public
improvement projects which included the Chelsea Road and School Blvd project. Because the
business is not being assessed for the public improvements associated with the five acres, job
and wage levels are part of the criteria, and the assistance is greater than $100,000; by Law a
public hearing must be held by the HRA on the Business Subsidy Agreement within the
Contract f()r Public Development.
The resolution simply is requesting the HRA call for a public hearing date of September 7,
2005, to hold such hearing.
B. Alternative Action:
1.
A motion to adopt a resolution calling fi)f the public hearing on the proposed Business
Subsidy to Mountain Rocky Group, LLC.
2. A motion to deny adoption of said resolution.
3. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
The City Administrator and Economic Development Director recommend alternative no. I.
D. Supportin~ Data:
Resolution for adoption.
.
.
.
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REOEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF MONTICELLO
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLlfTION NO.
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED
A WARDING OF BUSINESS SUBSIDY TO ROCKY MOUNTAIN GROUP, LLC.
BE IT RESOL.VED, by tile Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of tile Monticello Housing and
Redevelopment Authority (the "liRA") as f()lIows:
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995 (tile "Business Subsidy Act" or
"Act") was adopted in 1999 and governs the granting of business subsidies by units of governlnent; and
WIIEREAS, the HRA is a grantor within the meaning of the Act~ and
WHEREAS, a grantor is required to adopt a policy and a set of criteria for awarding business
subsidies only after a public hearing and prior to awarding any individual subsidy; and
WHEREAS, a grantor must also hold a public hearing before awarding any individual business
subsidy if the subsidy wi II exceed $100,000.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board as follows:
I.
The I--IRA shall meet on September 7, 2005, at approximately 6:00 P.M., to a hold public hearing to
consider a,varding a business subsidy to Rocky Mountain Group, LLC; and
2.
Staff and consultants arc authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to prepare the business
subsidy agreement and related documents.
^l
J.
Staff and consultants are authorized and directed to cause notice of the hearing to be published at
least once in the official newspaper of the City not later than 10 days prior to September 7, 2005, and
to place a copy of the proposed business subsidy agreement on t~le and to make such copy available
for inspection by the public.
^pproved by the Board on ./uly 18,2005.
Chair
ATTEST:
.
.
--
-
ARA Agenda - July 18,2005
3.
Consideration to hire a firm for Redevelopment TIF District No. 1-35 inspection
service.
A. Reference and hack!!round:
At the June 27 I IRA mecting, the commissioners adoptcd a resolution requesting the City
Council call for a public hcaring datc of August 22,2005, for approval of the establishmcnt of
TIF District No. 1-35 (Redevelopmcnt District) fix Landmark Square II. The commissioners
requested advisc from Attorney Steve Bubul as to qualifications of an acceptable inspection
servicc consultant.
In discussion with Barry Fluth and Brad Johnson on July 14, they informed me that they had
Pope Architect lined up to do the inspection. Thcy were asked to have Pope Architect prepare
a proposal feJr services for the TIRA to assess and compare to that of LHB at not-to~exceed
$5,400 plus reimbursement fces. The inspection needs to be completed for HRA review by
August 3 or a special HRA meeting. Additionally, Fluth will provide a new account for the "but
for" test.
Attached is a copy of the proposal from LHB, excerpts from the Statutes, and e-mails.
B.
Alternative recommendations:
1. A motion to hire the firm of LHB for inspection services as outlined in the proposal and
the developer paying full cost.
2. A motion to hire the firm of Pope Architects for inspection services as outlined in the
proposal and the developer paying full cost.
3. A motion to hire the firm ofLHB for inspection services as outlined in the proposal and
the BRA and developcr splitting the cost equally.
4. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
The HRA Chair, City Administrator, and Economic Development Director recommend
alternative no. 3 as this is consistent with the recommcndation of the HRA Attorney and
consultant and as a new statutory requirement allows the I IRA in the futurc to give a developer
a range of thc inspection costs. If Pope Architect were hired this does not guarantee the HRA
ARA Agenda - July 18,2005
Attorney wi II accept the report fc)r purpose of presenting the HRA
D. Supportin!! Data:
I.HB proposal, Statutes, and e-mails.
.
.
.
2
.
.
.
250 Third Avenue North, Suite 450
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
612.338.2029
Fax 612.338.2088
www.LHI3corp.com
June 21,2005
Ollie Koropchak
Economic Development Director
City of Monticcllo
505 Walnut Avcnue, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
PROPOSAL FOR TIF DISTRICT 1-35 INSPECTION SERVICES
Thank you for the opportun ity to submit a proposal for the City of Monticello TIF District 1-
35 inspection services. LHB is a full-service architecture and engineering firm with 145
employees in our Minneapolis and Duluth offices.
Our Community Design studio has extensive experience working with local governments on
their planning, design, architectural and engineering needs. Having been personally
involved as a City Council President, I understand how cities function and the importance of
maintaining the support of the city council and community throughout the process.
PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE
LHB has significant experience with a varicty of inspection and facil ity assessment projects,
including the analysis of over 30 TIF districts in the past four years. Examples include:
City of Columbia Heights TIF inspection services
City of S1. Paul TIF inspection serviccs
City of S1. Anthony Village, NW Quadrant TIF inspection services
City of S1. Louis Park TIF District inspection services
City of Mound TIF District" 1-2" inspection scrvices
City of Osseo TIF inspection services
City of New Richmond, WI TIF inspection services
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system facility assessments
State of Minnesota facility assessments
Property Condition assessments for the St. Paul Depaliment of Planning and Economic
Development (Franklin/Emerald Neighborhood)
Condition survey of every property along the 1-394 corridor for the Minnesota Department
of Transportation, prior to and during the construction of 1-394
ADA compliance assessments for the State of Minnesota (82 buildings in 1992)
Duluth, MN
Minneapolis. MN
Proposal for Monticello TIF District 1-35 Inspection Services
Page 2 of 6
June 21,2005
.
METHODOLOGY
A. Survey the proposed TIF district to determine if it meets the "Coverage
Test":
1. To meet the coverage test, parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the
district must be "occupied" by buildings, streets, utilities, or paved or gravel
parking lots.
2. A parcel is not considered "occupied" unless at least 15% of its total area
contains improvements.
B. Make the following attempts to inspect the interior of each building in the
district:
1. Obtain property owner's consent for inspection.
2. Document all property conditions relative to Minnesota Statutes Section
469.174 Subdivision 10.
.
C. Determine replacement eost for each building:
I. Replacement cost is the cost of constructing a new structure of the same
square footage and typc on the site.
2. A base cost will be calculated by cstablishing the building class, type and
construction qual ity.
3. Idcntify amenities, which increase the value of the building over the
'standard construction quality level.
4. Rcview building permits for cach parcel.
5. The base cost and cost of amenities will be totaled to determine the
rcplaeement cost for thc property.
D. Determine the existing condition of each building:
I. "Structurally substandard shall mean containing defects in structural
elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities,
light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and
condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or
deficiencics are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial
renovation or clearance."
E. Determine Code Deficiencies in each building:
1. Determine technical conditions, which are not 111 compliancc with current
building code applicable to new buildings.
2. Determine costs to correct identified deficiencies.
3. Compare cost of deficiency corrcctions to replacement value of building.
4. A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with building
code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy thc building
code at a cost of less than 15 percent of replacement cost.
.
Proposal for Monticello TIF District J -35 Inspection Services
Page 3 of6
June 21, 2005
.
F. Prepare a final report outlining findings:
I. Prepare a tabulated spreadsheet of the entire proposed district properties
conditions.
2. Prepare a written narrative analysis of the redevelopment district describing
why the property within the district does or does not meet the criteria as
"structurally substandard" as established in Minnesota Statutes Section
469.174, subdivision 10.
3. Deliver final reports to City staff.
ASSUMPTIONS
Preliminary boundaries of the prospective district include three (3) parcels that will be
analyzed for the coveragc test. If the coverage test is met, three (3) buildings will rcquire an
intcrior inspection.
.
The City of Monticello will provide the following:
· A list of building permits issued for the parcels in the last three years.
· ^ letter to the property owners authorizing and explaining thc inspections.
· Other documents as may be required to assess the condition of the buildings and
determine coveragc tests, including maps and GIS information with specific
parcel data.
· ^ parcel map of the arca to be inspected.
· ^ list of all parcels including owner, current known business or resident name
and address.
COST AND FEE STRUCTURE
Wc propose to work on an hourly basis with the following key staff:
Project Principal, Michael Fischcr (TIF analysis)
Project Managcr/Architect/Inspector, Jerry Putnam
Project Administrator (Property owner contacts, documentation)
Techn ician Assistance (if necessary)
$152/hour
$110/hour
$51/hoLlr
$90/hour
We will work on an hourly basis with a not-to-exceed fee budget of $5,400 plus
reimbursable expenses for the inspection of the 3 structures and a full report outlining the
findings for the 'fIF district.
SCHEDULE
Upon acceptance of this proposal, we are able to begin work within two weeks. Assuming
full cooperation of the property owners and the City, we will completc the final report within
45 days of the start date.
....
~
Proposal for Monticello TIF District 1-35 Inspection Services
Page 4 of6
June 21,2005
.
TERMS
We propose using an AlA Document B727 (Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner
and Architect for Special Services). The contract will include "limit of liability" language
(equal to our fee or $10,000 maximum, whichever is greater). In addition, the contract will
contain language negotiated with the city indicating that LHB and the City, acting through
the City's legal representative, will, to the fullest reasonable extent, cooperate and coordinate
efforts in preparing responses to any third party challenges to the inspections.
TEAM CREDENTIALS
Michael A. Fischer, AlA - Project Principal/TIF Ana!.yst
Michael has nineteen years of architectural experience as project principal, projcct
manager, project designer and project architect on municipal planning, educational,
commercial and governmental projects. He is a Vice President at LHB and currently
leads the Community Design Group in LHB' s Minneapolis office. Michael completed a
two-year Bush Fellowship at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1999, earning
Masters Degrees in City Planning and Real Estate Development. Michacl has servcd on
over 3S committees, boards and community task forces, including a term as City Council
President and Chair of the Duluth/Superior Metropolitan Planning organization. He is
currently a Planning Commissioner in Edina, Minnesota. He was one of four architccts in
the country to receive the National "Young Architects Citation" from the American
Institute of Architects in 1997.
.
Jerry A. Putnam, AlA, FCSl, CCS - Project Manager/Inspector
Jerry is a senior architect in LHB's Minneapolis oiTice with twenty-five years of
experience in all phases of the architectural process, from pre-design through construction
administration, including specialty consulting in investigations for buildings, building
condition surveys, TIF inspections, code reviews, estimating and specification writing.
Jerry is an active member in the Construction Specification Institutc (CSI). lIe has been
recognized as a Fellow of CSI for his dedication and leadership in the construction
industry. In addition to being past president of the largest CSI chapter in the United
States, he serves on many local, regional and national committees, and has given
presentations at many specification writing classes and workshops.
Dennis Swartz, CSI - Inspector
Dennis has over 34 years of experience as a project architect and specifier, working for
clients throughout the United States and around the World. He is an active member of the
Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) and is the former Treasurer of the
Minneapolis-St. Paul chapter.
.
Todd Koneczny, AlA - Project Manager/Inspector
Todd has twenty-one years of design and construction experience in a wide variety of
building projects for municipal, institutional, healthcare and commercial clients. His
responsibilities often include project management, architectural design, construction
document preparation and construction administration. His seventeen years of design
experience and four years of construction management experience has given him the
ability to understand all aspects of building systems and components.
Proposal for Monticello TIF District 1-35 Inspection Services
Page 5 of6
June 21,2005
.
Bruce Chalupsky, ASLA - GIS/Coverage Analysis
Bruce has more than ten years of experience as a landscape architect/planner.
During this time, he has specialized on site master planning for public and private
clients. Bruce has also pursued specialization in Geographic Information Services
(GIS) and is proficient in the administration of community data and the production of
maps for a variety of needs.
REFERENCES
Stephen J. Bubul
Kennedy & Graven
612/337-9300
Mary L. Ippel
Briggs and Morgan
651/223-6620
NEXT S1'EP
Upon acceptance of this proposal, we will draft an AlA Owner/Architect agreement for your
revIew.
.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit a proposal for your project. Please contact me at
(612) 752-6920 if you have any questions.
LHB INC.
~~
MICHAEL A. FISCHER, AlA
DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY DESIGN GROUP
c: TJK/MAF/JAP
C:\Comrnllnily Design Slllc\io\l'roposal Lctlcrs\Monliccllo TIP Dislricl 1-.15 6-21-05.c\oc
.
11(J4
) la or parl of
-j' property tax re-
lie commi ssioner
I tax reductions it
he governmental
J': city to provide
-thcr information
It1bUrSemellls by
lunt of tax credit
I to the commis-
Ir tax reductions
>:imum amounts
ficates issued by
"ined in this sec-
ferent meaning.
ICing authority
,ment authority
uant to sections
111t to sections
2 to 469.165; a
'lJeSections
e 'suant to
I area or with a
:rs of a port au-
_ notes, interim
ion 469.178 or
lds issued pur-
the amount by
[ended subdis-
ally taxable as
exempt entity.
, "captured net
et tax capacity
listrict overly-
I or board of a
zed, and with
icipaJity" has
ct undeltaken
dertaken pur-
y.
(b), "original
ax increment
s assessment
,ment financ-
,.ditor by
I ]()5
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 4(,9.174
r
.Iune 30. The original tax capacity of districts for which requests are filed after .Iune 30 has an
original tax capacity based on the current assessment year. In any case, the original tax capac-
ity must be determined together with subsequent adjustments as set forth in section 469. I 77,
subdivisions I and 4. In determining the original net tax capacity the net tax capacity of real
propelty exempt from taxation at the time of the request shall be zero, except forreal property
which is tax exempt by reason of public ownership by the requesting authority and which has
been publicly owned for less than one year prior to the date of the request for celtification, in
which event the net tax capacity of the property shall be the net tax capacity as most recently
determined by the commissioner of revenue.
(b) The original net tax capacity of any designated hazardous substance site or hazard-
ous substance subdistrict shall be detennined as of the date the authority certifies to the
county auditor that the authority has entered a redevelopment or other agreement for the re-
moval actions or remedial actions specified in a development response action plan, or other-
wise provided funds to finance the development response action plan. The original net tax
capacity equals (i) the net tax capacity of/he parcel or parcels in the site or subdistrict, as most
recently determined by the commissioner ofrevenue, less (ii) the estimated costs of the re-
moval actions and remedial actions as specified in a development response action plan to be
undertaken with respect to the parcel or parcels, (iii) but not less than zero.
(c) The original net tax capacity of a hazardous substance site Of subdistrict shall be in-
creased by the amount by which it was reduced pursuant to paragraph (b), clause (ii), upon
certification by the municipality that the cost of the removal and remedial actions specified in
the development response action plan, except for long-term monitoring and similar activi-
ties, have been paid or reimbursed.
(d) For purposes of this subdivision, "real property" shall include any property normal-
ly taxable as personal property by reason of its location on or over publicly owned propeliy.
Subd. 8. Project. "Project" means a project as described in section 469. I 42; an indus-
trial deveJopmentdistrict as described in section 469.058, subdivision 1; an economic devel-
opment district as described in section 469. 101, subdivision 1; a project as defined in section
469.002, subdivision 12; a development district as defined in section 469.125. subdivision 9,
or any special law; or a project as defined in section 469.153, subdivision 2, paragraph (a),
(b), or (c).
Subd. 9. Tax increment financing district. "Tax increment financing district" or "dis-
trict" means a contiguous or noncontiguous geographic area within a project delineated in
the tax increment financing plan, as provided by section 469. I 75, subdivision 1, for the pur-
pose of financing redevelopment, mined underground space development, housing or eco-
nomic development in municipalities through the use of tax increment generated from thc
captured net tax capacity in the tax increment financing district.
Subd. 10. Redevelopment district. (a) "Redevelopment district" means a type of tax
increment financing district consisting of a project, or pOltions of a project, within which the
authority finds by resolution that one of the following conditions, reasonably distributed
throughout the district, exists:
(I) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings,
streets, utilities, or other improvements and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not includ-
ing outbuildings, are stmcturally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or
clearance; or
(2) the property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infre-
quently used rail yards, rail storage facilities, or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way.
(b) For purposes of this subdivision, "stmcturalIy substandard" shall mean containing
defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facili-
ties, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of
interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total sig-
nificance to justify substantial renovation or clearance.
(c) A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building
code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of
less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new stmcture of the same square footage and
type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally
~
~ \>.~ ~
~
.
.
\ 106
4(,').174 ECONOMIC D~~VELOl'MENT
suhstandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence,
such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or
"mctuml ",pai", m othet "mil", ,"iahle "ideoee, The munidpallty may oot make ,uch a
determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an indepen-
deot, "pe,t appmi,"1 p",pa",d of the "," of ",pai, and ",habilitation 01 the boilding Ao in-
",iot ; n'pectioo of the pmpeny i, oot o''1ui"d, if the munid pality fmd, that (I) the munici-
paty 0' authori ty i; unahk to gaio aCO'" to the pmperty aftc' u,ing i" b"teffm" to obtaio
p"'mi,,ioo fmm the pill'ty th" own' 0' conttob the ptoperty; aod (2) the" ;dence oth"wi"
;upport; a rea"mable cood",ioo that the building" "mctumlly ,ub"andan!, I"m' of "i-
denee that support such a conclusion include recent fire or police inspections, on-site proper-
ty ta' appmi,"l, ot hou,ing i n'pect;on" "t"io, ev ideoce of deterimation, 0' oth" ,imilm
reliable evidence. Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspec-
tion w.s oot cooducted mu" be made and ",tained und" ;ection 469,175, ;ubdi vi,ion 3,
clause (I).
(d) A parcel is deemed to be occupied by a structura\1y substandard building for pur-
poses of the finding under paragraph (a) if all of the following conditions are met:
( I ) the pm'" w"' occupied by ",ub",ndmd huilding within th"e yeo" ofthe filing 0'
the request for certification of the parcel as part of the district with the county auditor;
I2l the ,ub"andmd build ing w"' demnll,hed onemoved by the ,uthority 0' the demoli-
tion m ",moval w"' fi na"ed by the authmity ot w"' done by a develOP" uod" , develop-
ment agreement with the authority;
(3) the authotity 'ound by ",olution befote the demolition ot temovol that the panoel
was occupied by a structural1y substandard building and that after demolition and clearance
the authority intended to include the parcel within a district; and
(4] upon filing the tequ"t fot cenifieation of the taX capacity u' the pmeel " pm! of a
di,triet, the authOlity notifte' the county auditOl that the original tax capacity of the pm'"
must be adjusted as provided by section 469.177, subdivision \, paragraph (h).
(c) F 0' pu'1'o'" ofthi' ,ubd ivi, ion, a pteccl ;, not occupied by boilding', ,tr"", utili-
ties, or other improvements unless I S percent of the area of the parcel contains improve-
mentS.
(f1 Foe di,oid' eon;i,ting of tWO 0' more nonwoti guou' a""', "eh mea mu" qual ify
"' a tedovelopment di,trid uud" pmagmph (a) to be induded in the di"rid, and the enti"
area of the district must satisfy paragraph (a).
Subd, lOa Renewal and ,-enovation di,trict, (a) "Renewal and tenev"ion di,t,ict"
mean' a type of tax i nctement fi nanci og di,triet con,;"ing of a ptoj"t, m pottion' of a ptoj-
ect, within which the authority finds by resolution that:
(I I(i) p""l, eoo,;"iog ono p""nt of the "" of the di,,,ict a" occupied by boild-
ing', ,tr"'" uti litie;, ot oth" impmvomeo",; (Ii) 20 peteent 0' the buildi ng' are ,tmdurnlly
substandard; and Oii) 30 percent of the other buildings require substantial renovation or
clearance to remove existing conditions such as: inadequate street layout, incompatible uses
ot land u" telatioo,h;p', ovo,,,owding of building' on the land, """ivo dwelling uoil
den,ity, ob,nlete boildiog' not ,uitable fm imptovement m conv",ion, ot oth" identified
hazards to the health, safety, and general well-being of the community; and
(2) thc conditions described in clause (I) are reasonably distributed throughout the geo-
graphic arc a of the district.
(b) FOl potpO'" of detenoio; np wheth" " build ing ;, "metotally ,ub,taod"d, wheth"
pteccl; ate ocoupied hy building' 0' oth" imptoVOmen"" ot wbeth" nooeonti,uou, ate"
qualify, the provisions of subdivision l(), paragraphS (b), (c), and (eI) apply.
Suhd. 11. Housing district. "Housing district" means a type of tax increment financing
di",id which con,i,t; of a p",jeet, '" a ponioo of a ptojcet, iotended fot oecopancy, in pmt,
by pet"m' nt fami lie; 0 flow and modetate income, "defi ned in ch"pt" 462A, Title 1I ofthe
N "tion" I Hou'; ng Aet of 19'4, tbe National HOH;i og Aet of 1959, the U oited State' H ou,iog
Act of 1937, ax "mended, Titk V of the Hou,i og Act of 1949, "' "meoded, "ny othe! ,imilm
p,,,ent m [c,tote fed"al, ,tate, ot monicipa'leg;,'ation, ot the ",gulation, ptomulgated un-
d,,"o y or tbo" "ct" A p",j"t doe; oot quali fy und" th" ,obdi vi;ion if the 'a;' mteket v,uue
of the impowem,nt' which "", ,"n,t,ueted 'm ",mm"cial u'" '" fo, u,,, oth" than low
.,
I \()7
and moderate income hOll
of the planned improveme
the improvements may bt
other appropriate. methm
Subd. 12. ECOOOlUil
type of taX increment flll'
not meeting the requiren
renovation district, soils
or housing district, but \
(I) it will discoura
tions to another state or
(2) it will result in
(3) it will result ir
Subd. 13. Mined
spaee development elis
project, or portions 0\
ground space pursuan
Subd. 14. Ad:mi
tures of an authority 0
tractors or others pro'
services, directly con'
relocation benefits p,
the distri.ct, or amour
issued pursuant to s(
services provided b~
ment consultants.
Subd.ls.Pare
tion of the district 8
Subd. \ 6. J)e~
site" means any p,
county auditor that
ing for the remova
plan or the authori
ments, to finance
amendment may t
approval of the de
ofthe municipaJit
opment action re:
Subd. 17. D
means a plan or '
submitted to the
posal are approv
to protect the p\"
development ac
within 60 days;
sioner shall noli
30 days after th
sons for rejecti
Subd. \8.
dial action," .-
meanings give
\ \ 5C.02.
Subd. \9
crement final'
authority fine
~ ~o- . -- .
Ollie Koropchak
. From: BUbul, Stephen J [sbubul@Kennedy-Graven.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 28,20059:00 AM
To: Ollie Koropchak; Susan Landrum; Mark Ruff
Subject: RE: TIF District No 1-35
I did speak with Barry's attorney yesterday and explained why we think a full inspection is needed. (He wanted to
just have Barry waive any claims, but that doesn't suffice.) If you have more detailed information about the
Landmark Square II project, please send my way (e.g., description of development, map of the parcels involved,
etc.)
-----Original Message-----
From: Ollie Koropchak [mailto:Ollie.Koropchak@ci.monticello.mn.us]
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 8: 15 AM
To: Susan Landrum; Mark Ruff; Bubul, Stephen J.
Subject: TIF District No. 1-35
Barry Fluth was in yesterday and talked to the Planning Depart. The HRA last night approved a
resolution requesting the Council call for a public hearing on August 22,2005 for establishment of TIF
District No. 1-35 (Redevelopment District) for Landmark Square II. I'll get you info after site review this
morning. Susan I need the resolution for execution. Steve, Barry is going to call you about the need and
who for inspection and report The HRA advised him to do so Got quick TIF program, how are numbers
coming Mark? Council opened and continued public hearing for 1-34 and Mike Fischer emailed revised
info for report prior to HRA meeting and HRA approved that respective resolution Ollie
.
.
6/28/2005
. at>.... I VI I
Ollie Koropchak
. From: Bubul, Stephen J [sbubul@Kennedy-Graven.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 2:09 PM
To: Ollie Koropchak
Cc: Mark Ruff; Rick Wolfsteller
Subject: RE: question for attorney
Keep in mind that the HRA will engage the inspector, not the developer (even though the developer will be
required to pay the cost)
I wouldn't say categorically that any of these types should or should not do the inspection-it depends on that
person's experience, knowledge and training But architects and engineers are the professionals who have the
most qualifications to do the study. It requires detailed knowledge of the state building code, construction
practices and costs, the statutory standards and the case law that has interpreted those standards A handful of
specialists in the state meet these qualifications now Others could learn but would need to be educated
.
mnOriginal Messagenm
From: Ollie Koropchak [mailto:Ollie.Koropchak@cLmonticello.mn.us]
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 1:35 PM
To: Bubul, Stephen J.
Cc: Mark Ruff; Rick Wolfsteller
Subject: FW: question for attorney
Importance: High
From: Barry F/uth [mailto:barryfluth@charter.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 12:57 PM
To: Ollie Koropchak
Subject: question for attorney
Hi Ollie,
Please contact Steve Bubul and find out from him who the HRA will accept to do the inspection of
the houses to determine if the area meets the qualifications for a redevelopment district.
Which of these will be ok with them:
1. Attorney
2. Engineer
3. Building Inspector
4. Architect
5. Home inspector (ASHI)
6. List other types of approved services
Thank you. Please get back to me ASAP so I can continue to pursue this.
-
Barry Fluth
6/28/2005