EDA Agenda 12-14-2011EDA MEETING
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
6:00 p.m.
Mississippi Room - 505 Walnut Street, Monticello, MN
Commissioners: President Bill Demeules, Vice President Bill Tapper, Treasurer Tracy Hinz, Matt Frie,
Bruce Hamond, and Council members Tom Perrault and Brian Stumpf
Staff: Executive Director Megan Bamett - Livgard, Finance Director Tom Kelly
1. Call to Order
2. Approve Meeting Minutes:
a. November 9, 2011 regular EDA meeting
3. Consideration of additional agenda items
4. Approval of EDA Invoices
5. Consideration of approving Resolution #2011 -116 recommending the City Council amend the
Monticello Comprehensive Plan adopting the Embracing Downtown Plan
6. Consideration of approving a $2,000 contribution to the Initiative Foundation
7. Consideration of authorizing a contract between the Monticello EDA and Jim McComb
to continue to work with potential business prospects (will be emailed on Monday)
8. Consideration of approving a 2012 EDA work plan
9. Director Report
10. Adjourn
MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA)
Wednesday, November 9, 2011- 6:00 p.m.
Commissioners Present: President Bill Demeules, Treasurer Bill Tapper, Tracy Hinz, Matt Frie,
Bruce Hamond, and Council Member Tom Perrault
Commissioners Absent: Brian Stumpf
Staff: Executive Director Megan Barnett - Livgard, Finance Director Tom Kelly
1. Call to Order
Bill Demeules called the meeting to order at 6 p.m.
2. Approve Meeting Minutes
a) October 12, 2011 Regular EDA Meeting
BILL TAPPER MOVED TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 12, 2011 REGULAR EDA
MEETING MINUTES. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT.
MOTION CARRIED 6 -0.
b) October 12, 2011 Workshop with MDBA
BILL TAPPER MOVED TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 12, 2011 EDA
WORKSHOP WITH MDBA MINUTES. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY TOM
PERRAULT. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0.
3. Consideration of additional agenda items
a) Further McComb Group involvement
4. Approval of EDA Invoices
Staff responded to several questions about invoices.
The cost of the McComb Group invoice was an authorized expenditure for initial retail
store contact work performed by McComb Group related to marketing the Embracing
Downtown Plan.
The Land Title invoice specified that the City would pay the cost of developing the
sewer /water trunk line. Suburban Manufacturing agreed to pay its own SAC & WAC
charges.
Economic Development Authority Minutes 11/09/11
Suburban Manufacturing agreed to split the additional cost of consultant fees with the City.
The $9,000 Ehlers expense is related to the creation of TIF District 1 -39. There will be
additional Kennedy & Graven invoices related to Suburban Manufacturing.
BILL TAPPER MOVED TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 2011 INVOICES. MOTION
WAS SECONDED BY TRACY HINZ. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0.
Matt Frie stated that the cost of mailing the Embracing Downtown Open House flyer was
money well spent in that it resulted in a great turnout to the public meeting.
5. Consideration of approving Resolution # 2011 -103 authorizing City staff to apply for
a redevelopment grant through DEED, allocating matching funds, and
recommending the City Council approve stated Resolution.
The City has the opportunity to apply for a state grant through the Department of
Employment and Economic Development (DEED) which would be considered an
implementation step to the Embracing Downtown Plan. The grant application could
include costs for acquisition, demolition, infrastructure improvements, road
improvements, ponding, interior abatement, and environmental infrastructure. The scope
of the work would involve purchasing the Montgomery Farms parcels, demolishing the
buildings, and making road improvements along Highway 25 and County Road 75.
Staff asked that the EDA approve a resolution to support moving forward with the grant, a
required 50% match and authorization to obtain quotes for demolition. Staff pointed out
that the cost of the property purchased would count toward the match. The amount of the
match would depend upon the cost of the total project submitted for the grant. The
resolution would then go before the City Council for approval. The grant application is due
January 3, 2011.
Tom Perrault pointed out that because only 50% of the grant funds available in general
fund proceeds are earmarked for outside the metro area there would only be one million
available. Staff indicated that there is also some bonding pool money available apart from
the grant. The City has the option of applying for the street improvement project and
requesting general fund acquisition costs.
Bruce Hamond suggested that it might be useful to seek the expertise of a grant specialist in
determining options available for the Embracing Downtown Plan. Staff agreed that there
will be a need for numerous consultants once the plan is approved and the implementation
phase gets underway.
BILL TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION #2011 -103 AUTHORIZING CITY
STAFF TO SUBMIT A REDEVELOPMENT GRANT TO DEED FOR POTENTIAL
ACQUISITION /DEMOLITON AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE
Economic Development Authority Minutes 11/09/11
SE CORNER OF HWY 25 AND COUNTY ROAD 75 AND IDENTIFYING SURPLUS
TIF FUNDS FOR THE FUNDING SOURCE FOR THE REQUIRED 50% LOCAL
MATCH. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY BRUCE HAMOND. MOTION CARRIED
6 -0.
6. Director Report
The Director Report was included as part of the agenda packet submitted to the EDA.
7. Consideration of items added to the agenda
a) Further McComb Group involvement
Bill Tapper expressed concern that the Embracing Downtown Project may lose
momentum once the contract with McComb Group is completed. He recommended
that the City hire Jim McComb on a retainer basis for two days per month to continue to
move the project through the implementation phase. Staff will request a quote for the
retainer and bring that information back to the EDA next month.
Tracy Hinz noted the importance that future contracts clearly specify the scope of tasks
to be addressed within the implementation phase.
8. Adjournment
BILL TAPPER MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 6:30 PM. TOM
PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0.
Recorder: Kerry T. Bum
Approved: December 14, 2011
Attest:
Megan Barnett - Livgard, Executive Director
J
4. Approval of Invoices:
a. Bullfrog Sweat Shop $1,120.00
*Update website & yearly web hosting fee
b. Wal -mart $27.18
*Items for MNCAR tradeshow
c. Law Bulletin $2,500
*MN Real Estate Industrial Conference
d. Architectural Consortium $4,062.40
*Downtown renderings
e. NAIOP $425.00
*Dues
f. Wilson Development Services $110.50
*Montgomery Farms (Total to date is $1,066.00)
g. WSB & Associates $9,184.96
*Otter Creek 411i Addition (Suburban Manufacturing)
h. Kennedy & Graven $5,686.75
*TIF District 1-39 & Monticello Pet Hospital
i. US Post Office $34.58
*(Downtown public meeting notice)
j. Wright County Partnership $25.00
*Monthly seminar
k. Megan Barnett $223.39
*Reimbursement for travel and tradeshows
1. Majirs Advertising $506.53
*Industry of the year event & DT Public Hearing Notice
m. Chris Lommel
*Industry of the Year photos
1
$180.35
V
_♦
o0
w w rn rn o 0
� U
w w
w w
w
w
A
A A
U
a O O
O N
N
U
O
O tNi.
w w
O
b
w
x x
w
w
r
7
ztv
0 c
c oo
c
0
0
0
o0
w w rn rn o 0
� U
U
a O O
O N
N
U
O
O tNi.
0
O
b
O
x x
r
7
ztv
O O O
O oo
OO
��
O
�
w
V
k-.
� Rnb
A%
r
N
CD
a
O
r r
z
f.
C
NI
H
O O
z
En
N
dC
e5
�
7
N3
�y
N
6.
CL
CIO0 CD
a
a
rL
rL
cn
ECD
N
r
w
z
tc
4-1
..
O
E;
c)
E
R
h
O
O
O
O
C6
C7,
ti
b
ti
d
V
G U
W
W
N N
N
N
.y
N
W
o0
w w rn rn o 0
� U
U
a O O
O N
N
U
O
O tNi.
O
Oo
O
7
O O
O O O
O oo
OO
OttC
�
7
2
K
�
w
V
k-.
� Rnb
A%
r
N
CD
a
7
w
V
� Rnb
A%
z
f.
C
NI
d
N N N N N N N N N
b
M w
dU)
n
O O
w w
w w
w
ON
IV
O O
O O
O
O
w
O
w w
O O
w w
w W
w
p
U U
A A
w
W
N
W
O
W W
O O
N
s.
O O
(=> O
O
O
O
O O
b
M w
dU)
n
O O
ro
IV
n
,C.
o
O O
Q
y y
^1
00
p
O
CD
w
N
.r
N
s.
O
91 Rp
as
vNi
CD
a
��
00
a
U
�
U
In
O
O O
W to
�O
U A
O
�
00
00
O
z
O
O O
<�
C.45 Col
CA CO)
��
yy
z
dt�
6�
°
(rob
N
N N
y
N
N N
Q
\
w'
CD
•�-•
t7l
°' d
w
y
o c'bCD
N
co
C
tsCD
o
07
u'
`»
o
0
0
o
ro
o
]
o
C.
N
rD
X
V1
C
a
'y
CY
d'
n
C
w
b0
Uj
(b
0
0
0
0
0
r
b
b
b
b
A
A
At
.P
A
t)
-j
b
n
O O
CN
n
,C.
O O
Q
O O
^1
00
p
O
CD
N
A A
�O O
w
N
.r
N
s.
O
b A
vNi
CD
00
a
U
iU
U
In
O
O O
W to
�O
U A
O
O
00
00
O
O
O
O O
b
n
n
,C.
Q
^1
CD
c
b
N
s.
O
r+
U
CD
a
b
s.
K
N�2 N N�2 �2 N�2 N N N N
b
W W
W W
W W W W W W W W
•�
A A
A A A.4? .4 L
O\
O, a\ ON ON Q, T O\ O\ ON ON a, a\ ON
O\
U U
U U
U U U U U LA U U U U U U U
U
.s
w w
lO lO
w w
p �o
w w w W w W w w w w w w w
.D �O �O �O �O �O �O �O �O �O �O �O �O
N
Z
.wn•.
p'
w w
w w
A A A.4 IL A A A A A •Q
W W w W w w W W w W W W w
.P
W
C
O O
O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
W w w w w w w w
C
crb
O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
b
O
a
n
0
0
N
O
N
x.11
O
ro
�
xx xx
td td
Gi Cd by by tb b� W tC by td td to by
R'Ru
nyny
RDS�£c�S�iPS�RDi�f�S�f�l�f�
O
a
.,
as
dd
aaaaaaaaaaaaa
�
0o
as
0000000000000
0
r�nr
�tmnt�ntnt'�tyntynr�nt
r�lntyntMm
w En w Ln w W Ln
r
C)
n �
�a
�z
00
0 m0
0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0
C
o
�
ti
n
d
O O O O O O fN•' '•Y
n n n n A• n
.~�-.
00000 000
o
d
b
y y ti n n C1 C1 C] CJ n
�D
y
w e'n ti YC 7C 6 7G' 7c' x' UOq
Q A
tlm
O G
R OOQ OOQ O�Q N N N N
p. a s
CD
`co
�' w V] G w G C m a
o
CL
a
N R
a s
p
<
o
o
as
cD cD rn a
o
o
0
ti
E
0
0
0
0
0
Ln
c
t7
t7
t7
t7
t7
rte-. .\..
O
U
(A U
U
In U
U
U U to U U U U U U U U U U
Vii
U
W
O O
O O
N N N N N N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N
N
O
d
y
r
.+ r-�
N
W
0 0
rn rn
0 0
a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
A
N N
m
�--• .-•
..... a... a a, 27NW"
N N N N N N N N N N N N
N
v
A A A A A A A A A A A A A
�D �D
o O
�O xD �O �D \D �O �O �O \O �O �O �O
O
O
J
A W
w 01
IJ
pp
N O
�1
0o
U
N N 0o J A �O A U U W
Q\ w A w N v w O\ U �O p w
O
O
O
O\ O O O\ O W A O N In O O �1
w
W
O
N
�1
A
O�
A C
O1 O
LVA
O
O to
O O
Lh
O
C C C" C O" Cl G O O U O
O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0
o0
00
Lh
a
9
"J
G
ro
N
Z
0
K
C/
b
0
>
/
@
/ �
e
ee
e
w
R
\
}
\
\ \
\
\
{
\
§
§
\
\ \
1p
m
�
Q
\ \
n
q
\
E
\
�
/
$�
/ \
Cl
CD
ƒ
H
\
}
/
?
/
\
§
§
\
\ \
}�
m
�
Q
\ \
n
q
\
E
\
�
/
$�
/ \
k
\
CD
ƒ
�.
2
7
\
\
\
.)
§
n
§
/ \
\
¢
8 8
_
Cl
k\
CD
-
CO)f
-
,
\§
4
{
® G
4
<
k
4
/
\
E
}
i
%
I
{
/
/
7
$
»
m
E
/
CD
#
T
$
$
%
-
- -
-
-
-
H
\
}
/
?
/
\
§
§
\
\ \
}�
�
b
n
H
}
/
?
/
E
�
}
}�
�
b
n
\
).
/
$�
R
k
\
CD
ƒ
�.
2
}
}�
n
�\
p
,
ƒ
�.
O
W
Q\
BLlllfrog Sweatshop
website development & design
PO Box 357
MONTICELLO, MN SS362 WWW.BVLLFROGSWEATSHOP.COM
PHONE # 612-801-6717 DAVE@BULLFROGSWEATSHOP.COM
BILL To
CITY OF MONTICELLO
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ATTN: MEGAN BARNETT
I
P.O.
DUE DATE 11/19/2011
TERMS DUE ON RECEIPT
HOSTING WEBSITE HOSTING
INCLUDES DOMAIN, 5 E-MAIL ADDRESSES UP 500MB TOTAL,
FTP MANAGEMENT, AND GOOGLE ANALYT[CS. 1YR
WEBSITE DESIGN UPDATES TO THE BUILDINGBUSINESSINMONTICELLO WEBSITE
BULLFROG SWEATSI-IOP LLC.
Pay online at:: https://i.pn.intLiit.com/p,iWK9rk
DATE 11/19/2011
INVOICE 60
11 200.001 200.00
3.51 80.001 280.00
SUBTOTAL $480.00
SALES TAX ((}.875%) $0.00
TOTAL $480.00
PAYMENTS/CREDITS $0,00
BALANCE DUE MOLM
ORBullfrog Sweatshop ° �' , INVOICE
website development &design �
DATE 11/19/2011
PO BOX 357
MONTICELLO, MN 55362 WWW.BULLFPOGSWEATSHOP.COM INVOICE 61
PHONE # 612-801-6717 DAVE@BULLFROGSWEATSHOP.COM
CITY OF MONTICELLO
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ATTN: MEGAN BARNETT
P.O.
DUE DATE
TERMS
11/19/2011
DESCRIPTION aw
WEBSITE DESIGN RE -SKIN THE BUILDINGBUSINESSINMONTICELLO WEBSITE TO
NEW DESIGN (NEW SLIDER, FOOTER, HEADER AND MINOR
LAYOUT CHANGES)
BULLFROG SWEATSHOP LLC.
AMOUNT
8 80.00 640.00
SUBTOTAL $640.00
SALES TAX (6.875%) $0.00
TOTAL $640.00
PAYMENTS/CREDITS $0.00
BALANCE DUE $640.00
walmart I� „
Save money. Live better.
Walmart
MANAGER .JOEL MEYER
( 763 ) 296 - 9800
ST# 3621 0P# 00002094 TE# 03 T # 04083
OM FAMILY PK 002200011479 F 4.98 X
OM FAMILY PK 0022000 1479 F 4.98 X
SM LOT HSKT 082342076831 6.00 X
TAX 1 6.SUBTO876 xTAL 11.37 vl
:
,,....i1TAL 2.1 .3
WALMART CRS T TEND
ACCOUNT # 4102
APPROVAL # 02001311
TERMINALS#OUMTO 00`0001. OCT 2 0 2011
i
CHANGE, DUE p,pp
ITEMS. SOLD 4
TC# 1102 2864 0343 2201 1129
IIIIIIIIIlllffllllllllllllNlllllfl1011lllllfll�lllllllllllilllllfilllifflillif fill
yawaa !s back for Electronics,
Toys, and Jewelru. 10/17/11-12/16/11
10/20/11 12:03:16
***CUSTOMER COPY***
1w IP/tt 1"A N C A V
2 0 2011
t,
i
Law Bulletin I IVAM
Publishing Company
415 NORTH STATE STREET
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60654
312.644.7800
BILL TO: 113723-00
CITY OF MONTICELLO
505 Walnut St Ste 1
Monticello MN 55362
Attn:ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
REAL ESTATE COMMUNICATIONS GROUP
INDEX PUBLISHING CORPORATION
SULLIVAN'S LAW DIRECTORIES
INVQICE
r
Invoice Date: 10/25/11
Invoice Number: 1481951
Salesperson: JOHNSON
Due Date: Upon Receipt
Fein; 36-1368690
SOLD TO: 113723-00
CITY OF MONTICELLO
505 Walnut: St Ste 1
Monticello MN 55362
Cust PO: None Order: 1087465 Qty Price Inv Amt
10/25/11 MN Industrial Real Estate Conference 1 EA 2,500.00 2,500.00
November 18, 2011
Note: Attn: Megan Barnett-Livgard
Payment Due On Or Before November 11, 2011
OCT 2 8 2011
TOTAL INVOICE AMOUNT 2,500,00
A Late Charge of 1.5% Per Month will be Added to All Open Balances on the 31st Day After the Invoice Date
II 11111111111111111111 IIIII IIIII 111
Original Copy - For Your Records
Page 1 of 1
November 6, 2011
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street
Monticello, MN 55362
Attn: Megan Barnet-Livgard
Project: Downtown Monticello renderings
Architectural Consortium LLC Project # 11-105501
Billing Period: October 1- October 31, 2011
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN SERVICES
Basic Services:
Colored rendering of Walnut Street
Colored rendering of River -oriented shopping
Architectural fees: $4,000.00
Reimbursable expenses:
Copies
$3.40
Sales tax @7.75 %
$4.00
Plotting
$50.00
Foam core board
$5.00
TOTAL DUE.
$4,062.40
Payment due within 30 days of receipt of invoice Thank You.
Payable to:
Architectural Consortium LLC
901 North Third Street, Suite 220
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Attn: Kathy Anderson
NA10P PO ChBox223353
yVA2
Chantilly, VA 20753-3353
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE wXID#25o20216 11/1/2011J7 216463
DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION TAXIDtf25-12021667
2012 Dues
216463
Megan Barnett
City of Monticello
505 West Walnut Street
Monticello, MN 55362-0000
Public Official Full Dues
Minnesota Chapter, NAIOP
NAIOP Legislative Support Voluntary Contribution
Voluntary Contribution NAIOP Research Foundation
MEMBERSHIP DUES WN DICE
b r,
�fitiiv
r
186.43 Nondeductible 1 425.00
95.00
48.00
l If you have questions, see the reverse side of this invoice or call (800) 456-4744. . Lrt* $568,00 1
Your membership is due to expire on December 31st, 2011. Please send payment today or t
renew online at www.naiop.org in order to avoid any interruption in member benefits- NOV — % 2011
E'
For Federal Income -Fox purposes. NAIOP dues are not deductible as o charitable contribution, however, most of the dues amount may be deductible as a business expense.That
portion of the dues amount related to expenses for lobbying Is not deductible for Federal Income Tax purposes — refer to the line item description for the non-deductible amount.
Included in the dues amount is a $25, one-year, subscription to Development magazine, which is fully deductible for Federal Income Tax purposes.
RETURN THIS STUB WITH PAYMENT TO: NAIOP, P.O. Box 223353, Chantilly, VA 20153-3353, or FAX credit card payment to: (703) 904-7942.
NAIOP11/1/2011 216463
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION
❑ Check here if name/address/phone/e-mail has changed
Complete changes on reverse side.
Megan Barnett
Economic Development Director
City of Monticello
505 West Walnut Street
Monticello, MN 55362-0000
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE ..................................
AMOUNT ENCLOSED ............................... . ..... .
PAYMENT: ❑Check (Enclosed)
❑ Personal Credit Card ❑ Corporate Credit Card ❑ VISA ❑ MC ❑ Amex
CARDHOLDER ADDRESS
CARD NO.
*0216463 00000568006359501*
R DATE 1IG "All R
1111111111111111VIII�IIIIIINI�IINI�Ila911VII�IIIIII�IIINIIIWIIVMVIYIAIIIIIIYnnV111VIIh11lAfllllll
Membership Number.
Please refer to your membership number in the upper right
hand corner of your Invoice If you need to contact NAIOP.
Corporate and Chapter Dues:
Corporate and chapter annual dues are combined as one line
Item. The portion represented by chapter dues will be sent
directly to your local chapter. Your dues include a $25
subscription to Devetopmentmagazine.The nondeductible
portion is described below.
Nondeductible:
The nondeductible amount shown on your invoice indicates
the portion of your corporate and chapter dues that is
nondeductible for federal income tax purposes. This repre-
sents the amount used for Iobbying.The remainder of your
dues may be deductible as ordinary business expenses.This
nondeductible feature is a result of the Budget Reconcilia-
tion Act of 1993.
Voluntary Contributions:
NAIOP Research Foundation. Support the Foundation's
mission of building better communities through practical
research and education that advances the quality and
makes evident the benefits of commercial real estate own-
ership and development. Foundation contributions are fully
tax deductible.
Other Items. Chapters may have additional voluntary con-
tributions. Contact your chapter with questions.
NAIOP Legislative Support Voluntary Contributions
(U.S. Members Only)
Legislative Issues Fund (LIF). Funds collected for LIF sup-
port NAIOP's legislative efforts. [JF contributions are fully tax
deductible.
NAIOP-PAC. NAIOP's political action committee collects per-
sonal donations from members to be used for contributing
money to candidates for federal ofBce.Thentributions
are not tax deductible.
Contributions to both LIF and NAIOP-PAC aoluntarY and
are not required for NAIOP membership.The contidbutidn
requested is only a suggested amount.You may contribute
more or less than that amount or make no contribution
whatsoever. NAIOP will not look upon with favor or disfavor
any member by reason of the amount of their contribution
or their decision not to contribute. If not contributing, or if
contributing an amount different than that shown on the
face of the statement, make the appropriate addition or
reduction from the total amount shown as due.
The following will apply to Legislative Support Contributions:
Corporations: Federal election law prohibits NAIOP-PAC from
accepting corporate funds. If your legislative support contri-
bution is paid with corporate funds, NAIOP will deposit it to
NAIOP's Legislative Issues Fund (LIF),
Personal checks or credit cards: If your legislative support
contribution is paid with a personal check or personal credit
card, NAIOP will deposit it to NAIOP-PAC.
LLCs or LLPs: If your legislative support contribution is paid
by a limited liability company (LLC) that has elected to be
taxed as a partnership, or a limited liability partnership (LLP),
it will be deposited to NAIOP-PAC. Federal Election Commis-
sion guidelines require that the contributor inform NAIOP
that they are eligible to make the contribution and to which
partners the contribution should be attributed, NAIOP will
use its best efforts to determine attribution. If NAIOP is un-
able to obtain the required information, or unless otherwise
notified, NAIOP will assume it Is an eligible contribution and
attribute the contribution to the partner who is a full member
of NAIOP.
If you have any questions regarding your invoice or
membership benefits contodt (800) 456-4144 or visit
www.nalop.org.
PLEASE INDICATE CHANGES BELOW
Name
Organization
Title
Address
Phone Fax
E-mail
NAIOP
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION
November 1, 2011
Dear NAIOP Member,
Renewing your membership in NAIOP is invaluable in 2012.
It's no secret that the last few years have been challenging for our industry. Political and economic uncertainties
have certainly changed the way you do business — and these uncertainties and challenges are the very reasons you
need the knowledge, connections and advocacy NAIOP provides.
You won't find a more valuable organization that protects your legislative interests and connects you directly with
the deals and players in your market, and across North America.
Like you, we are looking forward toward a period of economic growth for our industry. We are firm in our
commitment to providing our members valuable benefits, including:
Important Connections — Your chapter meetings are the best place to learn what's happening your market, and
more importantly, who is making it happen. NAIOP brings the industry together to share experiences and drive
the future of development. Open doors beyond your market by attending a NAIOP conference, joining a
National Forum or accessing online content,
Legislative Leadership — NAIOP invests time and resources into lobbying for legislation that benefits and
protects you. We work hard to ensure that your elected officials understand the vital role commercial real estate
plays in the economy, and your needs are being represented both in your state capital and on Capitol Hill. In
Canada, our chapters work diligently with the Provincial Governments.
Knowledge and Resources — Where else will you find free online Solutions Series briefiggs, top online resources
and valuable Research Foundation reports — all available at the click of your mouse? NAIOP foresees the
information our members need and delivers conference sessions, online courses and Webinars and more to
keep you ahead of the curve.
The time is right to renew your commitment to NAIOP and to leverage its resources to find new opportunities.
Your budgets are tight, and it's important that you carefully select the organizations that you'll join in 2012. With
NAIOP, your investment provides access to opportunities in your market and across a powerful chapter network.
1 look forward to welcoming you back to another year with NAIOP. Together we will drive the success of this
dynamic industry.
Sincerely,
Thomas J, Bisacquino
President and CEO
2201 Cooperative Way, Suite 300, Herndon, VA 20171-3034 Tel: (703) 904-7100 Fax: (703) 904-7942
UON
Invoice submitted to:
City of Monticello
Megan Barnett
505 Walnut Street
Monticello, MN 55362
Wilson Development Services, LLC
510 North Chestnut Street, Suite 200
Chaska, MN 55318
952.448.4630 800.448.4630
FEIN 26-1629971
Invoice Date Invoice Number Last Bill Dote
November 07, 2011 22600 10/12/2011
In Reference To: Acquisition & Relocation Services -Montgomery Farms
Professional Services
1�
NOV - 9 2011
Hrs/Rate Amount
Montgomery Farms
10/5/2011 DHW Time
0.30
33.00
Call Foster regarding appraisal status. Discuss comparables higher
110.00/hr
than expected. Call Megan, same.
Montgomery Farms
10/2712011 DHW Time
0.20
22.00
Call to Foster with message regarding meeting with city prior to EDA
110.00/hr
meeting.
Montgomery Farms
10/28/2011 DHW Time
0.30
33.00
Call Megan and Foster regarding set up meeting.
110.00/hr
Montgomery Farms
10/31/2011 MEF Time
0.10
7.50
Call to and from Foster regarding meeting time change,
75.00/hr
Montgomery Farms
MEF Time
0.20
15.00
October 1 to October 31 Consultant entries recorded to database for
75.00/hr
client/case history, status and file maintenance/backup.
Montgomery Farms
SUBTOTAL: [ 1.10 110.50]
City of Monticello Monticello -Montgomery Farms, Page 2
Hours Amount
For professional services rendered 1.10 $110.50
Amount
For professional services rendered 1.10 $110.50
Previous balance $955.50
10/12/2011 Payment -Thank You. Check No, 105808 ($450.50)
10/26/2011 Payment - Thank You. Check No. 106042 ($505.00)
Total payments and adjustments ($955.50)
Balance due $110.50
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 337-9300
October 21, 2011
Statement No. 104891
City of Monticello
Accounts Payable
505 Walnut Avenue, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
Through September 30, 2011
MN190-00101 General EDA Matters
I declare, under penalty of law, that this
account, claim or demand is just and correct
and that no of ' has been paid.
Signature of Claimant
Total Current Billing: 949.50
Page: 1
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
City of Monticello Minneapolis, MN 55402
September 30, 2011
MN 190-00101 General EDA Matters
Through September 30, 2011
For All Legal Services As Follows:
Hours
Amount
7/1/2011
SJB Phone call with M Barnett; review/revise P.D.A. and email
0.75
157.50
8/1/2011
MNI Phone call to J Jamnik regarding sale of EDA property;
1.30
234.00
phone conversation with M Barnett regarding same; office
conference with S Bubul regarding same; review TIF
memo on TIF 5; follow-up phone conversation with M
Barnett regarding use of TIF for acquisition of Fluth
property.
8/9/2011
MNI Draft resolution calling for a public hearing on TIF mod for
0.80
144.00
TIF 1-5.
8/10/2011
MNI Draft EDA reso requesting call for public hearing on TIF
0.50
90.00
1-5 mods,
8/10/2011
MNI Finalize and send EDA and Council resolutions regarding
0.10
18.00
TIF 1-5.
9/6/2011
MNI Phone conversation with T Hagen regarding modifications
0.30
54.00
needed for TIF 5.
9/8/2011
MNI Review schedule of events for TIF1-5 mods; email
0.30
54.00
correspondence regarding same with City and Ehlers,
9/13/2011
MNI Review Ehlers materials for mods to TIF 1-5; email to all
0.50
90.00
regarding same.
9/21/2011
MNI Review proposed schedule for TIF 1-5 mods; phone and
0.40
72.00
email correspondence with EDA and Ehlers regarding
same.
9/23/2011
MNI Review email correspondence with EDA and T Hogan
0.20
36.00
regarding TIF 1-5 mods; phone conversation with T Hogan
regarding same.
Total Services:
$
949.50
Total Services and Disbursements: $ 949.50
Ann Zimmerman
From: Megan8amett
Sent: Monday, October 34, 20117:41 AM
To: Ann Zimmerman
Subject: Re: 10/14/11 mailing using permit #99
I think that is the downtown piece z signed oft on last week.
Ann Zimmerman wrote:
Hello everyone;
|oanyone aware ufamailing done on 1? The number ofpieces mailed was S,413,charging $1U6Q.24bnthe
city's general permit #99. Please refer tothe attachment.
Thank you for your help.
Annie
27132OS '
-
_
' \b t z4
J
��� t)/,
�
Y`
-'�/ ' /o
1
USPS Postal0n- 6,:'
Company Detail
1.
Company Name
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Address
505 WALNUT ST STE 1
MONTICELLO, MN 55362-8831
Contact Name
Phone Number
(612)295-2711
Profit Indicator
p
PS Form 36078 - Mailing
Transaction Receipt
Permit Holder Permit Number
99
Permit Holder Permit Type
PI
Permit Holder CHID
2879049
Mailing Agent Name
Mailing Agent Permit Number & Type
Mail Owner Name
Mail Owner Permit Number & Type
Customer Reference ID
CAPS Transaction Number
I N/A
Class of Mail
Standard Mail
Processing Catego
Letters
Postage Statement ID
122126386
Mailing Group ID
100348406
Mailer's Mailing Date
10/14/2011
Total Pieces
5,413 pes.
Weight of a single -piece
0,0245 lbs.
Total Weight
132.6000 lbs.
Total Number of Containers
14
Additional Postage
Total Adjusted Postage
$1.069.24
Payment Date and Time
10/14120119 6:38
Payment Transaction Number
I 201128716185446M1
Transaction Adjusted?
Yes'
Person authorizing adjustment
Name
Karl
Phone Number
Accepted at
MONTICELLO BMEU - 55362-9356
Cost Center
266460-1578
Acceptance Site Mailer ID
Clerk Initials
CiW
Mail Arrival Date and Time
10/14/2011 16:21
to
Page I of 2
. OICT 2 0 2011
- AAA�
V
hil.n.,;://www.us-DsDostalone.cotiilPostageProcessingWeblplacardReceiptDistribute.do?fro... 10/14/2011
10;26 3202839693 SUNRAYPRINTINC-1 PAGE 02
I
U(Aed ftWit poww Swoo
P4)OtaV* gt*WMqt — OWdiwd Mail W- .ft
uIN$f0ottrxIT kwopym tn fimatha*MSR
amly
a0um wro moy NO
r T�malier hAnYby Cartdisa that s!t intormethsn kmrtiwd an farm io sxurata, truddu6 and cunpie96 that Ole ma l sate Uu supprtrattsng dfldkmerdtiGon
(tsrnn19with WI ppaellaFW4" Om that IN mail»q pks@8Pot th4 atkaa std fires clgmad; arwJ chat �ha meGl+yt dose rwt on+ lain any matter protdh mtl by
4W or pww to Wn. I undirsuM thatwt
C m;Ayb
hal Y W r 6r Aprlt .(AO.roffi.
T
Sunray q1kNq I&* Inc, (320}263 -mm
kOd MhO
EMM A*Oms, It Any
eMlanOW
MWkV AOM (VWW ('3"20W� 720$4808 "'ay" 011, 60001, 11 n&v"
P"10" Gmanibmeww for W I MG&V In P(6pwod
m
{ally of MN 4 um b
porm,* how# E4wftli 166 (if cow Man par" h0h*)
A
506 WAIM9 St
8 w # y N n w q S o k A b ft 1
I
man"4 UN mm
26123 22rW Ave W5 WOO 81
L
SaNntObw MN besot
OCT 17 2011
WS C�xt r4fcalx,. No,
I
n1C
N #.owl t 1
7—�
0
I I rob
1, MU TIV vs -
Poemi"
I Faroe& - v4d"Ad
ON a two taiaoa 0? wadj"i rotxl e d Wdcis V MM Tr&IV
prow"Wea mwo
Ipows; - ftvWwW
HOW
I m"OfMau 2 Dow Trays 14
6,280 TOMI Trays 14
A
I
f lWm
i 1 Cleo
01 to p"Wa Wah IRY;M FW Trays
L
seal
Arm#w C on If S*04-4-6-wic—don pa"
I
N
I I
Rimed k*vc, Total Worom 0OW
I I uOrsfy MW I f
UM )Pow p" I I moo ( 1151K som
go at Csrr{w oa r
MCOdj(N of Cuft Wv&Y SUltdic, Sa a'sasmspv#
hwj)o
i
r Re CamWr ed rS.IadtaNEhupE ay h1 NA
ASTUVON I I NWALInk Aft"1614 MOO" I I Kilo's I j 046COft ACS pq Wa at. #40mg F*mt
I NO 110 IIE [IF 110 1IH 111 1 14 119 f J
0
OPMONS if *two&* SV4*.
I I L"O.V13W W W Mows" Wu"O mcv or 0#0 cm.
—sR —on
Subtotal Postap
Pk# at WhiM we c ;
Mal Tom ry rew- v -th
wwo I —nw t,,*. , 1.; 4 zo —,jjQ , —,tmo,
or 0000`1��d iismoi,
A
I I CW -I UMIM I
I MetOw
Postage, Affixg
(%
or $0,00)
x Total Postage or Riec" as solcobw
Not Postage Due
uIN$f0ottrxIT kwopym tn fimatha*MSR
amly
a0um wro moy NO
r T�malier hAnYby Cartdisa that s!t intormethsn kmrtiwd an farm io sxurata, truddu6 and cunpie96 that Ole ma l sate Uu supprtrattsng dfldkmerdtiGon
(tsrnn19with WI ppaellaFW4" Om that IN mail»q pks@8Pot th4 atkaa std fires clgmad; arwJ chat �ha meGl+yt dose rwt on+ lain any matter protdh mtl by
4W or pww to Wn. I undirsuM thatwt
C m;Ayb
hal Y W r 6r Aprlt .(AO.roffi.
T
Sunray q1kNq I&* Inc, (320}263 -mm
kOd MhO
AfR1G!!T 7COUNT
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSH-I l
PO Box 525 • 6800 Electric Drlve • Rockford, MN 55373
Megan Barnett Livgard
City of Monticello
505 Walnut ST Ste 1
Monticello, MN 55362
OCT 2 5 2011
Descripti,on Total
Attendance - October 13, 2011 - Planning for Expansion $25.00
Seminar
10 Frirsr-Z off $25.00
2011
EMPLOYEE REIMBURSEMENT VOUCHEROCT 31 2011
CITY OF MONTICELLO
(effective)/1/11}
DATE OF REQUEST_ , i I
Address to Mail (if necessary)
PURPOSE/DATE
LOCATION
EXPENSES: (Please reference Travel and Reimbursement Policy — 2008)
j
Mileage ($.51 per mile 1/1-6/30/11) $ ' (Total miles
($.555 per mile 7/1-12/31/11)
'dist mileage breakdown on back of form
Parking Fee $
Meals $ (include dated, itemized receipts)
Lodging $ (include dated, itemized hotel bill)
SUBTOTAL Account number ,.433100 $
Other
-71
Other
Other
description
description
NOV - 1 2011
Account $
Account
TOTAL TO PAY
SIGNED APPROVED BY
NOTE:Attach co"documenation, including invoices, receipts, seminar certificate, etc.
T RAVEL . F R M: 10/3112011
I
r.
INVOICE NUMBER
9-
xaT. 1899
225 Third Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Phone: (612) 758-7804
Fax: (612) 758-7814
EVENT RECEIPT
HA 10643
Lace Item Description Amount
10/20/2011 Day of Electrical Service Order for MN CAR 10/20 show 5100.00
21% Service Charge $21.00
10.775% Tax on AV and Service Charge $13.04
Total $134.04
Amount charged to Visa ending in 8771 ,4L,,,,
Please visit our newly expanded web site at www.thedepotminneapolis.com for 360 -degree virtual tours
of our hotels, historic suites, recreational facilities, and unparalleled event space.
We hope to welcome you back soonl
Federal Tax ID #41-1938275
Please direct any questions regarding this invoice to Cindy Anderson at 612-758-7804
J
TRAVEL..FRM: 1/20/05
Driving Directions from l754th 8tW' Cokato, Minnesota 5532lto505Walnut St, Mnot— Page lnf3
mapiquestm-
Trip to:
5O5Walnut S8
.75 mil
1754th St
7NUlea Per
| Miles Driven
Cnkmto.K8N65321
|Section
�
1.Start out going east on4th SuVVtoward Millard Ave SVV,
! GoO.V6 M|
0.06 mi
2. Take the 2nd left onto Broadway Ave S,
4. Turn right onto CR -37.
CR -37 is 0.8 raflospast Osborr) Ave NW
Our Saviour's Lutheran Church is or? the comer
If you react) 40th St NWyou've gone about 0.7miles too far
5. Turn right onto MN -55.
Go 1.1 IVII
18.8 ml
MAI -55 is 0.4 n7fies past Gunderson Ave NW
ff you are on CR -7 and reach 6.3rd St NWyou'vo gone about 0. 6 ralfas too far
6. Turn left onto Oak Ave N.
Go 0.2 MI
19.1 mi
If you reach Elm Ave IV YOLIVe gone about 0.3 mfles too far
7. Take the 3rd right onto CR -37.
Go 0.2 MI
19.3 mi
CR -37 isjust past George St E
If you reach 7th St Wyou've gone a little too far
8. CR -37 becomes County Road 37 NW.
Go 8.5 MI
------------
27.8 mi
MN -25 S is 0.4 miles past Cameron Ave NE
If you are cmcn-3rand reach Davern Ave msyou've gone about uomiles too far
. _-________+___
`m
...... .... _
10.Tumleft on��hStw�
' Go 0.08
| '
'o�Jn�
�
6th u/wis just past 7th Svs
Caribou Coffee isor? the aw
ff you are u°MN-2oand reach W+thmyou've gone about u1 miles too far
littp://www.mapq-uest.coin/print?a-7app.core.f572312aafdgfDfd34c6bee7
9/15/2011
Driving Directions from 175 4th St W, Cokato, Minnesota 55321 to 505 Walnut St, Mont... Page 2 of
11. Take the 1st right onto Walnut St.
if you reach Locust St you'vo gong a little too lar
® 12. 505 WALNUT ST is on the left.
If you reach 51h St you've gone a little too rar
......... _..---- _..._..... . . .............
505 Walnut St
Monticello, MN 55362-8821
Go 0.02 Ml
31.8 mi
31.8 mi
31.8 mi .�...�_.._.�
31.8 ml
http://www.mapquest.com/print?a=app. core. f572312aafd8fOfd34e6bee7 9/15/2011
Driving Directions from 505 Walnut St, Monticello, Minnesota 55362 to 225 3rd Ave S, ... Page 1 of 2
mapquest' Nates
Trip to:
225 3rd Ave S
Mini9eap8fi N 55401-2524
38.94 miles
43 menu es
M119)4-----
http://www.mapquest.com/print?a=app. core, cf8a5620eaI 17314fda27eb4 10/31/2011
505Walnut St
Miles Per
Miles
Monticello, MN 55362-8821
Section
Driven
1. Start outgoing northeast on Walnut St toward 5th St.
Go 0.01 Mi
0.01 mi
J
1< €
2. Take the 1st right onto 5th St.
Go 0.07 Mi
0.07 mi
If you reach W 4th St you've gone about 0.1 miles too far
25
3. Turn right onto Pine St I MN -25 S. Continue to follow MN -25 S.
Dairy Queen is the
Go 0.3 Mi
0.4 mi
on right
4. Merge onto 1-94 E 1 US -52 S toward Minneapolis 1 St Paul.
Go 30.1 Mi
30.5 mi
5. Keep right to take 1-94 E I US -52 S via EXIT 35B toward
Go 6.2 Mi
36.7 mi
qjUp
Minneapolis.
>
6. Take EXIT 230 toward 4th St N,
Go 1.0 Mi
37.6 mi
7. Stay straight to go onto N 4th St.
Go 1.1 Mi
38.8 mi
41
B. Take the 1st left onto S 3rd Ave.
If
Go 0.2 Mi
38.9 mi
you reach S 4th Ave you've gone a little too far
.
9. 225 3RD AVE S.
38.9 mi
Your destination is just past S Washington Ave
If you reach S 2nd St you've gone a little too for
225 3rd Ave S
38.9 mi
38.9 mi
Minneapolis, MN 55401-2524
http://www.mapquest.com/print?a=app. core, cf8a5620eaI 17314fda27eb4 10/31/2011
Driving Directions from 505 Walnut St, Monticello, Minnesota 55362 to 11 Kellogg Blvd... Page 1 of 3
mapquest
Trip to:
11 Kellogg Blvd E
aintt Paul-, 55101-1005
8,88-m'
54 minutes
Notes
(I (/ \v YlfiT,S b sum m�4
505 Walnut St
Monticello, MN 55362-8821
® 1. Start out going northeast on Walnut St toward 5th St.
Miles Per
Miles
2. Take the 1st right onto 5th St.
Driven
Go 0.01 Mi
(Fyou reach W 4th St you've gone about 0, i miles foo far
Go 0.07 Mi
ur
25'`
3. Turn right onto Pine St I MN -25 S. Continue to follow MN -25 S.
Dairy Queen Is the
8. Take the Wacouta St / 10th St exit.
Go 0.2 Mi
on right
%T
4. Merge onto 1-94 E / US -52 S toward Minneapolis / St Paul.
RAtAP
5. Merge onto 1-694 E via the exit on the left.
Go 0.03 Mi
48.0 mi
6. Merge onto 1-35E S I US -10 E via EXIT 46 toward US -10 I St Paul
10. Turn slight right onto 10th St E.
Go 0.2 Mi
48.2 mi
Miles Per
Miles
Section
Driven
Go 0.01 Mi
0.01 mi
Go 0.07 Mi
0.07 mi
Go 0.3 Mi 0.4 ml
Go 30.1 Mi 30.5 mi
Go 11.6 Mi 1 42.1 mi
Go 5.5 Mi 47.6 mi
l
7. Take the 1-94 E / US -10 E / 10th St / Wacouta St exit, EXIT 107A, on
Go 0.1 Mi
47.7 mi
1
9
the left toward US -52 S.
EXIT
8. Take the Wacouta St / 10th St exit.
Go 0.2 Mi
48.0 mi
RAtAP
9. Keep right to take the 10th St ramp.
Go 0.03 Mi
48.0 mi
10. Turn slight right onto 10th St E.
Go 0.2 Mi
48.2 mi
11. Turn left onto Robert St N I MN -3.
Go 0.5 MI
48.7 mi
Robert St N is Just past Jackson St
Keys Cafe & Bakery is on the left
http://www.mapquest.com/priiit?a--app.core.cf8a562OcaI 17314fda2764 10/31/2011
Driving Directions from 505 Walnut St, Monticello, Minnesota 55362 to 11 Kellogg Blvd... Page 2 of 3
Ifyou reach Minnesota St you've gone a little too far
12. Turn right onto Kellogg Blvd E. Go 0.2 Mi 48.9 mi
Kellogg Blvd E is Just past 4th St E
If you reach Fillmore Ave E you've gone about 0.3 miles too far
■ 13. 11 KELLOGG BLVD E is on the left. 48.9 mi
Your destination is just past Cedar St
If you reach 2nd St E you ve gone a little too for
4 11 Kellogg Blvd E 48.9 ml 48.9 mi
Saint Paul, MN 55101-1005
http://www.in-,pquest.com/print?a=app.core.cf8a5620eal 17314fda27cb4 10/31/2011
Governor's Job Summit ' Registration RegOnline
-
�����7�l��J����'�
���� ,/���������� ��
���l� ��T�������r�����
�����m �������v��� .4v���
G,BT|m8MINNESOTA WORKING AGAIN�------
Tuesday, October 25, 20110b00a.m.'7:00p.m.
Crowne Plaza St. Paul Hotel Kiverfront
11East Kellogg Blvd
St. Paul, Minnesota S5101
Governor's Job Summit ~ Registration
Page 1 of 3
\/�� /.�/
WAM ����
c
6kd
Important Information: The Crowne Plaza St. Paul Riverfront Hotel has a room block available for $118 per
night, Ask for the "Job Summit" rate, This offer is available through September 26, 2011.
Contact Information Special Accommodations Checkout Confirmation
Your registration completed successfully. You will also receive anemail message with information
about your registration, including link to your registration record.
Breakout selection and information will bmsent soon twthose who have registeredfor the
I[you questions about the event, please contact ]ennPettit-Hanson at or
at 651-259-7298,
Ifyou have questions about your registration,please contact Catherine Jensen at
cjensen@lilogistics.com or 952,649,2712.,
Reo|strmtonyD: 30748877
Registrant: Mrs. Megan Bo end
Economic Development Director
CitYofMonticello
505Walnut Street
Monticello, K8N55302
United Gto0oo
Registration Date: 9/20/2011 9:21 AM
Type: Attendee
Status: Confirmed
Work Phone: 7G3.271.32D8
Email., megan.barnett@cj.monticello.mn.us
Name as itwould appear ona badge: Megan Barnett Lkmard
u/tpmx/v/wwzu&oouoe.ounvreginTer/oVuficozotinu. 1009574 lK... 9/26/2011
Governor's Job Summit - Registration - RegOnline
_... Fees .._ ... _..__ .._. _ ....
Page 2 of 3
Fee Quantity Unit Price Amount
Fee
-Attendee Registration: $199 1$199.00 $199,00
-_--..._.. _.___.._._..__._.__ .-___________..
Subtotal: $199.00
otal: $199.00
—
Transactions-----.-
Transaction Type Date Amount Balance
Transaction Amount 9/26/2011 $199.00 $199.00
Current Balance: $199.00
-- Payment Method -------- - --- _-- - ---- —---------
Payment Method: Check
Payment Instructions ----------- --------------..__..___....-----------__-.
Note: Registrations will not be accepted unless registration fee has been paid in full
prior to conference.
Please send payments by check to:
Jenn Pettit -Hanson
Department of Employment & Economic Development
First National Bank Building
332 Minnesota Street, Suite E200
St. Paul, MN 55101 j
USA
w
For inter -agency payments, please use the following codes:
i
Speedchart - B22confer
Fin Dept ID - B2241900
Agency Cost 1 - 55352
Activity ID - DEV1
1
- Refund Information - ---- --- - -
i
https ://www.regonline. com/regi ster/confirmation. aspx? Eventld=10095 74&AttendeeId=1 K... 9/26/2011
Governor's Job Summit - Registration - RegOnline
Page 3 of 3
! Cancellation/Refund Policy
Cancellation through October 17, 2011 will receive a full registration refund minus $25 handling
fee. Cancellations after October 17, 2011 will not receive a refund.
I
...... --- --
https://www.regonline.coni/register/confirmation. aspx?Eventld=1009574&AttendeeId=1 K... 9/26/2011
Driving Directions Froin 505 Walnut St, Monticello, Minnesota 55362 to 1820 Highway 3... Page 1 of 3
maplquest-MO Notes
Trip to:
1820 Highway 36 W
i
- eseviller-MN 55113-4030
41.44 mile
Q-46=m-irrCi s
` 9. Turn left onto County Road C W. Go 0.3 Mi 40.4 ml
i If you roach Terminal Rd you've gone about 0.4 miles too far
10. Take the 1st right onto Cleveland Ave N, Go 0.8 MI 41.2 mi
If you reach Mt Ridge Rd you've gone about 0.1 miles too far
t 11. Cleveland Ave N becomes N 36 Service Dr. Go 0.3 Mi 41.4 mi
http://www.mapquest.coln/print?a=app. care.cf8a5620eal 17314fda27cb4 10/31/2011
505 Walnut St
Miles Per
Miles Driven
Monticello, MN 55362-8821
Section
®
1. Start out going northeast on Walnut St toward 5th St.
Go 0.01 Mi
0.01 mi
2. Take the 1 st right onto 5th St.
Go 0.07 Mi
0.07 mi
If you reach W 4th St you've gone about 0.1 miles too far
u�
2S '
3. Turn right onto Pine St 1 MN -25 S. Continue to follow MN -25 S.
Dairy Queen is the
Go 0.3 Mi
0.4 mi
on right
4. Merge onto 1-94 E 1 US -52 S toward Minneapolis / St Paul.
Go 30.1 Mi
30.5 mi
5. Merge onto 1-694 E via the exit on the left.
Go 6.1 Mi
36.6 mi
a
6. Merge onto 1-35W S via EXIT 41 A.
Go 3.1 Mi
39.8 mi
OWU
Gas
7. Take EXIT 24 toward County C.
Go 0.2 Mi
40.0 mi
8. Turn left onto Long Lake Rd.
Go 0.1 M1
40.1 mi
Holiday Inn Express Roseville -St Paul is on the corner
` 9. Turn left onto County Road C W. Go 0.3 Mi 40.4 ml
i If you roach Terminal Rd you've gone about 0.4 miles too far
10. Take the 1st right onto Cleveland Ave N, Go 0.8 MI 41.2 mi
If you reach Mt Ridge Rd you've gone about 0.1 miles too far
t 11. Cleveland Ave N becomes N 36 Service Dr. Go 0.3 Mi 41.4 mi
http://www.mapquest.coln/print?a=app. care.cf8a5620eal 17314fda27cb4 10/31/2011
Driving Directions Froin 505 Walnut St, Monticello, Mirmicsota 55362 to 1820 Highway 3... Page 2 of 3
■
12.1820 HIGHWAY 36 W. 41.4 m)
Your destination is just past W Perimeter Rd
ff you reach MN -35 W you`ve gone about 0.2 mites too Far
1820 Highway 36 W 41.4 ml 41.4 mi
Roseville, MN 55113-4030
http://www.inapquest.coin/pr int?a=app. core. cf8a5620ea 117314fda2764 10/31/2011
Advertising
njIRSI.and Design hi
P.O. Box 681, Monticello, MN 55362
www.majirs.corn ph: 763.295.4393 d? f: 763,295.8858
I Bill To
City of Monticello
Annie Zimmerman
505 Walnut Street
Monticello, MN 55362
Invoice
Date Invoice #
11/23/11 704
TERMS
Due on receipt
Item
Qty.
Description
Rate
Amount
Print
5,300
Public Meeting 10-24-11 Postcards - Megan
0.12207
646.98
Print
Mailing services for postcards
261.74
261.74
Print
DSF charge (for checking mailing list - used for
115.84
115.84
city newsletter also)
CREATIVE FEE -Non
2
Creative Services -non taxable
85.00
170.00
sales tax
6.875%
70.44
TOTAL_ $1,265.00
Payments/Credits $0,00
Balance Due $1,265.00
=K atr
AMR
r Advertising
fflnj1FandDes1gn F
PSO. Box 681, MonUC6110, MN 55862
WWW.MajlrS.COM 13 ph: 763.295.4893 E_! f: 783.295,6858
Bill To
City of Monticello
Annie Zimmerman
1 505 Walnut Street
Monticello, MN 55362
Invoice
Date Invoice #
10/4/11 686
TERMS
Due on receipt
Item
Qty.
Description
Rate
Amount
CREATIVE FEE -Non
2.25
Creative Services -Industry of the year breakfast
85.00
191.25
(Megan)
Print
500
4/4 flyers for chamber insert
0.59
295.00
sales tax
6.875%
20.28
OCT
-52011
Thank_you for your business TOTAL
$506.53
Payments/Credits $0,00
Balance Due $506.53
Page: 1
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
City of Monticello Minneapolis, MN 55402
October 31, 2011
MN190-00139 Economic Development TIF (Suburban Manufacturing)
Through October 31, 2011
For All Legal Services As Follows:
Hours
Amount
8/1/2011
SJB
Conference with M Ingram regarding council approval of
0.20
42.00
EDA acquisition
8/3/2011
SJB
Conference with M Ingram regarding deal terms; TIF plan
0.10
21.00
8/5/2011
SJB
Email to/from M Barrett regarding calling TIF hearing
0.20
42.00
8/22/2011
SJB
Conference with M Ingram regarding deal terms
0.25
52.50
8/30/2011
SJB
Conference with M Ingram regarding subsidy amount
0.25
52.50
9/26/2011
SJB
Phone call with M Barnett regarding abstract; title matters
0.25
52.50
110/3/2011
MNI
Office conference with C Rocklitz regarding closing
0.50
90.00
requirements; email to M Barnett regarding required
documentation for same; review file.
10/3/2011
CBR
Phone call from closer; review status of title; interoffice
0.75
95.25
conference with M Ingram
10A/2011
MNI
Phone conversation with M Barnett regarding closing
0.30
54.00
matters.
10/5/2011
MNI
Review title commitment; office conference regarding
0.40
72.00
same with C Rocklitz.
10/5/2011
CBR
Interoffice conference regarding closing issues and title;
0.25
31.75
email communication to client
10/1012011
MNI
Office conference with L Wertheim regarding wetland
0.40
72.00
credits and sale of property.
1 0/1 01201 1
LMW
Intraoffice conference with wetland issue.
0.20
45.00
10/11/2011
MNI
Email and phone correspondence with M Barnett
0.70
126.00
regarding Suburban Mfg closing; voicemail to developer's
counsel and title company regarding same.
10/12/2011
MNI
Phone conversation with M Barnett regarding closing
0.70
126.00
issues; office conference with C Rocklitz regarding same.
10/12/2011
MNI
Pre-closing and title issues for Suburban Mfg.
2.10
378.00
Page: 2
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
City of Monticello
October 31, 2011
10/12/2011
MNI Review closing documents; office conference with C
1.20 216.00
Rocklitz regarding same.
10/12/2011
MNI Office conference with C Rocklitz regarding closing,
0.30 54.00
10/12/2011
CBR Draft closing documents; prepare for closing; emails
4.75 603.25
10/13/2011
NKE Review emails from C. Rocklitz and M. Ingram
1.50 190.50
10/13/2011
MNI Email correspondence with title regarding closing matters.
0.50 90.00
10113/2011
MNI Review financing letter and phone conversation with bank;
0.60 108.00
email and phone correspondence with title regarding
settlement statement.
10/13/2011
MNI Pre-closing matters: Assessment Agreement, closing
1.70 306.00
statement review, revision of closing instructions letter;
office conference with N England regarding same;
circulate closing instructions letter.
10/13/2011
MNI Forward closing instructions letter to buyer's counsel, M
0.30 54.00
Barnett; phone conversation with M barnett regarding
same.
10/13/2011
MNI Pre-closing phone and email correspondence with M
0.60 108.00
Barnett, J Christian.
10/13/2011
CBR Emails regarding closing; draft letter of instruction
0.50 63.50
10/14/2011
MNI Phone and email correspondence with bank and
2.00 360.00
developer's counsel regarding Monticello closing matters;
revise additional pre-closing documents.
10/14/2011
MNI Email and phone correspondence with C Rocklitz, M
0.80 144.00
Barnett regarding closing matters.
10/1712011
NKE Review emails regarding closing; forward to C. Rocklitz
0.25 31.75
10/17/2011
MNI Phone conversation with M Barnett regarding docs needed
0.70 126.00
for closing; mise, email correspondence with bank and
title regarding final closing details; office conference with
C Rocklitz regarding closing matters.
10/26/2011
MNI Phone conversation with M Barnett regarding city trunk
0.20 36.00
fees; review buyer's closing statement and office
conference with C Rocklitz regarding flow of funds;
follow-up with M Barnett.
10/26/2011
CBR Intraoffice conference regarding trunk fees; e-mail to
0.25 31.75
closer
Page: 3
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
City of Monticello Minneapolis, MN 55402
October 31, 2011
Total Services: $ 3,875.25
Total Services and Disbursements: $ 3,875.25
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612)337-9300
October 13, 2011
Statement No. 104714
City of Monticello
Accounts Payable
505 Walnut Avenue, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
Through September 30, 2011
MN190-00139 Economic Development TIF (Suburban Manufacturing)
Total Current Billing:
I declare, under penalty of law, that this
account, claim or demand is just and correct
and that no part of it has been paid.
ignature of CI 'm nt
I- �q lik I
OCT 17 2011
1,073.50
Page: 1
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Total Services and Disbursements; $ 1,073.50
Suite 470
OCT 17 2011
Minneapolis, MN 55402
City of Monticello
September 30, 2011
MN 190-00139 Economic Development
TIF (Suburban Manufacturing)
Through September 30, 2011
For All Legal Services As f=ollows:
Hours Amount
9/8/2011 MNI
Revise interfund loan reso and EDA reso approving
0.80 144.00
contract; phone conversation with developer's counsel
regarding revised contract.
9/8/2011 MNI
Voicemail exchanges with developer's counsel regarding
0.10 18.00
contract.
9/8/2011 MNI
Phone conversation with Redeveloper's counsel regarding
1.70 306.00
contract; follow-up with M Barnett; revise and recirculate
Contract.
9/14/2011 MNI
Phone conversation with M Barnett regarding title work;
0.30 54.00
office conference with C Rocklitz regarding closing
schedule.
9/16/2011 MNI
Phone conversations with title co and M Barnett regarding
0,30 54.00
title abstract.
9/26/2011 MNI
Draft City resolution approving land sale and business
0.60 108.00
subsidy for Suburban.
9/27/2011 NKE
Intraoffice meeting with M. Ingram regarding title work;
2.50 317.50
phone call with M. Burnet regarding same; review
development agreement; phone call with G. Larson
regarding previous additions in Otter Creek Crossing;
phone call with Preferred Title; email .to C. Rocklitz and M.
Burnet
9/27/2011 MNI
Office conference with N England regarding pre-closing
0.40 72.00
matters for Suburban Mfg; review follow-up email
correspondence regarding same.
Total Services:
$ 1,073.50
Total Services and Disbursements; $ 1,073.50
Page: 1
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Monticello EDA Minneapolis, MN 55402
October 31, 2011
MN325-00023 Pet Hospital GMEF Loan
Through October 31, 2011
For All Legal Services As Follows:
Hours
Amount
10/5/2011
MNI
Phone conversation with M Barnett regarding Veterinary
1.40
252.00
Clinic GMEF loan; draft amended and restated loan
agreement and associated documents.
10/6/2011
MNI
Phone conversations with M Barnett and T Kelly regarding
0.80
144.00
new loan amortization; finalize amended and restated loan
agreement.
10/7/2011
MNI
Finalize and circulate execution copy of vet clinic loan
0.50
90.00
agreement.
10/17/2011
MNI
Follow-up with M Barnett regarding status of pet hospital
0,20
36.00
loan and instructions for closing.
Total Services:
$
522.00
Total Services and Disbursements: $ 522,00
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 337-9300
October 21, 2011
Statement No. 104892
Monticello EDA
Megan Barnett
505 Walnut Ave
Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
Through September 30, 2011
MN325-00006 General 216.00
I declare, under penalty of law, that this
account, claim or demand Is just and correct
and that no pam
Signature of Claimant
Total Current Billing: 216.00
Monticello EDA
Megan Barnett
September 30, 2011
MN325-00006 General
Through September 30, 2011
Page: 1
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
For All Legal Services As Follows: Hours Amount
9/7/2011 MNI Phone conversation with M Barnett regarding new GMEF 0.50 90,00
loan for pet hospital; open file; review emailed business
points.
9/7/2011 MNI Draft GMEF agreement for veterinary clinic. 0.70 126.00
Total Services: $ 216.00
Total Services and Disbursements: $ 216.00
A, �59
WSW
&Assoc` Engineering 1 Planning 1 Environmental 1 Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
City of Monticello October 10, 2011 Minneapolis; MN 55416
Attn: Tom Kelly Project No: 01494-540 Tel: 763-541-4600 -.
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Invoice No: 1 Fax: 763.541-1700
Monticello, MN 55362-8831 -
Otter Creek Crossing 4th Addition Plat
Professional Services from Auaust 01 2011 to August 31 2011 13 2011
Professional Personnel
Hours Rate Amount
Project Management/Coordination
Bisson, Shibani 2.00 121.00 242.00
Office Survey
Helder, Peter 9.00 105.00 945.00
Totals 11.00 1,187.00
Total Labor 1,187.00
Consultants
Other Consultants
8/31/2011 Provident Title Services, Invoice No. 2011-08-016 360.00
1 ne.
Approved by:
Reviewed by: Bret Weiss
Project Manager: Shibani Bisson
Minneapolis 1 St. Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
Total Consultants
360.00 360.00
Total this Invoice $1,547.00
Billings to Date
Current
Prior
Total
:....
Labor
1,187.00
0.00
1,187.00
Consultant
360.00
0.00
360.00
Totals
1,547.00
0.00
1,547.00
Comments:
Approved by:
Reviewed by: Bret Weiss
Project Manager: Shibani Bisson
Minneapolis 1 St. Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
Remit Payment To:
Provident Title Services, Inc.
299 Coon Rapids Blvd., Suite 210
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
Billed To:
W$B & Associates, Inc.
701 Xenia Ave., Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Invoice Date: August 12, 2011
Please Pay Before: August 12, 2011
Our Flle Number: 2011-08-016
Your Reference Number:
Property: Brief Legal: Pt of Outlot C, Otter Creek
Crossing 2nd Addn_ $, Outlot E.
Otter Creek Crossing 3rd
1�4-10
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
Mortgagee's Title Insurance to Insure
Owner's Title Insurance to Insure
Closing Fee
Abstract or Title Search 185.00
Title Exam 175.00
Name Search
Plat Drawing
Special Assessment Search
Invoice Total Amount Due $ 360.00
Additional fees Including but not limited to may be required, such as:
County Recording, State Deed Tax and Mortgage Registration Tax Fees
Wire Fee;1U0
Recording Service Fee $25.001 document
Courier and Handling fee $25.001 package or payoff
Certain Endorsement fees as applicable.
Please call for further details with any questions related to this transaction,
(2 011-06.416. P F012011-0 8.0 %6 )
A
WSB
-
& Associates, Inc. Engineering 1 Planning 1 Environmental 1 Construction
City of Monticello
October 10, 2011
Total Billings
Attn: Tom Kelly
Project No: 01494-510
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Invoice No: 2
682.00
Monticello, MN 55362-8831
Total this Invoice
Comments:
Outlot C Otter Creek Crossing 2nd Survey &
Wetland (Suburban Manufacturing Site)
Professional Services from August 01 2011 to August
31 2011
Professional Personnel
Hours Rate
Amount
Project Management/Coordination
Bisson, Shibani
1.50 121.00
181.50
Chesnut, Jed
.75 76.00
57.00
Foster, Elizabeth
.50 62.00
31.00
Leeson, Brett
.50 62.00
31.00
Totals
3.25
300.50
Total Labor
Billing Limits
Current Prior To -Date
Total Billings
300.50 3,947.50 4,248.00
Limit
4,930.00
Remaining
682.00
Total this Invoice
Comments:
Approved by:
Reviewed by: Bret Weiss
Project Manager: Shibani Bisson
Minneapolis 1 St. Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541:,1700
300.50
$300.50
WV,
&Assoc- Engineering 1 Planning 1 Environmental 1 Construction
City of Monticello August 25, 2011
Attn: Tom Kelly Project No: 01494-510
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Pa"` M°� �` Invoice No: 1
Monticello, MN 55362-8831 113 _ 5 sod
Outlot C Otter Creek Crossing 2nd Survey & Ott (Yor-CA C44C
Wetland (Suburban Manufacturing Site)
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300 0 •x
Minneapolis, MN 55416
TO 763-541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
Professional Services from Juiv 01 2011 to July
31 2011
1<11
AUG 3
Professional Personnel
j
Hours
Rate
- Amount
Project Management/Coordination
Bisson, Shibani
4.00
121.00
484.00 -
Chesnut, Jed
1.00
76.00
76.00
Drawings/Layouts
Fournier, Bruce
2.50
105.00
262.50
Hansen, Justin
2.00
86.00
172.00
Wetland Plan
Bergen, Heather
21.75
68.00
1,479.00
Chesnut, Jed
6.50
76.00
494.00
Office Survey
Helder, Peter
4.00
105.00
420.00
Totals
41.75
3,387.50
Total Labor
Field Services Billing
2 -Person Survey Crew
Total Field Services
Billing Limits
Total Billings
Limit
Remaining
Comments:
Approved by:
4.0 Hours @ 140.00 560.00
5FOA0
Current Prior To -Date
3,947.50 0.00 3,947.50
4,930.00
982.50
Total this Invoice
Reviewed by: Bret Weiss
Project Manager: Shibani Bisson
Minneapolis 1 St. Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
I
3,387.50
560,00
$3,947.50
"R:J
&Assoc— lQ— res Ino Engineering I Planning I Environmental 1 Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
City of Monticello October 18, 2011 Minneapolis, MN 55416
Attn: Tom Kelly Project No: 01.494-510 Tel: 763-541-4800
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Invoice No: 3 Fax: 763.541-1700
Monticello, MN 55362-8831
Outlot C Otter Creek Crossing 2nd Survey &
Wetland (Suburban Manufacturing Site) OCT 3 1 2011
Professional Services from September 01 2011 to September 30 2011
Professional Personnel
Hours Rate Amount _
Wetland Plan
Chesnut, Jed 1.25 76.00 95.00
Totals 1.25 95.00
Total Labor 95.00
Billing Limits Current Prior To -Date
Total Billings 95.00 4,248.00 4,343.00
Limit 4,930.00
Remaining 587.00
Total this Invoice $95.00
Comments:
Approved by: C,�R/�.
Reviewed by: Bret Weiss
Project Manager: Shibani Bisson
Minneapolis I St Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
_ ,'-�wctii �' �c•� � , ccs.
•��� ' �}rL5 tri • �{�o secs
WSB
&Assoc Engineering I Planning I Environmental I Construction
701 Xenia Avenue South
City of Monticello October 04, 2011
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Attn: Tom Kelly Project No: 01627-320
TO: 763-541-4800
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Invoice No: 6
Fax: 763-541-1700
Monticello, MN 55362-8831
Monticello Wetland LGIJ
Professional Services from August 01 2011 to August 31 2011
Phase 1 Feasibility/ Prel. Des.
Professional Personnel
Hours Rate Amount
Project Management/Coordination
Chesnut, Jed 3.50 76.00 266.00
Mont Business Park - Outlot C wetland investigation and review
Plan Review
Chesnut, Jed 2.00 76.00 152.00
TEMP - Wetland delin review and TEP NOD
Totals 5.50 418.00
Total Labor
418.00
Total this Phase
$418.00
Total this Invoice $418.00
Billings to Date
Current
Prior
Total
Labor 418.00
21033.00
2,451.00
Totals 418.00
2,033.00
2,451.00
Comments:
Approved by:
Reviewed by: Bret Weiss
Project Manager; Andrea Moffatt
Minneapolis I St. Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
4t,5's9-
o/8/11
Maty �:, cwLa�znN Ilr/rg
SB I,, Jt * ��lL COC++ Ar -
XIS -
rCXt7" 4 ( 5 3 cl - -150.."00
Engineering 1 Planning 1 Environmental 1 Construction
&.4ssocaates, Inc. 701 Xenia Avenue South it/g
300 / rt
City of Monticello October 18, 2011 Minneapolis, MN 55416
Attn: Tom Kelly Project No; 01494-540 Tel: 763-541-4800
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Invoice No: 2 Fax: 763-541-1700
Monticello, MN 55362-8831
Otter Creek Crossing 4th Addition Plat
Professional Services from September 01 2011 to September 30.2011
Professional Personnel
Project Management/Coordination
Bisson, Shibani
Office Survey
Helder, Peter
Totals
Total Labor
Reimbursable Expenses
Mise Reimbursable Expense
9/30/2011 Wright County Recorder
Total Relmbursables
Field Services Billing
2 -Person Survey Crew
Hours Rate
6.50 121.00
0 C 3 j �
Amount �.
786.50
8.00 105.00 840.00
14.50 1,626,50
1,626.50
Plat Fee 434.46
434.46 434.46
Approved by: &�
Reviewed by: Bret Weiss
Project Manager: Shibani Bisson
Minneapolis 1 St Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
2.0 Hours @ 140.00 280.00
Total Field Services
280.00 280.00
Total this Invoice $2,340.96
Billings to Date
Current
Prior Total
Labor
1,626.50
1,187.00 2,813.50
Consultant
0.00
360.00 360.00
Expense
434.46
0.00 434.46
Field Services
280.00
0.00 280.00
Totals
2,340.96
1,547.00 3,887.96
Comments:
Approved by: &�
Reviewed by: Bret Weiss
Project Manager: Shibani Bisson
Minneapolis 1 St Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
WSB
&Associates,— Inc. Engineering 1 Planning 1 Environmental 1 Construction
City of Monticello
October 04, 2011
Attn: Tom Kelly
Project No: 01010-000
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Invoice No; 168
Monticello, MN 55362-8831
City of Monticello (Meeting Attendance)
Professional Services from August 01 2011 to August
31 2011
Professional Personnel
Hours Rate
Amount
General
Weiss, Bret 8!5/2011
.50 134.00
67.00
EDA meeting prep
Weiss, Bret 8/10/2011
2.50 134.00
335.00
EDA meeting and prep
Weiss, Bret 8/31/2011
1.00 134.00
134.00
review embracing downtown
Totals
4.00
536.00
Total Labor
Comments:
Total this Invoice
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763.541-4800
Fax: 763-541-1700
536.00
$536.00
Approved by:
Reviewed by: Bret Weiss OCT - 6 2011
Project Manager: Shibani Bisson i
Minneapolis 1 St. Claud
Equal Opportunity Employer
Located between
Monticello & Big Lake
17540 Co. Rd. 50 SE
Big Lake, MN 55309
Monticello, City Of
Megan Barnett
505 Walnut Street
Monticello, MN 55362
4ewAteZ
Chris lommel photography
email:
clphoto@sherbtel.net
INVOICE
Cust #: 9035
Invoice #: 9783-1
Order date: 11/30/2011
Last sitting date: 10/19/2011
Home: (763) 271-3208
Work: (000) 000-0000 X:
re -11• tnnni nnn-nnnn
Signature Date:
Delivery
Sales
Category Type
Appr Del
BUS
BUS
/2012
Qty
Description IDC Breakfest
Commercial shoot
Pose
FN
Price
Discount:
Total
Total
9168.75
I
225.00
56.25
Allow approximately 6-8 weeks for delivery. You will receive notification by plone—,]—
mail or e-mail.
Subtotal: 225.00
1, the undersigned, have reviewed the items and charges on this Invoice and find
Discount: -56.25
Subtotal w/discount: 168.75
them to be understood and correct as it is written. I also agree that Chris Lommel
Photography may use any or all images for display, competition, advertising or
Sales Tax (3) 6,875% 11.60
promotion purposes. Chris Lommel Photography retains the copyright and privileges
on all proofs and purchased prints.
Total: 180.35
Paid: 0.00
Balance: 180.35
Signature Date:
5. Consideration of approving Resolution #2011 -116 recommending the City
Council amend the Monticello Comprehensive Plan adopting the Embracing
Downtown Plan. (AS,MBL,BW)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The City and community at large has been diligently working on the Embracing
Downtown project for the past year. It is an exciting time to finally complete the study
process and start working on various implementation steps. The last piece of completing
the Embracing Downtown planning process is to adopt the document into the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
Planning Process
To develop the plan, the McCombs team worked through a five phase planning process.
These five phases included:
• Research and analysis
• Assessment of alternatives and preliminary feasibility
• Stakeholder review of alternatives and identification of the preferred alternative
• Feasibility and strategy development for the preferred alternative
• Creation of a downtown revitalization strategy
The draft plan presented for recommendation details the work accomplished in each of
these five phases and the resulting outcomes.
It is important to state that extensive opportunity for public input was provided for
throughout each phase of the planning process. Both downtown property owners and
business owners were engaged in the project from its inception, and broader community
involvement has been solicited at key points. The Steering Committee was also
instrumental in providing valuable direction, particularly during the development of
concept plan alternatives.
The Embracing Downtown Steering Committee was composed of the following
representatives:
City Council — Tom Perrault and Lloyd Hilgart
EDA — Bill Demeules
Planning Commission — Charlotte Gabler and Bill Spartz
Parks Commission — Larry Nolan
Sue Schiechowski — downtown land /business owner Steve
Johnson — downtown land owner
Wes Olson — IEDC representative
Doug Schneider — downtown land/business owner
Public involvement in the Embracing Downtown project has also included six public
community meetings, four focused Steering Committee meetings and seventeen
stakeholder interviews.
Components of the Plan
MarketAnalysis
In developing the final project scope of work, the new plan was driven by economic
realities. The Market Analysis component was therefore the first component to be
completed and acts as the foundation for the balance of the plan.
The main take away from the market analysis is that Monticello has capacity for more
commercial and retail space in the community. The consulting team believes that
Monticello should market itself as a sub - regional center between Maple Grove and St.
Cloud. Also of importance is the fact that Monticello has a real, market - driven
opportunity to successfully locate a department store, additional medical services, and
another type of grocery store (i.e. whole foods, co -op) in the downtown area.
Transportation
Providing a functional, multi -modal transportation system will play a critical role in ensuring
the commercial viability of the downtown area. With this understanding in mind, Westwood
Professional Services completed a comprehensive Transportation Study as part of the
Embracing Downtown Monticello Report. The study is included in the report as Appendix C.
The study concluded that traffic impacts associated with the proposed Redevelopment Plan
are expected to be minor. In total, the Redevelopment Plan is anticipated to result in a net
increase of 9,000 ADT. Of this total, the largest increase to any one street is expected to be
around 3,000 ADT. Compared with existing traffic volumes of about 30,000 vehicles per day
on TH 25, and more than 14,000 vehicles per day on East Broadway, and considering the
projected background growth between today and 2030 will be between 20% and 60 %, the
additional traffic generated by the redevelopment of the CCD will be minimal.
To follow are key recommended transportation improvements recommended by the
Embracing Downtown Plan.
TH 25 /CSAH 75
Under both existing and future conditions, the intersection most critical to traffic flow
in and around the CCD is the intersection of TH 25 and CSAH75 /Broadway. Because
of the high east /west traffic volumes and turning volumes (especially eastbound to
northbound and southbound to eastbound), little spare green time is available for the
heavy through traffic volumes on TH 25. Current plans for the intersection of TH 25
and CSAH 75, as identified in the City's Transportation Plan, call for the construction
of roadway capacity improvements at this intersection. Plans include dual left turn
lanes for the two heavy movements noted above. Dual right turn lanes were recently
constructed for the westbound CSAH 75 to northbound TH 25 movement. With these
improvements the intersection is anticipated to function acceptably through 2030, but
only as long as a second river crossing is constructed somewhere in the Monticello
area.
Second River Crossine
A second river crossing over the Mississippi River must be constructed to provide an
alternate route for trips between Monticello and Big Lake. This second crossing, as noted in
the City's Transportation Plan, accounts for the difference between 20% growth in background
traffic (with second crossing) and 60% growth (without a second crossing). Without this
vital second river crossing, no set of other minor geometric fixes to TH 25 and CSAH 75
will bring the intersection up to acceptable performance thresholds.
4th Street Signalization
The proposed CCD Redevelopment Plan will bring a modest amount of additional traffic to
the CC, spread among the many roads and intersections. In order to provide for adequate
access to the proposed retail facilities, creation of an additional signalized access point
to /from TH 25 at 4th Street is proposed. This intersection will not only be capable of
providing the additional access needed by the new retail facilities, but will also provide a
much - needed alternate route for local east /west through traffic in the downtown core,
improving operations at the critical TH 25 and CSAH 75 intersection, and in turn,
operations along the TH 25 arterial corridor.
In order to maximize the benefit of the traffic signal at 4th Street and offset the impact of the
addition of signalized access points, access restrictions at the intersection of TH 25 and 3rd
Street are proposed. Conversion to right -in /right -out accesses is recommended.
In addition to the vehicular traffic benefits generated by the signal at 4th Street, pedestrians
will also benefit. Currently, a 5 -block separation exists between signalized crossing points of
the high traffic volume TH 25 corridor. The addition of a traffic signal at 4th Street will limit the
distance a pedestrian must go out of his /her way to cross TH 25 to one and a half blocks.
Improved traffic operations will also result at the intersection of TH 25 and CSAH 75
due to the addition of the 4th Street signal by limiting the potential for queues on
CSAH 75 to extend upstream to both Walnut Street to the west and Cedar Street to the
east. Analysis of post - redevelopment traffic operations at these intersections shows
levels of service above acceptable thresholds with little queuing impacts from the
critical TH 25 and CSAH 75 intersection.
Other
Other geometric improvements recommended to improve traffic operations, whether
or not the proposed Redevelopment Plan proceeds, include an additional westbound
approach lane at the intersection of TH 25 and 7th Street, and revised signal phasing
and extension of the westbound storage bay at the I -94 north ramp intersection,
which is currently programmed in Mn /DOT's 2011 -2013 construction schedule.
The transportation planning effort completed by Westwood also include specific
recommendations for pedestrian and other multi -modal transportation
connections through the downtown.
Lastly, to improve north /south pedestrian connectivity for West Broadway,
consideration for future installation of a signal system at Locust Street is
recommended if and when warranted.
fi
Land Use
The McCombs Group melded the outcomes of the Market Analysis and
Transportation components with the stated strategies for the downtown identified
within the 2008 Comprehensive Plan.
As directed by the original scope of work, the consulting team created four
downtown plan alternatives, each meeting the vision, principles and goals
identified earlier. The plan document reviews each of the four concepts in detail.
Through the public review and feedback process, the Steering Committee
ultimately selected Compact Scheme A as the Preferred Alternative Plan land use design.
However, the plan notes that the Downtown Framework Plan serves as the more
general guiding Land Use document. This is in recognition of the fact that the
actual configuration of development may flex within Compact Scheme A, but should
always comply with the general Downtown Framework.
To further support downtown development meeting the established Guiding Principles, the
Embracing Downtown Plan includes Design Guidelines for the downtown. Both the
Preferred Alternative Plan and the Design Guidelines recognize the current CCD boundaries
as the applicable geographic planning district, with some suggestions for future expansion
of the district.
Financial Analysis & Implementation
The realization of the plan cannot occur outside of financial feasibility and implementation
outline. Therefore, an implementation section is included with the final draft plan.
The implementation section identifies areas where the City will need to be flexible and
where holding firm to the vision will be important.
A detailed financial analysis was also included in the implementation section, and was
reviewed on a block by block basis. Certain blocks will be more expensive to redevelop
versus others. The consulting team is recommending starting with the "Anchor" block
and Block 34 as immediate catalyst project areas.
Several financial tools both within Monticello and through outside agencies were
identified to help address how expensive redevelopment projects can become reality.
Implementation steps also include taking a closer look at leadership in downtown. They
state that leadership needs to be positive and should include representatives from major
employers, business /property owners, community center, city staff, policy boards,
chamber, legal, banking, downtown association, and the parks board.
Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
The Community Development Director has prepared a list of recommended text changes in
the Comprehensive Plan (see attached).
In summary: The McCombs Team recognized that many of the existing Downtown Policies
contained within the Comprehensive Plan were in fact still valid. As such, the amendments
proposed to the Comp Plan include additions of those new policies /guiding principles as
identified with the Embracing Downtown plan.
The new plan for downtown does recognize that a change in goals is needed to better
implement the stated policies and achieve the larger vision. Therefore, the proposed
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan included a full replacement of the previous goal
statements (which were consistent with the 1997 Downtown Plan) with new goals as
outlined within the Embracing Downtown plan. They are broken into three distinct
components as identified within the plan — Land Use, Transportation, and Downtown
Design and Image.
Lastly, the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment includes the full adoption of the
Embracing Downtown plan as an Appendix to the Chapter 3 — Land Use.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Motion to adopt resolution 2011 -116, recommending approval of the
November 4, 2011 Embracing Downtown final report and recommended
text changes in the Monticello Comprehensive Plan.
2. Motion to deny adoption of resolution 2011 -116, based on findings to be made
by the Planning Commission.
C. STAFF AND POLICY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS
The Embracing Downtown Steering Committee reviewed the Embracing
Downtown Plan in detail on November 22, 2011. The Steering Committee
recommend the City Council incorporate the Embracing Downtown Plan into the
Comprehensive Plan.
The IEDC reviewed the plan and recommended approval of the Comprehensive
Plan amendment incorporating the Embracing Downtown Plan into the
Comprehensive Plan at their December 6, 2011 meeting. The Planning
Commission held the required public hearing at their December 6, 2011 meeting
and recommended the City Council amend the Comprehensive Plan as proposed.
City Staff, the Embracing Downtown Steering Committee, IEDC, and Planning
Commission recommend the EDA recommend the City Council approve the
Embracing Downtown Plan as part of the City Comprehensive Plan.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
A. Resolution 2011 -116
B. Embracing Downtown Plan
C. Amendments to Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3 —Land Use (Proposed)
CITY OF MONTICELLO
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA)
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-116
RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE EMBRACING DOWNTOWN PLAN
AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
Date: December 14th, 2011 Resolution No. 2011 -116
Motion By:
Seconded By:
WHEREAS, the City of Monticello has, in 2008, adopted a Comprehensive Plan guiding the
growth, development, land use, and infrastructure planning for the City; and
WHEREAS, said Comprehensive Plan provides for the development and redevelopment of the
downtown as a part of such guidance; and
WHEREAS, the City last undertook a specific planning effort for its core downtown area in
1997; and
WHEREAS, fundamental changes to the demographics, transportation systems, and land uses in
the City have occurred since the completion of the previous downtown plan; and
WHEREAS, the City has found that a revised and detailed plan for its downtown would be
consistent with both City objectives and the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, as part of updated planning efforts for the downtown, the City engaged the services
of McComb Group to complete a market analysis of downtown; and
WHEREAS, as part of updated planning efforts for the downtown, the City engaged the services
of Westwood Consulting to assess the transportation system within and throughout the
downtown area; and
WHEREAS, as part of updated planning efforts for the downtown, the City engaged the services
of Architectural Consortium and Westwood Consulting to analyze land use and design
opportunities in downtown, and
WHEREAS, as part of updated planning efforts for the downtown, the City engaged Economic
Development services to ensure public input was obtained through the entire process; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monticello Industri al and Economic Development Committee makes the
following additional Findings of Fact in relation to the need for adoption of an updated
downtown plan:
• The 2011 Embracing Downtown Plan recognizes downtown as a unique commercial
district that is part of Monticello's heritage and identity, and provides a guide for
development, redevelopment, and revitalization in downtown Monticello.
• The downtown update was accomplished through a partnership between the City,
downtown landowners, business owners, and policy makers.
• The Embracing Downtown revitalization vision includes seeking additional retail and
office professional end users, making needed transportation improvements, shifting the
focus of downtown 90 degrees, initiating catalyst projects on the "anchor" block and
Block 34, creating more park programs and public gathering places, and utilizing Walnut
Street as the main pedestrian thoroughfare.
• The updated plan includes a comprehensive implementation section to further assist in
achieving the vision.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE ITRESOL VED, that the Monticello Economic Development
Authority recommends that the Monticello City Council adopt the amendment to Chapter 3 of
the Comprehensive Plan, including the following:
1. The document entitled "Embracing Downtown Monticello," dated November 4, 2011.
2. The document entitled "Chapter 5, Land Use" as replacement text for the existing
Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3.
ADOPTED BY the Economic Development Authority of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, this
14th day of December, 2011.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
William Demeules, EDA Chair
ATTEST:
Megan Barnett Livgard, Economic Development Director
EXHIBIT "A"
Attach Final "Embracing Downtown" Plan
EXHIBIT "B"
Attach Final Comprehensive Plan Amendment Text
EMBRACING DOWNTOWN
MONTICELLO
FINAL REPORT
Monticello CCD Revitalization
City of Monticello, Minnesota
November 4, 2011
Prepared by
McComb Group, Ltd.
Economic Development Services
Architectural Consortium
Westwood Professional Services
FINAL REPORT
Embracing Downtown Monticello
Monticello CCD Revitalization
City of Monticello, Minnesota
November 4, 2011
Prepared for
City of Monticello
& Monticello EDA
505 Walnut Street
Monticello, MN 55362
Prepared by
McComb Group, Ltd.
Economic Development Services
Architectural Consortium
Westwood Professional Services
11
Table of Contents Page No
Executive Summary v
Introduction 1
Chapter One — Research and Analysis 5
Chapter Two —Revitalizing Downtown Planning Process 28
Chapter Three— Downtown Framework Plan and Design Guidelines 51
Chapter Four— Implementation Approach 57
Chapter Five — Implementation Actions 72
Appendix
A. Market Study
B. Design Guidelines
C. Traffic Study
List of Figures
Page No
Figure 1— CCD District
3
Figure 2 — Broadway street
5
Figure 3 — Ace Hardware at 3'd Street
5
Figure 4 — Cub Foods
6
Figure 5 — Community Center
6
Figure 6 — Cargill Kitchen Solutions
7
Figure 7 — West Bridge/East Bridge Parks
8
Figure 8 — Parking Supply
11
Figure 9 — Detailed Parking Study Area
16
Figure 10— Downtown Sidewalk System
19
Figure 11—Land Use
22
Figure 12— Aging and Obsolete Properties
23
Figure 13 — Willing Sellers
24
Figure 14 — Compact Scheme A
33
Figure 15 — Block Number Key Map
34
Figure 16— Compact Scheme B
36
Figure 17 — Expanded Scheme C
38
Figure 18 — Minimalist Scheme D
40
Figure 19 — Village Green Concept
42
Figure 20 — Refined Scheme A
44
Figure 21— Framework Plan
51
Figure 22 — Design Guideline Use Areas
53
Figure 23 — Highway 25 from 7`h to Broadway
54
Figure 24 — Broadway Street from Linn to Palm
54
Figure 25 — Walnut Street looking north at the Anchor Block
55
Figure 26— Historic Building Proportions
55
Figure 27 — Implementation Plan Illustration
60
Figure 28 — Illustrative Redevelopment Plan
72
Figure 29 — Walnut Street View at the Anchor Block
74
Figure 30 — Walnut Street View from West Bridge Park
76
iii
List of Tables Page No
Table 1— Existing Parking Supply
12
Table 2 — Public Parking Counts
17
Table 3 — Summary of Market Potential
26
Table 4— Summary of Scheme A Development
35
Table 5 — Summary of Scheme B Development
37
Table 6 — Summary of Scheme C Development
39
Table 7 — Summary of Scheme D Development
41
Table 8 — Summary of Refined Scheme A Development
45
Table 9 — Downtown Property Values
59
Table 10— Preliminary Downtown Redevelopment Economics
63
Table 11—Short-term Redevelopment Scenario Economics
65
IV
Executive Summary
Embracing Downtown Monticello
The Monticello Economic Development Authority (EDA) seeks to create a vibrant downtown district,
capturing the benefits of its historic downtown area, location on the Mississippi River, river crossing and
other community assets. The EDA envisions a downtown that is economically sound, convenient and
accessible— where pedestrians can enjoy great shopping, dining and entertainment.
In the Spring of 2010 the Monticello EDA issued a Request for Proposal — Embracing Downtown
Monticello - seeking a multi -disciplinary consulting team to provide guidance for the revitalization of
downtown Monticello. In September 2010, the consulting team consisting of McComb Group, LLC,
Economic Development Services, Inc., Architectural Consortium, LLC, and Westwood Professional
Services, was engaged to analyze existing conditions and issues, and create an implementation plan that
integrates market, transportation, land use and finance considerations. The EDA established a Steering
Committee with responsibility for interaction with the project consulting team.
Description of the Planning Process
The Embracing,Downtown Monticello planning process included five phases:
1. Research and analysis
2. Assessment of alternatives and preliminary feasibility
3. Stakeholder review of alternatives and identification of the preferred alternative
4. Feasibility and strategy development for the preferred alternative
5. Creation of a downtown revitalization strategy
Conditions and Issues
Monticello functions as the sub -regional center between St. Cloud and Maple Grove due to its size,
location, and a constellation of assets including major employers, health care, shopping, dining,
entertainment, the civic center and hockey center.
In recent years downtown Monticello has been in a cycle of decline. The older store formats and
parking don't work for today's businesses and customers. In many communities, including Monticello,
this leads to a negative, self -reinforcing cycle of low customer traffic, high business turnover, low rents,
and insufficient revenue for building maintenance and state building code updates.
Businesses in downtown Monticello lack visibility. The older buildings are oriented to Broadway —
historically the high traffic corridor in the community. Only 20% of the businesses downtown orient to
TH-25, the corridor with the highest traffic count in recent years due to the Mississippi River bridge
crossing. However, TH-25 in downtown Monticello enjoys traffic counts that are stronger than the
development area south of 1-94 in Monticello. Walgreen's recently evaluated available sites in
Monticello and built a new store at the intersection of Broadway and TH-25 in downtown. The
investment by Walgreen's can be a catalyst for revitalizing downtown.
V
The market analysis, which serves as a critical foundation for the Embracing Downtown Monticello
implementation strategy, reveals market potential that substantially exceeds the land area available
downtown. Key categories that can be accommodated downtown include: a department store, grocery,
dining and other retail stores.
Community Goals and Guiding Principles
Community goals and guiding principles serve as another critical foundation for the plan. The following
ten strategies for downtown Monticello, paraphrased from the Land Use Chapter of the Monticello
Comprehensive Guide Plan (2008 update), were considered by the Steering Committee and consulting
team and integrated into the 2011 Embracing Downtown Monticello plan.
• The downtown focus area should extend from the River to 7th Street, and from Locust Street on
the west to Cedar Street on the east.
• Downtown land use should be a mix of retail, service, office, civic, and residential development.
Cargill should be encouraged to remain in the downtown area.
• With continued traffic growth on TH-25, it is essential to form a strong link along Walnut Street
between the river, Broadway businesses, and the Community Center to establish connections
between the factors that attract people to the downtown.
• To help create a new "main street" all new development on Walnut Street should have
storefronts oriented to Walnut Street.
• The City should explore ways to improve pedestrian and bicycle experience along Walnut.
• It is essential to prevent the use of Walnut Street for "by-pass" or "cut -through" traffic as traffic
volumes increase on TH-25. Traffic calming measures should be applied to Walnut Street.
• Housing should supplement and support downtown commercial development. Housing should
be encouraged on the edges of downtown, not as a replacement for commercial use, and all
housing in the downtown should be multiple family housing.
• Strong connections to adjacent neighborhoods should be promoted for the downtown;
pedestrian crossings of TH-25 at Broadway and 7th Street should be enhanced.
• Downtown connections with the River should be enhanced, especially at Walnut Street.
• Downtown access would be improved by trail or bike lane improvements along River Street to
take advantage of the controlled intersection with TH-25.
The community goals and guiding principles together with the market potential formed the foundation
for the redesign of downtown. Other critical factors that informed the physical redesign of downtown
include the following:
• Traffic patterns
• Historic downtown buildings
• A commitment to a pedestrian -friendly environment
• Contemporary retail design including visibility and parking
• Mississippi River, parks and trails
• Community Center
• Cargill, Xcel Energy and New River Medical Center
V1
A Framework Plan was
developed for the downtown
CCD District that illustrates
the reorganization of the
northern part of downtown
to capture existing market
opportunities for both new
development on vacant lots
and redevelopment of other
existing properties.
The plan represents a 90
degree reorientation of the
downtown shopping district
with improved access and
sight lines from TH-25. The
north end is anchored by
public access and river
oriented commercial activity.
The south end is anchored
by existing retail near 1-94
(Cub Foods area) and the
Community Center, which
generates over 230,000 visits
per year. It is a fusion of a
traditional downtown with a
format that works for
today's retailers.
6TH STRFFT
W dd�
2
<
,
l
G. C
Public
Ex Retail
STREET
4TH STREET
CCN S1,90
A key feature of the Existirg Retail /U -J
Framework Plan is the
proposed addition of a traffic
signal at the intersection of 1.94
TH-25 with 4th Street to
enhance access to the four- DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO FRAMEWORK PLAN
block area bounded by 4th
Street, Broadway, TH-25, and
Locust Street. This four -block area represents the primary opportunity to create a site larger than a city
block that can accommodate a medium-sized retailer, such as a department store, and its required
parking. An anchor use in this location will enjoy access and visibility from TH-25 and will become the
focal point for additional retail redevelopment in the downtown CCD District.
Vision, Guiding Principles and Goals
Vision: Downtown Monticello is the sub regional center for business, professional, personal, health care
services, dining and river -anchored recreation between St. Cloud and Maple Grove. Retail vitality is
created by anchor stores and businesses that provide shopping and convenience goods in a human scale
environment and are concentrated in districts with safe and convenient access and good parking. Retail,
vii
dining and entertainment businesses build on proximity to the Mississippi River, parks and trails to create
an activity node for outdoor recreation including bicycling, fishing, canoeing, kayaking, walking,
sledding, skating and bird watching.
Guiding Principles provide a flexible framework to guide public and private sector planning, decisions,
teamwork, and investment overtime. Recommended principles include:
• Build on core assets of greater downtown Monticello:
o Monticello's role as the sub regional center between St. Cloud & Maple Grove
o Mississippi River & city parks
o Traffic generated by bridge crossing
o New River Medical Center
o Community Center
o Employee/customer/visitor base created by Xcel, Cargill & New River Medical Center
o New Walgreen's
• A shared vision among property owners, business owners, and the City is the foundation for
effective team work and long term success.
• A shared understanding of realistic market potential is the foundation for design and generation
of a healthy business mix.
• A safe, attractive human scale environment and entrepreneurial businesses that actively
emphasize personal customer service will differentiate downtown from other shopping districts.
• The river is a distinctive asset that differentiates downtown Monticello and serves as a
foundation for design and as a focus for activity.
• Property values can be enhanced if property owners and the city share a vision for downtown
and actively seek to cultivate a safe, appealing environment and attractive business mix.
• The city and business community must work actively with MnDOT to ensure safe local access to
business districts.
Goals: To secure the vision described above, the consulting team recommends that the following goals
be adopted and implemented by the City of Monticello and its EDA.
LAND USE
• Diversify Land use in the downtown; supplement retail and service uses with other activities
that generate traffic.
• Encourage redevelopment of old and obsolete structures; encourage consolidation of small
parcels with multiple ownerships.
• Balance parking and land use to ensure availability of adequate parking at all times.
• Encourage mixed use but don't make it a requirement or prerequisite for development or
redevelopment.
• Discourage residential as a free-standing land use within the core downtown area.
• Establish physical connections between the core downtown area and the riverfront and park.
• Encourage land uses that serve as evening and weekend attractions to the downtown area.
• Expand facilities and parking adjacent to West Bridge Park to help create an anchor attraction at
the north end of Walnut Street.
TRANSPORTATION
• Acknowledge that TH-25 will be limited in terms of providing direct property access.
• Develop circulation patterns that utilize local streets for individual site access.
• Recognize TH-25 as a barrier between the east and west parts of the historic downtown core
areas extending to either side of the TH-25 corridor.
• Consider developing in districts to reduce the need or desire to cross TH-25 between 7th street
and the river crossing.
• Strengthen pedestrian ties throughout downtown including connections to other parts of the
City to the south, west, and east. Downplay TH-25 as a corridor for pedestrian movement.
• Improve pedestrian connections between Broadway and the riverfront park area to allow the
park to serve as an attraction that brings people into the downtown area.
• Improve access to the Mississippi River to expand on recreational opportunities.
• Explore creation of a fourth signalized intersection on TH-25 at 4th Street to improve access to
areas with development and redevelopment potential on either side of the TH-25 corridor.
DOWNTOWN DESIGN AND IMAGE
• Encourage design standards that elevate the quality of downtown development without
creating undue hardships for property and building owners.
• Acknowledge that the historic "Main Street" buildings and developments along Broadway are
functionally obsolete for many tenants and users in today's automobile and convenience -driven
marketplace.
• The public realm of streets, boulevards and sidewalks represents the best opportunity to create
an interim image for downtown as it redevelops.
• The TH-25 and Broadway corridors should be softened with streetscape and landscape features
to offset the effects of high traffic volumes, and to help establish an identity for the CCD.
• Development should orient toward the intersection of TH-25 with Broadway to take advantage
of high traffic volumes in the TH-25 corridor.
• New development in the TH-25 corridor should be scaled to allow visibility to development up
to a block or more away from TH-25.
• New buildings in the TH-25 and Broadway corridors should be located to allow for eventual
widening of the corridor right-of-way and roadway.
• To the extent possible, buildings should occupy street frontages and should front on public
sidewalks with connections to a continuous "downtown" sidewalk pedestrian system.
• Proposed uses should have adequate parking (private or public) within easy and convenient
walking distance.
• The downtown plan should provide strategically located public gathering spaces to bring people
together to experience a sense of community that is associated with downtown.
Feasibility and Financing Overview
The feasibility of transforming of downtown was analyzed. Monticello has an opportunity to capitalize
on the new Walgreen's and related intersection improvements to relocate a locally owned, business -
Ace Hardware — to a new, more visible site on the southeast corner of Broadway and TH-25. The
market analysis and early stage discussions with a department store and hotel indicate that it may be
feasible to attract a significant new anchor; this would drive additional customer traffic to downtown.
ix
The estimated preliminary redevelopment costs for each downtown block were calculated using
assessor's market values and a contingency to cover other costs. The amount of additional retail or
office space that could be located on each block, if it was developed, was estimated, along with the
estimated tax increment generated from the new development and estimated revenues from sale of
pad sites and parking license fees. The result was a preliminary estimate of the financial feasibility of
redeveloping each block. This analysis demonstrated that some blocks are relatively inexpensive to
redevelop, while others are more expensive and/or yield less tax increment. This analysis was used to
identify the areas where redevelopment would be most effectively implemented.
Monticello is in a position to use substantial tax increment finance resources to facilitate site assembly
for the Ace Hardware relocation and an anchor business. However, the availability of these tax
increment resources will expire in 2012 and 2013. A priority use of additional tax increment generated
by new private developments (hardware store and anchor) will be additional redevelopment and
relocation activities. Common areas and streetscape improvements follow private investment, with
funding coming from common area fees, tax increment finance, and possible redevelopment/small city
grant funds available through the MN Department of Employment and Economic Development.
The Mississippi riverfront revitalization projects can serve as an early stage catalyst also. Legacy Funds —
available from the constitutionally dedicated sales tax devoted to the environment, arts, history and
culture — can provide an external source of funds for public realm improvements connected to the river,
parks and trails.
Implementation Strategy
The implementation strategy is flexible and driven by market opportunities and willing sellers. Property
values and rents will likely rise in revitalized areas with improved customer traffic because increases can
be supported by increased business volume. Central to the success of the revitalization effort is the
principle of "value creation." Value creation results in:
• Increased customer traffic,
• Increased economic activity and vitality downtown,
• A growing number of businesses with increased sales and profits,
• Buildings that increase in value base on increased sales and profits,
• Increased tax revenues to the city, and
• Increased tax increments to support continued revitalization of downtown.
The Monticello EDA has critical statutory authority, financial resources and access to staff through the
City of Monticello to support downtown revitalization. However, the EDA has comprehensive economic
development responsibilities for the community, a scope well beyond downtown revitalization.
Organizationally the community should consider establishing a Downtown Development Corporation
that includes public and private sector leaders; major employers; downtown business and property
owners; professionals in banking, law and accounting; the Community Center; Park Board; Downtown
Association and Chamber of Commerce.
X
Introduction
Embracing Downtown Monticello
The City of Monticello and the Monticello Economic Development Authority (EDA) seek to create a
vibrant downtown district, capturing the benefits of its historic downtown area, location on the
Mississippi River, river crossing and other community assets. The EDA envisions a downtown that is
economically sound, convenient and accessible — where pedestrians can enjoy great shopping, dining
and entertainment.
In the Spring of 2010 the Monticello EDA issued a Request for Proposal — Embracing Downtown
Monticello - seeking a multi -disciplinary consulting team to provide guidance for the revitalization of
downtown Monticello. In September 2010, the consulting team consisting of McComb Group, LLC,
Economic Development Services, Inc., Architectural Consortium, LLC, and Westwood Professional
Services, was engaged to analyze existing conditions and issues, and create an implementation plan that
integrates market, transportation, land use and finance considerations. The EDA established a Steering
Committee with responsibility for interaction with the project consulting team.
Description of the Planning Process
The Embracing Downtown Monticello planning process included five phases:
1. Research and analysis
2. Assessment of alternatives and preliminary feasibility
3. Stakeholder review of alternatives and identification of the preferred alternative
4. Feasibility and strategy development for the preferred alternative
5. Creation of a downtown revitalization strategy
1
The research and analysis phase included the following components:
• Consultant analysis of market, transportation and land -use conditions, issues, trends and
opportunities.
• Community engagement during this project phase included:
o A public meeting on October 19, 2010 targeted to downtown stakeholders to introduce
the consulting team, outline the planning process, and secure perceptions of downtown.
o Downtown business participation in a shopper's survey conducted in the Fall of 2010 to
provide insight into market demographics and shopper's behavior and choices.
o Over twenty in-person interviews with business and property owners, major employers
and public officials also conducted through the Fall of 2010.
o A public meeting on December 14, 2010 at which downtown stakeholders and citizens
shared perceptions of downtown.
o Steering committee and stakeholder review of consultant research findings at a public
meeting on January 18, 2011.
During the assessment of alternatives and preliminary feasibility, the consulting team considered the
challenges faced by downtown business and property owners and other members of the community as
well as market data, transportation and land use research/analysis. When it became apparent that
Monticello has significant untapped market potential, the consulting team explored alternative
approaches to revitalizing downtown that would bring economic vitality to the area; be attractive to
investors and businesses; capitalize on key community assets; and achieve the community vision of a
convenient, pedestrian -friendly downtown area for shopping, dining, and entertainment. The
alternatives were reviewed with the Steering Committee and Downtown Stakeholders in public
meetings on March 29, 2011 and April 18, 2011 to identify the preferred alternative.
The preferred alternative was developed based on input received in March and April and the consulting
team immediately began in-depth feasibility analysis and strategy development for the preferred
alternative. The analysis and strategy was presented at a public meeting on June 28, 2011.
Based on feedback received at that meeting, additional research was conducting regarding the traffic
alternatives for Walnut Street. The EDA retained McComb Group in a separate assignment to explore
market opportunities with potential downtown anchors, including a department store and hotel. Design
guidelines describing recommended uses, development standards, and architectural form and materials
were developed and reviewed with the Steering Committee and other downtown stakeholders at a
meeting in late September. Transportation research, more detailed financial analysis and insights into
the redevelopment and revitalization process formed the basis for the downtown revitalization
implementation strategy, presented on October 24, 2011.
Definition of Downtown & Central Business District
Early in the planning process the limits for the Downtown area included in the Embracing Downtown
Monticello study were defined to be coincident with the CCD Central Community District as delineated
in the Monticello Zoning Code. The district generally extends from Interstate Highway 94 on the south
to the Mississippi River on the north, and from Maple and Linn streets on the west to Cedar and Palm
Streets on the east. Due to combined residential and commercial use on the two blocks flanking 4th
2
11
Street between Cedar and Palm, these two blocks have also been included in the study area. No further
differentiation has been made between the area described above within the CCD and what might also
be termed the Monticello Central Business District or CBD. For convenience, the term CCD has been
used throughout this report to refer to the downtown study area.
Figure 1 illustrates the CCD District boundary and the additional blocks making up the study area.
Figure 1— CCD District
Overview of Market Study Component
An understanding of market characteristics, opportunities and limitations is critical to informing a
realistic downtown revitalization strategy. The McComb Group conducted a market analysis including
the following elements.
Existing conditions
• Interview business and property owners to gain insight into market conditions
• Evaluate existing tenant mix and market orientations of downtown retail and office
establishments
• Evaluate downtown real estate market conditions (rents, operating expense, taxes &
occupancy) and uses
Retail Market Analysis
• Evaluate competitive shopping areas, including anchor stores and tenant mix
3
• Survey customers to gain insight into Monticello's trade area and inflow patronage,
based on customer home address and reason for shopping
• Identify retail sales trends
• Identify primary and secondary trade areas and future supportable space
Office Market Analysis
• Identify existing office buildings
• Evaluate historic office absorption
• Evaluate future office demand
Multi -Family Evaluation
• Identify existing multi -family housing
• Assess future role of multi -family housing in downtown
Market research was conducted to identify the demand for retail and office space in downtown
Monticello for the period 2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030. Short-term estimates for 2010, 2015, and 2020
are contained in this report. Work tasks are summarized below.
Business establishments in downtown Monticello were identified and categorized by type to determine
tenant mix and market orientation. Principal competitive shopping areas were identified and evaluated.
Retail businesses in downtown participated in a survey of their customers to determine where they live
and why they shop in downtown. Downtown's primary and destination trade areas were delineated
based on arterial road patterns, competitive shopping centers, customer survey results, and McComb
Group experience. The economy of the trade area was analyzed to identify and quantify those factors
that generate support for retail and service establishments. Retail sales in Monticello from the Retail
Census were examined to determine market share trends for the period 2002 and 2007. Supportable
square feet of retail, food service, and service establishments was estimated by business type.
Office market research was conducted to identify existing office buildings in downtown Monticello
including occupied space, vacant space, rental rates, operating expenses, and property taxes. Office
buildings competitive with downtown Monticello were identified. Historic office absorption in
downtown and other parts of Monticello was quantified and the downtown share of the office market
was identified. Business employment categories typically associated with commercial office space in the
City of Monticello were identified and evaluated to determine historic growth of office inclined
employment categories. Office demand in downtown Monticello was identified for future years.
Multi -family housing in downtown Monticello was identified and evaluated. The future role of housing
in downtown was recommended.
The complete Market Study and its methodology and conclusions are included in the Appendix to this
report.
4
Chapter 1- Research and Analysis
Historic Context
The growth and transitions in Downtown Monticello have occurred over a long period of time that is
reflected in the location, layout and condition of structures and their context throughout the Central
Community District (CCD). Downtown Monticello evolved initially along Broadway Street before there
was a bridge crossing over the Mississippi River. The buildings constructed during the initial era of
downtown development reflected the types of businesses which occupied the downtown area and were
influenced by the fact that most businesses occupied structures owned by the proprietor, and were
limited in size by the pattern of lots along Broadway and by the building technology of the time.
■=
The second era for downtown development followed the construction of MN Trunk Highway 25 (TH-25)
and the bridge crossing the Mississippi River. Ultimately, this era created a 90 -degree shift from
Broadway as the primary axis of downtown. Traffic along TH-25 (Pine Street) through Monticello led to
the expansion of business to the blocks between Broadway and the rail corridor at 5th Street. Most of
this development occurred within two blocks to the west of Pine Street and one block to the east of Pine
Street. The area of downtown on the east side of Pine Street retained a mix of single-family homes that
are interspersed with commercial development oriented towards the Highway.
The third era for downtown development occurred as a result of the construction of Interstate Highway
94 through the southern part of the City. The Interstate Highway and its interchange with TH-25 created
areas along the freeway and abutting TH-25 for more contemporary commercial and retail development
with a strong orientation toward automobile use. Structures within this area are larger, and have a
distinct identity that is associated with the use and the brand of the occupants. Franchise businesses
with an emphasis on architectural design that can be readily identified by customers are the norm
within this area of the downtown.
The final, most recent era for downtown development is a product of public policy encouraging the
revitalization and redevelopment of properties within the CCD Central Community District. The
Monticello Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and policies and actions of the City Council and Economic
Development Association have resulted in significant redevelopment within the downtown district.
Although planning for the downtown district as reflected in the 1997 Downtown Revitalization Plan
established a direction for the entire downtown, redevelopment activities have been limited to public
facilities including the library and the community center, one block of retail development between 5th
Street and 6 1 Street between Walnut Street and TH-25, and redevelopment of obsolete structures in
two locations along Broadway.
These most recent private
developments, accomplished
largely without public subsidy,
include the mixed-use
development on the southeast
corner of Broadway and Locust
Street, and the new Walgreen's
pharmacy located in the northeast
quadrant of the Intersection of
Broadway with TH-25.
R
As can be expected, the most recent additions to the downtown development fabric represent the most
applicable development forms for meeting the needs of the contemporary consumer. Convenience and
accessibility are among the top criteria of consumers when making decisions about where to conduct
business or procure goods and services. These qualities are reflected in the most recent two eras of
downtown development. Ironically, the predominant image for a small town downtown expressed by
residents is the quaint setting represented by Broadway, where small-scale structures with individual
architectural expression and identity exist along a tree -lined boulevard that invites foot traffic and
interaction between people on the street. Fulfilling both the pragmatic requirements for ease of access
and convenience, and the aesthetic requirements for a sense of identity for Downtown Monticello will
be an important part of a successful plan for revitalizing downtown.
Activity Centers
Downtown Monticello has existing features that contribute to the potential for expanding business in
the downtown area by attracting large numbers of people to the downtown on a daily basis. The most
important of these traffic generators is TH-25 which carries tens of thousands of potential customers
and service users through the community each day. The existing traffic levels on TH-25 are very
attractive to potential retailers and service providers that make locational decisions in part based on the
traffic levels of adjacent streets. To a lesser extent, traffic levels on County Road 75 (Broadway) also
represent significant traffic levels that will appeal to retailers searching for high -traffic locations.
Another significant activity generator is the Community Center complex including the Community Center
itself, the City Hall offices, and the Public Library. The programming and use of these facilities attracts
large numbers of people to the downtown area, and provides services that appeal to a wide variety of
users on weekdays, evenings, and weekends. The community center recreation complex generates over
200,000 visits per year, and meeting rooms attract another 30,000 annual visits. Expansion of services
and activities provided in these facilities can continue to attract new users to the downtown area.
The Cargill Kitchen Solutions corporate headquarters, research and development facilities, and a
sophisticated production operation represent a third significant activity generator for the downtown
area. Cargill corporate headquarters and research and development employees, customers, visitors,
and suppliers, represent a
reliable daytime population
in downtown Monticello.
Retaining the Cargill facilities
and encouraging Cargill
expansion to complement
other downtown growth and
redevelopment objectives
will retain and expand the
importance of Cargill as an
activity center feeding
downtown business.
7
Finally, the shopping center located between 1-94 and 7th Street on the west side of TH-25 is an
important activity center and traffic generator based on customer traffic for users of Cub Foods, the K -
Mart store, and the connecting strip -mall businesses. Due to the size and nature of these retail facilities,
the shopping center attracts a much higher daily complement of shoppers than the smaller businesses
located at the north end of the downtown do.
The function of these activity generators should be protected and expanded, where possible, to
continue to bring prospective consumers of downtown resources into the downtown area. Interaction
between Cargill, the Community Center, and the Cub Foods/K-Mart shopping center is enhanced by
their proximity; they occur within a four -block area representing a walking distance of less than one-
quarter mile. While not everyone will walk between activity centers, their closeness makes it
convenient to do so, especially if interaction is encouraged. Development of other Activity Centers in
the northern part of the downtown area could likewise encourage more interaction between businesses
and users south of 4th Street, and businesses from 4th Street north to Broadway and River Streets.
Mississippi River and Riverfront Parks
The proximity of the Mississippi River and two riverfront parks to the downtown area represents the
opportunity to create an Activity Center for the northern part of downtown Monticello. Existing
facilities in West Bridge Park and East Bridge Park already create a variety of opportunities for passive
and active recreational use and access to the Mississippi River; both visual and physical. The two parks
are connected by a walkway below the TH-25 bridge, but are both somewhat remote from access and
connections with the downtown area. The Mississippi River is a unique resource that should be
leveraged to differentiate Monticello and its downtown area from other small communities along the I-
94 corridor. With better connections to the downtown area, an expansion of recreational facilities, and
the type of emphasis on programmed activities that is visible in the management of the Community
Center, the Riverfront Parks could become the Activity Center that anchors the north end of downtown
and the traffic generator that feeds interaction with the other Activity Centers along Walnut Street.
JIB
77,
C_7
Transportation - Roadway
Transportation issues in the downtown Monticello area hinge on the TH-25 (Pine Street) and County
Road 75 (Broadway) corridors. These two corridors provide the major arterial connections through the
CCD District in the north -south and east -west directions respectively. Both corridors have relatively high
levels of peak hour traffic, and represent potential future capacity problems for movement through and
within the downtown area. Existing traffic volumes combined with expected traffic growth, even with
no change to downtown area land use, will ultimately lead to capacity and congestion problems at
critical downtown intersection locations. The City's 2030 Transportation plan identifies the need for a
second crossing over the Mississippi River in order to maintain adequate capacity in the TH-25 corridor
through at least 2030. Identifying the preferred bridge location and accomplishing the second river
crossing will be critical to the long term success of downtown.
The recent redevelopment in the northeast corner of Broadway and TH-25 for Walgreen's required
improvements to the TH-25 and Broadway/River Street intersections and traffic signals to account for
additional traffic generated by that development. In spite of these recently completed improvements,
there will still be future issues on Broadway due to the narrow corridor width and resulting narrow
travel lane widths through the downtown area from Maple Street to Palm Street. The need to plan for
future roadway capacity for the Broadway Street corridor has led to past discussions that have included
possible options that would change the character and function of Broadway through the CCD, including
possible elimination of the planted median treatments, possible elimination of on -street parking, and
possible reduction in sidewalk widths where bump -out areas currently exist. These options provide the
most viable solutions for improvements given the existing corridor dimension from storefront to
storefront. However, most property owners and business owners along the corridor consider the loss of
these existing elements to be contrary to promoting the continuation and growth of business in the
corridor.
TH-25 is a heavily -traveled corridor through the downtown area from 1-94 to the Mississippi River
bridge. As a state highway, the corridor is under the jurisdiction of MnDOT and is dependent upon
MnDOT approval for changes in roadway geometry, access, and traffic control. Traffic in this corridor is
heavy, especially at peak hour periods when commuters from the north side of the River take advantage
of the bridge as a link to the Interstate 94 corridor. Although the high traffic volumes appeal to retailers
and service providers who make site selections based in part on adjacent traffic volumes, MnDOT's
functional emphasis for the corridor is to carry traffic through the Monticello downtown in as rapid and
efficient a manner as possible. This mission is the basis for limitations on access to individual
development sites from the roadway, and is the reason that traffic control is biased towards moving
traffic through the TH-25 corridor, even at the expense of side street operations. The amount of "green
time" in the TH-25 traffic signals allocated to providing traffic progression through the corridor limits
how much time is available for turning movements and through movements on the side streets, and
limits the time available for pedestrians to safely cross the TH-25 corridor, even where intersections
include traffic signals.
The northerly end of the TH-25 corridor from 5th Street to Broadway is limited in width by existing, older
development on either side of the roadway, which limits the ability for the provision of turn lanes to
supplement the lanes needed for through -traffic movement. This condition will be partially resolved
with acquisition of properties along the east side of the approach to Broadway to allow for additional
turn lanes at the Broadway intersection. The narrow corridor north of 5th Street and existing
development with no setback from the right-of-way line limit the space available for boulevard area,
9
sidewalks, and landscaping from 5th Street to Broadway. Because of these constraints, existing sidewalk
areas are immediately adjacent to the roadway, affording little space for snow storage during the winter
months, and little protection for pedestrians from the intense traffic levels that occur on TH-25 during
peak traffic periods.
Walnut Street has been recognized in earlier planning efforts as a more friendly north -south corridor
through the downtown area with the capability to support adjacent development both from a traffic -
carrying standpoint, and from the ability to provide for north -south pedestrian connections through the
downtown area. Improvements completed in the Walnut Street corridor concurrent with the
development of the Community Center and retail shops to the east of the Community Center included
modest streetscape improvements for sidewalks, street furniture, and street lighting, and also
incorporated angled on -street parking where feasible between 7th Street and Broadway. Because it
crosses the railroad corridor at 5th street and extends from 7th Street to River Street, Walnut Street is
well situated to act as a parallel collector street to TH-25, providing by-pass opportunities for local
traffic, and providing local access to businesses and parking throughout the CCD west of TH-25.
Maple Street is the next local street to the west of Walnut that is continuous across the railroad tracks
from 6th Street north to Broadway and beyond to the riverfront. While the continuity of Maple Street
makes it viable as a north -south collector street, the northern part of the street is lined on both sides
with blocks that are 100 -percent single-family land use. Because of difficulties involved with either
public or private acquisition of properties of this type, Maple Street is unlikely to provide expansion
opportunity for the downtown district.
To the east of TH-25, Cedar Street provides a north -south collector street function that mirrors Walnut
Street on the west side of TH-25. Cedar Street extends from 7th Street northward across the rail corridor
and Broadway, terminating at a parking lot for East Bridge Park at River Street. Cedar Street can provide
local access along its length to properties in the blocks adjacent to TH-25 where access from the
Highway is limited by MnDOT.
Transportation — Parking Supply
Public and private off-street and on -street parking has been inventoried for commercial properties
within the Downtown CCD district. Figure 8 on the following page illustrates parking lot locations and
space counts for the study area. Private parking areas are indicated with numbers in red, and public
spaces for off-street parking lots, are listed in blue.
The available parking supply was analyzed on a block by block basis to determine the adequacy of the
existing parking supply to support existing development, and to identify problem areas for consideration
during the formulation of revitalization plan options. Details of existing parking supplies and parking
ratios for commercial development within the downtown area are summarized in Table 1.
10
;I
"N; I
.;� - "
X
fth
13
,4
%xit WRI - -4 - 261 38
7
.28 64 138
"K'577�1
, kh
71 14C 43
:54 8!., 4
- I dk 104
4, _ - '65 IL
40" AA A.,
-.Ado
f S' 2 2�,_-�*Q
133
1�4t
2
59 Jk
44 A 4, P
�- ,I wol
24j�,�
93 ' "2;, -
33
25
164 It
35
9Aar.
t 7 5 1,
31 29 146 134
70
34 27
77
8 19
rte" _TUL
OM_
♦
5 730
333
102 2
410 38
Figure 8 — Parking Supply
11
Table 1
Existing Parking Supply
Block Number
Parking Spaces
Building Area
Parking Ratio
3
158
15,000 SF
10.5/1,000 SF
4
838
168,000 SF
5.0/1,000 SF
5
80
14,000 SF
5.7/1,000 SF
6
53
16,000 SF
3.3/1,000 SF
6
70
Library
NA
12/13
250
Community Center
NA
14
90
35,000 SF
2.6/1,000 SF
15
172
36,000 SF
4.8/1,000 SF
16
72
19,000 SF
3.8/1,000 SF
17
59
9,000 SF
6.5/1,000 SF
18/19
170
120,000 SF
1.4/1,000 SF
31
161
36,000 SF
4.5/1,000 SF
32
120
21,000 SF
5.7/1,000 SF
33
30
12,000 SF
2.5/1,000 SF
34
130*
27,000 SF
4.8/1,000 SF
35
154*
46,000 SF
3.3/1,000 SF
36
81
40,000 SF
2.0/1,000 SF
51
58*
17,000 SF
3.4/1,000 SF
52
139*
45,000 SF
2.8/1,000 SF
53
120*
35,000 SF
3.4/1,000 SF
�Nauc wUiiL� niuiuue puunc parking
For commercial development in a downtown district where parking can be shared between private
owners, and where public on and off-street parking is available, parking ratios of 4 spaces per 1,000
square feet should be adequate to provide convenient parking during peak and off-peak periods. Blocks
3, 4, 5, and 6 south of 6t" Street are among the most contemporary commercial developments within
the downtown study area and all exhibit adequate off-street parking. A ratio over 10 spaces per 1,000
square feet is appropriate for Block 3 due to the additional demand from restaurant uses on that block.
Block 6, although less than 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet, is likely parked adequately due to reduced
demand for the auto parts store which includes warehouse space. The library parking is separated out
for Block 6 in Table 1 because it does not fit the retail or commercial criteria for a specific parking ratio
based on floor area. Observation of the library parking indicates that it adequately supports the library
function, and provides overflow parking capability for the Community Center.
Blocks 12 and 13 containing the Community Center are also not able to be evaluated on the basis of
parking ratio. The uses in the Community Center and City offices create parking demand based on when
users are attracted, and how many are using the facility at a given time. In general, the amount of
parking for the Community Center including the Montessori school and fire hall is observed to be
adequate for most occasions. However, the distribution of the parking with the largest concentration of
parking to the west of the facility creates the appearance of inadequate parking as users seek to park
near the main entrances on the south and east sides of the building. This demand has led to routine use
of the library parking and the on -street parking along Walnut Street by Community Center users.
Parking to the west of the Community Center is also reported to be challenging when weekend National
12
Guard use of the facility overlaps with meetings, weddings, or other large gatherings. Balancing parking
distribution for the Community Center should be addressed in planning for downtown revitalization.
Block 14 to the east of the Community Center is one of the blocks redeveloped in response to the public
investment in the Community Center, and includes the municipal liquor store and a variety of retail
spaces for smaller tenants. Based on a target ratio of 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet, this block should
have a minimum of 140 spaces to support the 35,000 square feet of retail development, but it has only
90 off-street spaces to support it. About 10,000 square feet of the total 35,000 square feet of retail on
Block 14 is oriented toward Walnut Street with its access and storefronts facing to the west. This area of
the retail space is only supported by 13 on -street public parking spaces located on the east side of
Walnut Street. Adding to the lack of available parking for this space, the Walnut Street parking spaces
are in high demand for Community Center users, and additional parking on the west side of Walnut
Street is seldom available. The 25,000 square feet of Block 14 oriented toward Highway 25 is supported
by 90 parking spaces, which results in a ratio of 3.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet, approaching the goal
of 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet, but still representing a condition of inadequate off-street parking.
The parking shortage for Block 14 should be addressed in planning for downtown revitalization.
Parking on Block 15 reflects the past use of the existing building as a grocery store with an overall
parking ratio approaching 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet. It may be possible to reduce parking on Block
15 since the current tenant mix includes a variety of office uses along with the remaining smaller retail
tenants. The parking lot layout for Block 15 is based on the utilization of 6th Street functioning as an
aisle with multiple curb cuts for the parking on the south side of the block. Since 6th Street is only one
block long on the east side of Highway 25, the continued use of 6th Street in this fashion may be
acceptable, but it limits the ability to provide for public sidewalk along the north side of 6th Street.
North of the railroad tracks, Blocks 16, 17, 31, 32, and 33 generally reflect acceptable amounts of
available off-street parking. Blocks 17, 31, and 32 on the west side of Highway 25 are essentially 100
percent retail and provide overall parking ratios from 4.5 to 6.5 per 1,000 square feet. On the east side
of Highway 25, Blocks 16 and 33 exhibit lower ratios, but the available parking appears to support the
existing uses. On Block 16, warehouse space offsets the retail use on the south side of the block, and
parking for the bank at the northwest corner should be sufficient for the size and type of use. Block 33
includes the former phone company office which has been modified over the years to support more
technology and fewer users.
Blocks 18 and 19 support the core of Cargill operations in downtown Monticello. This two -block area
contains office space, processing space, warehouse space, and research and development space. The
available on-site parking represents an overall parking ratio of only 1.4 spaces per 1,000 square feet,
which seems low for a manufacturing or industrial use with office and a low percentage of warehouse
functions. The shortage of on-site parking is documented in the analysis of parking utilization later in
this section, which demonstrates that Cargill relies on both on -street parking and utilization of other
private parking to meet parking demands. The office and research facility at the northwest corner of
Block 19 appears to have an adequate supply of available parking, but the balance of on-site operations
are supported by limited parking at the east end of Block 18 with no room for expansion. The parking
shortage at the east end of the property creates additional demand for on -street parking on Walnut
Street, and further adds to the parking shortage on Walnut Street associated with the Community
Center and retail uses to the east.
13
The remaining six blocks of the core downtown area north of the railroad tracks flank Broadway and
represent the historic image of downtown Monticello from the first era of downtown development.
Properties fronting Broadway historically developed with little or no parking, relying on parking in the
street and limited parking to the rear. For blocks 34 and 35 on the south side of Broadway, parking has
been supplemented by private and public investment in public parking located on the south half of the
two blocks adjacent to 3`d Street. Ratios included in Table 1 above include this off-street public parking
which results in adequate parking for Block 34 east of TH-25, and nearly adequate parking for Block 35.
However, analysis of utilization in these public parking lots indicates that parking is available throughout
the average weekday, which suggests that parking availability is not currently a factor in the success of
businesses occupying these two blocks. Block 36 indicates a shortage of parking, which is apparent
when breaking down use and ownership for the block. The south half of the block is a combination of a
vacant parcel and the State Farm Insurance office, which appears to be parked appropriately. The
northern half of the block contains early buildings at the east end, and a redeveloped retail structure
with housing above at the west end. Nearly all of the off-street parking in the north half of the lot is
owned by, and supports the retail and housing at the west end of the block. Approximately two-thirds
of the retail space in Block 36 has little or no parking to support retail or office use, and there is a
marked shortage of parking to support the restaurant use for Beef O'Brady's at Broadway and Locust.
On the north side of Broadway, Block 51 has about half of the Block developed as housing, and the east
half utilized for office and retail, including some uses in former homes along Walnut Street. Including
public parking support for this block, the resulting parking ratio is low at 3.4 spaces per 1,000 square
feet. For Block 52 to the east of Walnut Street, combined public and private parking results in an even
lower ratio of parking at 2.8 spaces per 1,000 square feet. The parking shortage demonstrated by the
low parking ratios is exacerbated by the location of most of the public parking in the northwest corner of
Block 52 at an inconvenient distance from the uses fronting Broadway.
Block 53 was evaluated based on the now -complete replacement of the vacant movie theater and
selected office uses on the block with the new Walgreen's store and some replacement office space.
The overall parking ratio for the block is somewhat low, but reflecting on the fact that the new
development is parked based on contemporary standards suggests that the east half of the block is
likely to be parked well below optimum levels for the existing office uses. The analysis included public
parking on the west side of Cedar Street to supplement the off-street private parking.
East Bridge Park and West Bridge Park are both supported by small public parking lots of 14 and 16
spaces respectively. From observations during site visits, the available parking supply is more than
adequate to support the existing activity levels in the parks, except during winter break when use of the
sliding hill at East Bridge Park sometimes causes overflow of parking onto adjacent local streets.
The points below summarize parking supply issues observed within the CCD:
• For newer developments south of the railroad tracks at 5th Street, parking availability is
consistent with contemporary standards for commercial uses.
• One notable exception to this is the block east of the Community Center which exhibits both a
shortage of available parking and issues with distribution of parking on the block.
• Although overall parking for the Community Center appears to be sufficient, the distribution of
available parking forces underutilization of parking west of the building, and competition for
parking spaces to the south and east of the building near the main entrances.
14
• Commercial blocks between 5th Street and 3`d Street generally contain enough appropriately
located parking to support the existing uses, but the demand for this parking is currently low
based on tenants, customer use, and the vacancy of the former Walgreen's site.
• The blocks occupied by Cargill reflect the situation observed for the Community Center:
adequate parking exists near the west end of the property, but shortage of parking based on
parking distribution is observed at the east end of the facility at Walnut Street. Shortages based
on Cargill needs increase competition for limited parking already evidenced at The Community
Center and the retail block to the east.
• The two blocks flanking Broadway to the west of Walnut Street both exhibit serious shortage of
convenient parking to support storefront retail and office uses fronting on Broadway.
Ownership patterns limit the opportunity to provide additional parking with reasonably
convenient locations.
• The two blocks flanking TH-25 and adjoining the south side of Broadway between Walnut Street
and Cedar Street both have relatively large supplies of available public parking to support uses
fronting on Broadway. However, the available parking does not relate well to the majority of
the storefronts, and little has been done by owners to develop secondary customer entrances
on the back sides of the existing structures where parking is available.
• The two blocks flanking TH-25 and adjoining the north side of Broadway between Walnut Street
and Cedar Street both suffer from a shortage of available parking to support existing uses, and
also suffer from shortcomings in parking location for the convenience of users and customers,
except for the portion of the block redeveloped for Walgreen's.
Transportation — Parking Utilization
The inventory of available downtown parking was supplemented with a more detailed parking study
within the Monticello CCD to assess the utilization of public parking available on a typical weekday.
Since private parking lots were not fully utilized during any project team visits to the downtown area, it
was determined that only public parking areas should be analyzed for utilization. The objectives of
analyzing public parking were two -fold; first, to identify where on -street parking was functioning to
supplement off-street private parking, and second, to evaluate if public parking in the vicinity of
Broadway is supporting existing uses fronting Broadway in a meaningful way. Because available parking
supplies support existing development south of the railroad tracks and 5th Street, and because the
problems identified near the Community Center are based on parking location, not utilization, the study
was conducted for twelve blocks north of 5th Street. The study area extended to River Street on the
north, Locust Street on the West, and Cedar Street on the east. Figure 9 depicts the area studied.
All of the public parking spaces (both on -street and off-street) within the study area were counted at the
following times:
• 8:30 AM, 10:30 AM, and 12:30 PM on Thursday, December 9, 2010.
• 3:30 and 5:00 PM on Wednesday, August 24, 2011
• 7:00 and 8:30 AM on Thursday, August 25, 2011
These dates and times were chosen to ensure that the average mid -week parking demand was
accounted for during the morning and afternoon peak use times when most of the existing businesses
are open.
15
`� • fr 'a r ~y ti '
14
Vol,.
- Ift,
r+ 40 ri 2� 53 .A • ' 4'
40
*�) ,# s tiff
F r
10
10
10
134
�'+... 6 + ° 5 t. ..
104r� 1
,' [ t 1tr a' z
_ io j' ..
_ '10 99
* d10r 69 .� 10 I L •[ �r
10 1 X1046
.� e• L ,''p !-
Iro
10
n a. a"
10-10
10 �f •t .j
20 " 10� �xY Si
i �(/�,���,, � , . ill . � 1'•{1. `'�
• f �' w ate/ _'bt it _ •
Figure 9 — Detailed Parking Study Area
16
Detailed count data from the observations is summarized in Table 2, below.
Table 2
Public Parking Counts
Block
Total SpacesP292
Spaces
Available
Number
:30 AM
10:3EAM
12:30 PM
3:30 PM
5:00 PM
16
20
0
2020
19
20
17
20
22
5
1818
23
02
8
20
31
40
9
26
24
25
29
32
30
8
26
26
27
28
33
30
9
28
28
27
27
34
99
6
83
85
87
90
35
134
123
102
105
36
43
42
35
38
51
40
38
32
34
52
74
70
=420
54
54
53
15
15
14
14
Overall
573
496
435
477
87%
83%
74%
74%77°/a
1 84%
The counts showed that of the roughly 600 public spaces available within this 12 square block area,
approximately 80% are available on a typical weekday. Based on the findings in this parking study,
public parking is generally in ample supply within the 12 -square -block study area. Between 70% and
90% of the public parking spaces are available throughout an average day.
The utilization of public parking that supports uses along Broadway in Blocks 34-36 and 51-53 is a strong
indication that lack of available parking is not a significant component contributing to lack of vitality in
this segment of the CCD. Rather, the tenant mix reflects the lack of convenience demanded by
consumers who complete most shopping trips in settings with ample parking proximate to the facility
entrance.
The one exception to the general trend of low utilization within the CCD occurs as might be expected
within the vicinity of the Cargill facility at 4th and Walnut Streets (Block 18). Parking on this and nearby
blocks is in short supply during working hours, forcing employees to park up to a block or two away. The
general shortage is amplified at shift changes for the Cargill production operation when there is overlap
between employees leaving and arriving for their work day. Employees are also observed parking in
adjacent land use parking lots, including the Wells Fargo Bank parking lot across Walnut Street. This is
an area where concentration of use and demand for parking, combined with a shortage of available real
estate, could argue for structured parking. Because there are multiple parties that would benefit, it may
be possible to determine cost distribution that would offset the premium price for structured parking.
The points below summarize private and public parking utilization issues observed within the CCD:
• Businesses along Broadway are affected more by the location and convenience of parking than
by the availability of adequate parking.
• Parking shortfalls at Cargill affect public parking on the Cargill blocks and also spill over onto 4th
Street, Walnut Street, and other underutilized private parking to the east.
17
• Cargill's demand for parking in the Walnut Street corridor competes with unmet demands
created by the Community Center and the retail shops to the east with inadequate parking.
• Based on utilization, on -street public parking is not a significant contributor to the downtown
parking supply except in the blocks containing and adjacent to Cargill.
• Structured parking solutions may be financially feasible in areas of concentrated parking
demand with limited parking supplies or limited real estate available to develop parking.
It was also noted that most of the existing parking lots have no contemporary storm water management
facilities. Future parking facilities should incorporate storm water infiltration and ponding to the
maximum extent practicable.
Transportation — Access
Access to the Monticello CCD originates on the two arterial roadways through the downtown area with
connections to the regional transportation system. For north -south travel, TH-25 (Pine Street) provides
access with connections at Interstate 94 to the south, and Highway 10 and County Roads 11 and 14 to
the north. Results of the market investigation for the downtown area indicate that regions to the north
of Highway 10 and to the south of Interstate 94 also rely on TH-25 for access to downtown Monticello.
Traffic volumes for northbound and southbound trips on TH-25 were compared for both the AM Peak
Hour and PM Peak Hour to determine whether or not there was a difference in orientation for
commuters that would favor one side or the other of TH-25 for retail uses, since most retailers prefer
the side of an arterial roadway with higher PM Peak Hour (going -home) trips. From observed traffic
counts the northbound and southbound trips are fairly evenly distributed for both Peak Hour periods,
indicating no clear advantage to either the east or west side of TH-25 from the standpoint of ease of
access for commuters on their homeward bound trip.
East -west travel to and through the CCD is provided primarily by County Road 75 (Broadway), with travel
demand fueled by the power plant to the west of downtown, the middle school and hospital complex to
the east of downtown, and the retail node and Interstate 94 access at Broadway and CSAH 18.
Direct access opportunities to downtown properties adjacent to these arterial routes are limited by the
need to control intersection spacing to accommodate existing and future traffic levels. The existing
intersection spacing for public streets in the downtown area represents something close to the
functional minimum spacing required by traffic volumes, and is less than most intersection spacing
recommendations for high-volume corridors. Future roadway capacity improvements on TH-25 and
County Road 75 will include the addition of turn lanes at locations where they may extend beyond
existing curb cuts for driveways and alleys. The need to reserve roadway capacity for future growth
suggests that as much local access as practical be moved from these two arterial streets to the east -west
"side " streets and to the Walnut Street and Cedar Street corridors that parallel TH-25.
With additional constraints on access from TH-25 and County Road 75 it will become increasingly
important to maintain the existing grid street system in the downtown area. The street grid provides for
flexibility in where connections serving the downtown area intersect the arterial routes, and allow for
dispersal of traffic within the downtown CCD district. Options for travel routes will help avoid traffic
concentrations that require additional intersection improvements on local streets in the downtown
area. There is sufficient capacity on the downtown street grid to accommodate traffic growth from
18
revitalization of the downtown area without additional business traffic diverting to the residential
streets adjacent to the downtown area. Some additional traffic is likely to utilize 4`h Street between Elm
Street on the west, and Washington Street on the east after implementation of the proposed traffic
signal at TH-25 and 4th Street due to the enhanced ability to cross TH-25 at that location with a traffic
signal.
Transportation —Pedestrian Facilities
An existing network of sidewalks along public streets provides the primary accommodation for
pedestrian circulation through the Monticello downtown area. Figure 10 illustrates the existing
sidewalk system servicing downtown developments.
Figure 10 - Downtown Sidewalk System
19
The network of sidewalks through the downtown area is relatively complete, but has some segments
missing in locations that would enhance movement between the Activity Centers described earlier:
• Connection from 7th Street and Walnut Street to the storefront area of the Cub Foods Center
• Better connection from Walnut at River Street to West Bridge Park
• Better connection from Highway 25 and 7th Street intersection to Block 3 with Perkins and the
other restaurants and service uses in that quadrant of the intersection.
Also, as noted above in the parking inventory and analysis, convenient pedestrian pathways to existing
commercial storefronts are lacking in a number of areas, especially for the uses along Broadway where
the bulk of available parking is located remotely from the building and customer entrances.
The existing downtown area is also lacking in other pedestrian facilities and amenities such as benches
and seating areas, sidewalk area landscaping, and directory and way -finding signage to facilitate
movement through the downtown. Existing facilities are limited to benches in some locations along
Walnut and Broadway Streets, and around the entries to some of the public facilities such as the Library
and Community Center. Expansion of amenities for pedestrians should be incorporated into plans for
revitalizing downtown.
Connections to destinations beyond the boundaries of the CCD provide important linkages to other
parts of the community to help promote use of pedestrian facilities within the CCD. Important existing
pedestrian connections to the CCD occur at:
• Westerly extensions of Broadway sidewalks at Linn street
• Easterly extensions of Broadway sidewalks at Palm street
• Westerly extension of sidewalk on the north side of 4th Street at Linn Street
• Easterly extension of a trail on the north side of 7th Street from Palm Street
These connections should be preserved, and in some cases extended as future street connections are
completed, especially when future crossings to the south side of Interstate 94 are accomplished.
Review of off-site connections and existing facilities within the CCD suggest that a number of missing
segments of sidewalk could be added to improve connectivity for pedestrians that would promote
pedestrian use in the CCD. These include potential sidewalk segments to be added:
• From Minnesota Street to Elm Street along either side of future 7th Street
• From Minnesota Street to Elm Street along the north side of 4th Street
• From Locust Street to Maple Street along either side of 6th Street
• From Maple Street to Elm Street along either side of 6th Street
• From Cedar Street to Washington Street along either side of 4th Street
Although sidewalks exist along TH-25 from 7th Street to River Street, the right-of-way width and existing
development dictates a lack of separation from vehicular traffic for pedestrians in this corridor to the
north of 5th Street. TH-25 is an unfriendly environment for pedestrians, and adjustments to how
pedestrians are accommodated in the TH-25 corridor "should be taken into consideration as plans for
revitalization are developed.
20
Pedestrian Crossings of TH-25 and Broadway
One of the primary issues facing pedestrians in downtown Monticello is how to cross TH-25 and
Broadway safely within the downtown area. Currently, controlled pedestrian crossing is available at the
following locations:
• TH-25 at bridge underpass in the parks north of River Street
• TH-25 and Broadway intersection
• TH-25 and 7th Street intersection
The north/south crossing of Broadway in the CCD is another issue for pedestrian movement and
connections through the downtown area. Currently, only one signalized crossing opportunity exists; at
TH-25. Under existing conditions, low traffic volumes on Broadway during most hours of business
operation permit crossing at the unsignalized intersections to the west and east (Walnut, Locust, Cedar,
etc.) of TH-25. However, as traffic volumes on Broadway continue to grow, crossing at these
unsignalized locations will become more problematic. As noted earlier, the desire to connect Activity
Centers on either side of Broadway, especially along Walnut Street, will require solutions that allow
convenient crossing of Broadway. When warranted, a signal system should be provided at Locust Street,
which will provide a controlled crossing of Broadway for pedestrians.
Transportation - Bicycle Circulation and Facilities
The major issues confronting bicyclists in the Monticello downtown area include high traffic volumes on
TH-25 and lack of dedicated facilities. In large part, as shown on the City's Existing Parks and Pathways
Plan, bicyclists must share lanes with automobile traffic in the CCD. No dedicated bicycle facilities, other
than posted on -road bike lanes on River Street between Washington Street and Otter Creek Road, and
trails located within East and West Bridge Parks adjacent to the Mississippi River exist within the CCD.
In order to improve service for bicyclists, implementation of a comprehensive dedicated network of
bicycle facilities is needed. Such a plan has been developed by the City and published in May of 2011 as
the Park and Trail Draft System Plan.
The Park and Trail Draft System Plan identifies two corridors within the CCD as bicycle corridors:
• Broadway is identified as a Primary Pathway Route
• Highway 25 is identified as a Secondary Pathway Route
While bicycle use of these two facilities within the CCD is not prohibited, the current geometric design of
these two roadway facilities does not promote safe and convenient use by bicycles. To the extent
possible, as improvements are made to both Broadway and TH-25, a prudent action would be to design
the improvements mindful of bicyclists as users in addition to automobiles. Due to right-of-way
constraints based on existing development within the CCD, the bicycle facilities developed for these
roadways will likely need to be of the on -street variety (wide shoulders or dedicated bike lanes), as
opposed to dedicated off-street trail facilities, especially for the near term.
21
The implementation of bicycle facilities on TH-25, while recommended in the City's Park and Trail Draft
System Plan, runs contrary to the MnDOT functional classification of TH-25 as an arterial roadway, the
primary purpose of which is to carry regional vehicular traffic. As preliminary -level design of bicycle -
related improvements in this corridor is undertaken, consideration should be given to providing off-
street bicycle pathways through the CCD.
Land Use
Existing land use in the Monticello CCD can be broken down into two major categories of use; residential
and commercial. Although promoted by the 1997 Downtown Revitalization Plan, mixed residential and
commercial use has not emerged as a significant use in the CCD. Stakeholder interviews conducted for
this study indicated support for the continued segregation of residential and commercial use in order to:
• Funnel public investment into commercial redevelopment to promote downtown business
• Retain downtown land area for future commercial and business development, including parking
• Focus revitalization efforts on the most visible problems with the existing downtown; vacant
and run-down commercial properties, and
• Protect residential properties from pressure to redevelop and from potential use of eminent
domain for property acquisition.
Figure 11— Land Use
22
Figure 11 - Land Use illustrates generalized
land use for the CCD District and two
additional blocks adjacent to the CCD east
of TH-25. The pattern of use illustrated
indicates that the bulk of the purely
commercial land use in the CCD occurs in
the blocks to the west of TH-25 between
the freeway and River Street. Aside from
concentrations of low and mid -density
housing between 6th and 7th Streets to the
west of Locust Street, residential land use
west of TH-25 occurs along the west edge
of the district from 4th Street north to the
Mississippi River. Delineation between
commercial and residential land uses west
of TH-25 are generally sharply defined
along the existing public streets.
To the east of TH-25, the segregation of
commercial and residential land uses is
quite well defined from the freeway to 5th
Street. But from 5th Street north to River
Street and East Bridge Park, all of the
blocks flanking Cedar Street except the two
at Broadway contain a mix of residential
and commercial land use with a significant
percentage of single-family residential land.
Because residential land use will be more difficult and expensive to redevelop than commercial use
areas, the more homogenous commercial areas on the west side of TH-25 should be considered as the
most likely redevelopment properties based on existing land use. The blocks to the east of TH-25
provide access and visibility equal to those on the west side, but will be harder to redevelop for
commercial use because they are constrained by the presence of numerous existing single-family
residences.
Building Condition
As noted earlier, commercial development in the downtown area started along Broadway, and has
extended to the south over time. The newest commercial developments and structures, and therefore
those in the best physical condition, occur to the south of the railroad corridor at 5th Street. In the CCD
th
Figure 12 — Aging and Obsolete Properties
north of 5 Street, there is a greater mix of
new structures, newly renovated structures,
and aging and obsolete structures. Aging
structures in poor physical condition do
occur in the CCD, and in many cases,
structural condition has continued to
deteriorate due to business loss and low
rental income for property owners in the
older downtown area. A number of the
existing buildings along the Broadway
corridor fall into this category.
The locations of aging and obsolete
commercial properties in the CCD are
illustrated to the left in Figure 12. The
designation illustrated in Figure 12 includes
several properties that are commercial
operations, but residential land uses.
Properties fitting this description include
rental property at the northwest corner of
Walnut Street and River Street across from
West Bridge Park, and rental property at the
southwest corner of Cedar Street at
Broadway.
In addition to structures in poor physical condition, there are issues with obsolescence in the downtown
area, especially in the older segment along Broadway that is hampered by a lack of well-placed
convenient parking for tenants and their customers. Even structures in reasonably good condition along
the Broadway corridor are difficult to lease and operate a business from due to lack of parking. In many
cases the form of the older buildings is also inconsistent with the desires of contemporary retail tenants.
The older buildings are generally quite narrow, and excessively deep from front to rear as compared to
23
what is the typical form for lease space for small retail and service commercial uses in more
contemporary shopping areas. The excess depth is undesirable for tenants who are therefore unwilling
to pay for it, and the additional depth makes store layout and operation more difficult. Where these
concerns are combined with a lack of parking, or with a parking supply only to the rear of the building,
space becomes even harder to lease. Rear entrances to stores have offered partial solutions where
owners have implemented them, but these additional entrances create additional demands for signage
and architectural enhancement of the rear of structures, and create operational problems by adding
additional control points that require monitoring by store employees.
Parcel Suitability
The Monticello EDA canvassed downtown property owners via a voluntary survey taken in 2009 to
determine the location and
extent of willing sellers of
n•}` ;>v property in the CCD. As
expected, there turned out
A.— i '"'f �.� tii• int , .,4�iS �` � • +�
s, 4ert+1�ld�uJ„ s t`, .1 to be a relatively strong
, t�.'"3t! ...—'. ail+ •a i u . Y' '
correlation between parcel
} '� _ '•`^ � •� "�°'�•' %�>�� owners willing to sell, and
��� • .� = "• i� 'i�� ;»'''"" properties that fit the
'�c�• �. -: .t+,description of aging and
'��'n �� '�^ ~ ]-`• obsolete as described above.
The distribution of available
properties should be an
f
indicator of locations where
':� ' �* �" •� - property acquisition could
>riy_• �� + ;� occur between a willing
!.� i` seller and a willing buyer to
l
IJV
t Ir
Al
Figure 13 — Willing Sellers
11 Willing solle's
City Owned/Public
24
facilitate redevelopment.
Figure 13 illustrates parcels
located within the CCD that
represent either willing
sellers, or public ownership.
Recognizing concentrations
of available property is
especially important in
Monticello where the
pattern of downtown
property ownership is
diverse with a large number
of owners of relatively small
parcels within a several block
concentrated area of the
downtown area.
Most potential redevelopment will require consolidation of multiple properties to assemble enough land
to achieve a redevelopment site. Recent attempts to consolidate properties for a Walgreen's
development and for a CVS Pharmacy development near Broadway Street and Highway 25 were
complicated by the need to deal concurrently with multiple property owners with diverse requirements
and expectations. For Walgreen's, the process was successful; for CVS, the process ended when owners
and CVS were unable to agree.
Acquisition of residential properties is also challenging for many of the same reasons that make it
difficult to compile multiple small commercial sites. For residential use it is also more politically
challenging to displace homeowners who in many cases have occupied properties in the CCD for many
years with the expectation that their immediate neighborhood would remain residential.
For these reasons it is recommended that the initial redevelopment activity in the CCD occur in those
areas where landowners are willing to sell, or where the EDA and City already own property.
Monticello —The Sub -Regional Center between St Cloud and Maple Grove
Monticello plays a key role in the 1-94 corridor between St. Cloud and Maple Grove and the US 10
corridor between St. Cloud and Elk River. It functions as a sub -regional center for employment, health
care, shopping, and entertainment/recreation.
Major employers — Xcel Energy, New River Medical Center, and corporate headquarters for Cargill
Kitchen Solutions — draw customers and suppliers, construction and repair workers, patients and
visitors. They generate traffic for local restaurants, hotels and other businesses while providing a
diverse range of high quality employment opportunities.
Families from throughout the region are attracted to the health care facilities, community center, the
hockey arena, restaurants, the theater and other entertainment opportunities in Monticello. The
community center in particular draws visitors to the downtown area:
• 200,000 visits per year are generated by the exercise/recreation portion of the facility
• 25,000 — 30,000 visits per year are driven by business meetings and social gatherings in the
meeting rooms
• 6-8 times per year the national guard center brings 210 soldiers to town for the weekend
• Additional activity is generated by the senior center, voting and other civic activities
Revitalization of downtown Monticello can build on the community's role as the sub -regional center and
enhance the community's position as a regional draw in diverse ways:
• Create an environment that encourages additional retail and service sector business activity,
consistent with market potential.
• Enhance access and opportunities for recreational access along the Mississippi River. Active
programming of the riverfront could complement active programming at the Community
Center, and draw visitors through the downtown area to the riverfront.
25
• Strengthen Monticello's role as a sub -regional center for arts and cultural activities. The
community center and riverfront can be key assets in this strategy.
• Address business concerns about the lack of housing opportunities for executive and
management personnel.
• Encourage other positive activities (e.g. gathering places, sports, recreation, culture,
entertainment) that draw regional residents to the community, especially the downtown area.
Trade Area Characteristics & Market Potential
Patrons already utilizing existing businesses, attractions, and Activity Centers within the CCD are the
easiest market to capture to fuel expansion of the downtown. The market analysis completed by the
McComb Group indicates that a large percentage of customers using downtown originate in a trade area
that expands beyond Monticello, but that would generally be described as local. Capturing potential
customers from the volume of through trips on TH-25 and to a lesser extent on Broadway is a possibility
that will appeal to a variety of retailers and developers of retail and service commercial uses. To capture
this potential, the organization of new downtown development needs to be accomplished in a way that
maximizes and preserves the view sheds to these two roadway corridors, and to the key downtown
location where they intersect. The selection of this intersection by Walgreen's as a location to
redevelop within the Monticello CCD is evidence of the importance of high -traffic locations to retailers.
The market study also identified projected demand for a variety of retail, commercial, service, and office
uses that could locate in the CCD. Table 3 summarizes demand and compares it to estimates of existing
businesses within the CCD. As indicated in the table by the column labeled 2010 Additional Demand,
the market existed at the time of the analysis to expand uses by over 235,000 square feet, or a 60%
expansion of existing downtown business. Columns labeled 2015 and 2020 indicate cumulative demand
from 2010. Cumulative demand for the period to 2020 is forecast to be 371,500 square feet of potential
development.
Table 3 - Summary of Market Potential
Snuara Fact of (;rncc I aacnhla Oran
Merchandise
Existing
Recommended Additional Demand
2010 2015 2020
Grocery Stores
71,000 SF
15,000 SF
45,000 SF
45,000 SF
Convenience Goods
30,700 SF
18,000 SF
19,300 SF
24,800 SF
Food Service
60,000 SF
16,000 SF
16,000 SF
23,000 SF
Convenience/Gasoline
6,000 SF
5,000 SF
5,000 SF
5,000 SF
General Merchandise
85,000 SF
73,000 SF
83,000 SF
95,000 SF
Apparel
0 SF
12,000 SF
24,000 SF
30,000 SF
Furniture/Home Furnishings
9,000 SF
9,000 SF
9,000 SF
15,000 SF
Electronic & Appliances
4,000 SF
12,000 SF
12,000 SF
12,000 SF
Other Shopping Goods
38,500 SF
17,000 SF
17,000 SF
24,000 SF
Services
55,500 SF
8,500 SF
18,300 SF
22,700 SF
Health Care
16,800 SF
50,000 SF
70,000 SF
75,000 SF
Total
389,500 SF
235,500 SF
318,600 SF
371,500 SF
'uurce: ivicIoma croup, Lia.
26
Not all of the additional Market Potential as summarized above will be captured in the CCD or even in
aggregate including the other commercial districts within Monticello. To put the demand into additional
perspective, contemporary retail/commercial development with adequate parking and primarily single -
story development consumes about one acre of land for each 10,000 square feet of development. The
average downtown block is approximately 2.5 acres, so it has the basic capability to support at least
25,000 square feet of development. On this basis, the identified potential in the current time frame
(2010) would require 23.5 acres, or approximately 9 blocks of the downtown area.
Looking at demand over an even longer time frame of ten years showed a potential for 371,500 square
feet of new development. Even at the modest capture level of 35% of that total demand, new
development in the CCD would be 130,000 square feet requiring up to 13.0 acres of land, or the
equivalent of over 5 full blocks of the downtown. These illustrations are intended to demonstrate that
the potential for sufficient new demand to fuel redevelopment in the CCD exists if the conditions
required to capture it can be achieved.
rxl
Chapter 2 - Revitalizing Downtown Planning Process
Community Goals and Guiding Principles
The Land Use chapter of the Monticello Comprehensive Guide Plan as updated in 2008 includes a more
detailed discussion of vision, goals, and policies for several critical areas of the community, including the
downtown area. The description of the downtown Monticello area included specific strategies for
downtown development and redevelopment that attempted to capture observations of the ongoing
transitions in the downtown area, and of the response to the 1997 Downtown Revitalization Plan. The
ten strategies outlined are paraphrased below in the form of goal statements representing current
policy objectives for the downtown area:
• The downtown focus area should extend from the River to 7th Street, and from Locust Street on
the west to Cedar Street on the east.
• Downtown land use should be a mix of retail, service, office, civic, and residential development.
Cargill should be encouraged to remain in the downtown area.
• With continued traffic growth on TH-25, it is essential to form a strong link along Walnut Street
between the river, Broadway businesses, and the Community Center to establish connections
between the factors that attract people to the downtown.
• To help create a new "main street" all new development on Walnut Street should have
storefronts oriented to Walnut Street.
• The City should explore ways to improve pedestrian and bicycle experience along Walnut.
• It is essential to prevent the use of Walnut Street for "by-pass" or "cut -through" traffic as traffic
volumes increase on TH-25. Traffic calming measures should be applied to Walnut Street.
• Housing should supplement and support downtown commercial development. Housing should
be encouraged on the edges of downtown, not as a replacement for commercial use, and all
housing in the downtown should be multiple family housing.
• Strong connections to adjacent neighborhoods should be promoted for the downtown;
pedestrian crossings of TH-25 at Broadway and 7th Street should be enhanced.
• Downtown connections with the River should be enhanced, especially at Walnut Street.
• Downtown access would be improved by trail or bike lane improvements along River Street to
take advantage of the controlled intersection with TH-25.
These objectives have been evaluated by the consultant team as part of updating earlier downtown
goals and their relevance for current market and development conditions. A number of these have been
carried forward as new goals and objectives have been formulated to guide and develop new
recommendations for the redevelopment of the CCD.
Vision and Guiding Principles
From the interviews conducted, interaction with city staff, and observations of the consultant team, a
Vision for the CCD was created to frame decision-making and evaluation of alternative plan approaches:
Downtown Monticello is the sub regional center for business, professional, personal, health care services,
dining and river -anchored recreation between St. Cloud and Maple Grove. Retail vitality is created by
anchor stores and businesses that provide shopping and convenience goods in a human scale
environment and are concentrated in districts with safe and convenient access and good parking. Retail,
28
dining and entertainment businesses build on proximity to the Mississippi River, parks and trails to create
an activity node for outdoor recreation including bicycling, fishing, canoeing, kayaking, walking,
sledding, skating and bird watching.
Expansion of the Vision allows definition of the forces unique to Monticello that should shape planning
and implementation of successful downtown development and redevelopment. These forces are
outlined in the Guiding Principles that follow:
• Build on core assets of greater downtown Monticello:
o Monticello's role as the sub regional center between St. Cloud & Maple Grove
o Mississippi River & city parks
o Traffic generated by the Mississippi River crossing
o New River Medical Center
o Community Center
o Employee/customer/visitor base created by Xcel, Cargill & New River Medical Center
o New Walgreen's
• A shared vision among property owners, business owners, and the City is the foundation for
effective team work and long term success.
• A shared understanding of realistic market potential is the foundation for design and generation
of a healthy business mix.
• A safe, attractive human scale environment and entrepreneurial businesses that actively
emphasize personal customer service will differentiate downtown from other shopping districts.
• The river is a distinctive asset that differentiates downtown Monticello and serves as a
foundation for design and as a focus for activity.
• Property values can be enhanced if property owners and the city share a vision for downtown
and actively seek to cultivate a safe, appealing environment and attractive business mix.
• The city and business community must work actively with MnDOT to ensure safe local access to
business districts.
The consultant team also developed Goals for achieving the Vision outlined above. One of the primary
purposes of stated goals is to use them to evaluate decisions and recommendations that evolve during
the planning process. Goals will be used to evaluate alternative solutions for the CCD as plans are
developed and refined. The following goals emerged as important from the review of prior directions
and from research and interviews by the consultant team:
LAND USE
• Diversify Land use in the downtown; supplement retail and service uses with other activities
that generate traffic.
• Encourage redevelopment of old and obsolete structures; encourage consolidation of small
parcels with multiple ownerships.
• Balance parking and land use to ensure availability of adequate parking at all times.
• Encourage mixed use but don't make it a requirement or prerequisite for development or
redevelopment.
• Discourage residential as a free-standing land use within the core downtown area.
• Establish physical connections between the core downtown area and the riverfront and park.
• Encourage land uses that serve as evening and weekend attractions to the downtown area.
29
• Expand facilities and parking adjacent to West Bridge Park to help create an anchor attraction at
the north end of Walnut Street.
TRANSPORTATION
• Acknowledge that TH-25 will be limited in terms of providing direct property access.
• Develop circulation patterns that utilize local streets for individual site access.
• Recognize TH-25 as a barrier between the east and west parts of the historic downtown core
areas extending to either side of the TH-25 corridor.
• Consider developing in districts to reduce the need or desire to cross TH-25 between 7th Street
and the river crossing.
• Strengthen pedestrian ties throughout downtown including connections to other parts of the
City to the south, west, and east. Downplay TH-25 as a corridor for pedestrian movement.
• Improve pedestrian connections between Broadway and the riverfront park areas to allow the
parks to serve as an attraction that brings people into the downtown area.
• Improve access to the Mississippi River to expand on recreational opportunities.
• Explore creation of a fourth signalized intersection on TH-25 at 4th Street to improve access to
areas with development and redevelopment potential on either side of the TH-25 corridor.
DOWNTOWN DESIGN AND IMAGE
• Encourage design standards that elevate the quality of downtown development without
creating undue hardships for property and building owners.
• Acknowledge that the historic "Main Street" buildings and developments along Broadway Street
are functionally obsolete for many tenants and users in today's automobile and convenience -
driven marketplace.
• The public realm of streets, boulevards and sidewalks represents the best opportunity to create
an interim image for downtown as it redevelops.
• The TH-25 and Broadway corridors should be softened with streetscape and landscape features
to offset the effects of high traffic volumes, and to help establish an identity for the CCD.
• Development should orient toward the intersection of TH-25 with Broadway to take advantage
of high traffic volumes in the TH-25 corridor.
• New development in the TH-25 corridor should be scaled to allow visibility to development up
to a block or more away from TH-25.
• New buildings in the TH-25 and Broadway corridors should be located to allow for eventual
widening of the corridor right-of-way and roadway.
• To the extent possible, buildings should occupy street frontages and should front on public
sidewalks with connections to a continuous "downtown" sidewalk pedestrian system.
• Proposed uses should have adequate parking (private or public) within easy and convenient
walking distance.
• The downtown plan should provide strategically located public gathering spaces to bring people
together to experience a sense of community that is associated with downtown.
Concepts for downtown redevelopment should provide solutions to problems and issues identified in
the research and analysis of downtown conditions that are directed by the stated goals for Land Use,
Transportation, and Design and Image. The preferred solutions should be those that best meet those
goals.
30
Development Plan Alternatives
Four alternative plans for redevelopment were prepared utilizing the results of the research and site
analysis, market investigation, and goals developed for Land Use, Transportation, and Downtown design
and Image. The purpose of the alternative plans was to test the capacity of the downtown area to meet
market demand, and to explore options for achieving the development goals. The direction taken in
formulating alternatives was based on selecting a downtown strategy favoring redevelopment and
reorientation of downtown over simply upgrading existing structures and filling gaps with selected infill
development. Because the predominant opportunities for downtown redevelopment occur to the north
of the 5th Street rail corridor, the alternative plans initially were focused within that portion of the CCD.
Upgrading existing building stock and filling gaps appears to be a feasible, low cost approach to
revitalization within the CCD, but this approach has issues meeting market expectations due to:
• 80% of existing buildings don't orient toward TH-25 and the access and visibility it provides
• Most existing downtown buildings
o Have deferred maintenance issues
o Need to be brought up to code
o Have the wrong store front to depth dimensions
o Are larger than most tenants desire
• The cost to upgrade buildings and correct code deficiencies exceeds building value
• Existing buildings do not meet the needs or expectations of credit tenants.
Because of these shortcomings, the consultant team recommends a strategy to redevelop downtown
and orient it toward TH-25. This strategy for downtown revitalization meets many more of the market
forces that affect where retailers and other commercial businesses prefer to locate, including:
• TH-25 has twice the traffic counts of Broadway
• Retailers want to locate with access from high-volume streets
• Downtown needs anchor stores to attract customers
• Many retailers need typical, contemporary store spaces that accommodate their prototypes
• Retailers want convenient customer parking
• Retailers want visibility from high-volume streets
Within this overall strategy, the alternatives were consciously prepared with a variety of approaches
concerning land use, building height, retention of public streets, and other factors affecting plan
efficiency and total redevelopment square footage. This was done to allow the affects of different
approaches to be compared. The four alternative plans are described below and include:
Compact Scheme A
Compact Scheme B
Expanded Scheme C
Minimalist Scheme D
A number of concepts or solutions were adopted that appear in all four of the solutions prepared.
These common themes represent solutions that the consultant team considers critical for a successful
redevelopment plan based on the issues facing downtown Monticello. Common themes include:
31
• Focus redevelopment activity on the north side of the 5th Street rail corridor in the areas of the
CCD with the highest percentage of aging and obsolete properties, and willing sellers.
• Assume upgraded access from TH-25 in the form of a signalized intersection at 4th Street.
• Offset the addition of a new traffic signal at 4th Street with access modifications at 3rd Street to
help maintain traffic progression in the TH-25 corridor.
• Plan redevelopment around the intersection of TH 25 and Broadway in a form that opens
visibility from this major intersection to development in all four of the quadrants adjoining the
intersection.
• To the extent possible, create and maintain visibility from the TH-25 corridor to new
developments.
• Include a retail anchor in a prominent location.
• Retain existing properties where property condition and fit with the proposed redevelopment
warrants retention.
• Supplement parking shortages in areas where parking shortages were observed, especially near
Cargill and adjacent to Broadway.
• Re-establish connections along Walnut Street from Broadway to West Bridge Park.
The plans were prepared utilizing consistent criteria for parking, with an objective of providing 4 spaces
per 1000 square feet of development throughout the CCD. The parking illustrated includes expansion of
parking as required to provide 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet in support of existing structures to remain,
even where that parking ratio is not currently achieved. The proposed parking ratio is low by typical
suburban standards, but is appropriate for an urban setting where a variety of uses share common
parking areas.
Uniform treatment has been assumed for all four alternatives for the area south of the 5th Street
corridor. Primary components include:
• Enhanced connections between the Cub Foods shopping center and the Community Center
utilizing the Walnut Street corridor.
• Creation of streetscape or urban design features at TH-25 and 7th Street establishing the
southerly entrance to the CCD.
• Long-term conversion of a portion of Block 14 east of the Community Center from retail use to
open space to create both a civic gathering space in proximity to the Community Center, and to
promote the Community Center by increasing its visibility. This change would also help balance
parking demand in what is currently a problematic location.
Compact Scheme A
This alternative illustrates the concept of focusing similar uses in districts where complementary uses
share areas that are located along the edges of the regional TH-25 and Broadway corridors that will
provide access and visibility to uses. The role of TH-25 as a divider as well as a source of customers is
acknowledged by the placement of most retail uses on the west side of TH-25 and most service
commercial and office uses on the east side of TH-25. This organizing principle reduces the amount of
pedestrian interaction that may be required across TH-25. Figure 14 on the next page illustrates the two
32
corridors and the arrangement of uses to either side. Existing structures to remain are included with the
lighter color, and proposed structures are highlighted with darker color.
�a�.._.�._..�. ` ____,:�i7 ll/ ' i�w acs � �•._. �P t s
wt,. r..m.....-.^._-a!
IL1 _
r
iyc f tx t7: u•
lNj I1 is 1` '� t
JF ;•-.._._... �y �_.. .-.-,^u� ! µ x 1 �^ .n:.MiY �j�ry[{ �.
iEJ
j t
({� j�t 77)i�' 1 t r.. }_...�....'�, � �€ rW • _—_I 1 ��j � �� s� r i � i � 1i �, 1
_„J _.._._.-„..ti_-.,..r� �\.i a! � � �.....—..--._....... ;'�if M_ t�, .i�� •� :._ _ �; li-.,. ..�..-. t.� C
�str.:�^-w � WbA+� , i �i �. ane 1 � � ......_. ,c..,..... Vv 1 ) � � _•_ _” '._,__ l
� a
Figure 14— Compact Scheme A
The plan shows how development can be organized around the intersection of TH-25 with Broadway to
allow visibility of new development in the adjoining blocks and beyond to Walnut Street. The east side
of TH-25 from 5th Street to Broadway is programmed as service commercial, office, and medical office or
clinic as predominant uses. New structures are pushed back from the TH-25 corridor where possible to
open site lines and create convenient parking areas that relate to fronts of buildings oriented toward the
highway. On the back side of these blocks adjacent to Cedar Street, the street corridor is framed by
buildings constructed up to the right-of-way lines. This creates an edge that will make pedestrian
circulation comfortable in the Cedar street corridor as opposed to the less desirable TH-25 corridor.
33
North of Broadway, the block to the east of TH-25 is illustrated with the Walgreen's development and
office or medical office on the balance of the block in a two-story configuration. The blocks to the east
of Cedar Street also illustrate replacement of existing residential uses adjacent to Cedar Street with infill
commercial uses to complete the commercial image along Cedar. In this scenario, Cedar Street is
intended to facilitate north -south pedestrian movement on the east side of TH-25 in the same way that
Walnut is intended to provide for pedestrian circulation on the west side of TH-25.
On the west side of TH-25, north of Broadway, new retail and restaurant development is proposed
between the highway and Walnut Street to create a retail node that can be developed with strong
connections to West Bridge Park. The plan suggests the vacation of River Street west of the highway to
allow direct connections between new structures and the Park. Given the vertical grade change that
exists, it could be possible to develop the northerly structure with a lower level that opened directly
onto the Park. While this space would not be suitable for retail use, it could support park programs and
provide public indoor space for park -related uses. The block west of Walnut and north of Broadway
includes replacement retail uses configured to reinforce the west edge of Walnut Street as a pedestrian
corridor leading to the riverfront and park. The existing residential property at the northwest corner of
River Street and Walnut could become surface parking to support expanded use of the park.
The four -block area on the west side of TH-25 from 4th Street to Broadway is the core area of
redevelopment proposed for Scheme A. This four -block area is proposed to be consolidated through the
vacation of 3'd Street as a public Street, and the reduction of Walnut Street from its current cross-
sectional width to a narrower two-way section without on -street parking, but with enhanced pedestrian
facilities to ensure safety for pedestrians crossing Walnut Street from parking areas between Walnut
and TH-25. The plan incorporates the existing mixed-use at Locust and Broadway, and the existing
former Walgreen's building on 4th and Walnut. The balance of the area is reconfigured for a retail
anchor store and multi -tenant retail shops along Broadway and 4th Streets. Although these structures
front along the streets to replicate the older buildings -
being replaced, the functional fronts of the structures
would be oriented toward the internal parking area
that is fed from the north and south edges, from a
revised right-in/right-out access from TH-25 at 3rd 51 52 53
Street, and from the east side of Walnut Street _ BRoaoWaYsraEET
between 4th and Broadway. The parking area is sized Ld
� 36 35 34
to support the retail uses shown. North of the - r
anchor, parking is configured to maintain the existing
parking supply for the mixed-use property. The -- 0 31 32 W 33 F_
p g pP Y p p Y __.. Cr. W
location of the anchor retail store requires the ,17 Z 16
�
removal or relocation of the recently renovated State _ < (-
Farm Insurance building on Walnut Street. The `= o
concept for Scheme A suggested relocating this U
structure to River Street at Cedar.
i_ ... .. r
To the south of 41h street, Walnut Street is flanked by
structured parking to offset parking shortages at
Cargill, the Community Center, and Block 14 retail; hi-sa
and the west half of Block 17 is reconfigured to add a
daycare facility to support downtown daytime
employees. Figure 15 — Location Key Map
34
A summary of proposed new development is listed in Table 4 below. The blocks identified in the
Location Key Map in Figure 15 on the previous page correlate to the Block Numbers in the Table, and
can be used to compare existing development to proposed redevelopment. For Compact Scheme A, the
total new development is just over 385,000 square feet, an increase of 108,000 square feet over the
existing development within the same area.
Table 4 - Summary of Scheme A Development
Square Feet of Floor Area
City Block
East of TH 25
Existing
Proposed
Change
16
19,000
26,000
+7,000
33
12,000
41,000
+29,000
34
27,000
37,000
+10,000
53
35,400
62,400
+27,000
West of TH 25
17
8,800
18,800
+10,000
32
21,000
26,000
+5,000
35
37,500
26,000
-11,500
52
39,000
28,000
-11,000
31
36,500
88,000
+51,500
36
27,000
18,000
-9,000
51
14,000
14,000
0
Total
277,200
385,200
+108,000
Stakeholder reaction to Compact Scheme A was generally positive. Comments on potential problems
with Compact Scheme A included:
• State Farm should stay in place or be relocated to more favorable location.
• Structured parking at Cargill removes an iconic structure from the corner of 4th and Walnut
• The displaced Cargill facility is not replaced within the plan area
• Two-story structures on Broadway suggest office over retail which may not lease
• The configuration of Walnut Street between 4th and Broadway is not pedestrian friendly
Compact Scheme B
Compact Scheme B was developed as a variation on Compact Scheme A to compare altered approaches
to the uses on the east side of TH 25, and uses within the four -block retail core area west of the
highway. For Scheme B, Cedar Street is assumed to be vacated to provide additional area for parking
development to allow higher square footage of redevelopment within the service commercial and office
district. Additional parking area was also gained by utilizing two-story structures and moving them to
the east side of what was formerly Cedar Street. The change is illustrated in Figure 16 on the following
page. This modified approach increased redevelopment potential east of Cedar Street, achieving 45,000
35
square feet of additional net new redevelopment space; a 60% increase in the 73,000 square feet of net
new space achieved in Scheme A.
To the west of TH-25 in the four -block retail core, adjustments were made to relocate the anchor use
from west of Walnut to the block adjacent to Highway 25. This location was tested to determine if the
impacts to the four -block area could be phased by relocating the anchor and potentially delaying
redevelopment of the blocks west of Walnut. The first reaction to the revised anchor location is that it
creates a mass next to TH-25 that blocks visual penetration from the traffic corridor of TH-25 to the west
side of Walnut. The orientation of structures at the south end of the core area results in the rear of
large stores turned toward 4th Street, and also to pedestrian and vehicle traffic on Walnut approaching
4th Street from the south.
_.J
'—j--- _- J�J
(i eaRs.:u: t
1.T
W
,�NF'
ICK
3
3 LEVEL$
tw/ Ems
3.K
Figure 16 — Compact Scheme B
36
The central parking area of this variant is also deficient in providing the recommended 4 spaces per
1,000 square feet parking ratio, and relies on structured parking to make up the shortage of surface
parking. While structured parking in this location could also meet some of Cargill's excess demand, the
location is not very convenient for use by retail customers, nor by Community Center users. Further,
the shortfall of surface parking also negates the possibility of simplifying phasing with the anchor in this
location. Parking to support the anchor cannot be achieved in the two block area between Walnut and
TH-25. The summary of development for Compact Scheme B is included below in Table 5.
Table 5 - Summary of Scheme B Development
Square Feet of Floor Area
City Block
East of TH 25
Existing
Proposed
Change
16
19,000
31,000
+12,000
33
12,000
58,000
+46,000
34
27,000
55,000
+28,000
53
35,400
67,400
+32,000
West of TH 25
17
8,800
18,800
+10,000
32
21,000
88,000
+67,000
35
37,500
10,000
-27,500
52
39,000
28,000
-11,000
31
36,500
30,000
-6,500
36
27,000
34,000
+7,000
51
14,000
14,000
0
Total
277,200
434,200
+157,000
Most of the increase in redevelopment potential for Scheme B as compared to Scheme A is a function of
changes illustrated to the east side of TH-25. With the large increase east of TH-25, this plan represents
the highest redevelopment potential of the four capacity studies completed. In part because of the
increase, the gaps along the east side of TH-25 allowing visibility to the back sides of the adjacent blocks
have been filled in with buildings to capitalize on the expanded parking area of this Scheme. So,
although the redevelopment potential is higher, visibility for buildings along Cedar Street has
diminished.
Expanded Scheme C
This alternative was developed to explore remedies for visibility problems appearing in Scheme B, and
to explore expansion of the retail core west of TH-25 from four to six blocks. For this scheme, structures
on the east side of TH-25 were moved away from the highway frontage where possible, and those along
the highway were assumed to be single story. With this adjustment, the available parking area was
reduced, resulting in the need to reduce building area proportionately. These changes reduced net new
redevelopment east of TH-25 from the 118,000 square feet achieved in Scheme B to 70,000 square feet
in this alternative. This comparison demonstrates the increased efficiency achievable with two-story
development. With the same ground area affected for redevelopment, Scheme B achieved a nearly 70%
increase in floor area as compared to Scheme C.
37
Figure 17 illustrates the gaps created along the east side of TH-25, and the westerly expansion of the
retail core area on the west side of TH-25. The retail core area was expanded across Locust Street,
requiring the vacation of Locust Street and its utilities, and requiring the conversion of the blocks
between Locust Street and Linn Street from single-family residential use to commercial use. As this
alternative design was being explored, anchor retail locations as far west as Linn Street were considered.
However, the configuration shown in Figure 17 was determined to be a reasonable compromise
between maintaining anchor visibility from the TH-25 and Broadway intersection, and limiting the
amount of residential property required for the retail area.
r
H I
ol
I• Ra.y. N•P.I � C �J'—....._.�.�.�...._�.� Y �� /:J •� 1�Jr j 3
L�_ LLE. 3]
f
j
I • � 71 (/� te. N N �� fL_............�'. T— � +f � � /y�)�
tw
i+K ! H ,K t {
Y M- �
-�.J�...._.,.. 1"`=A _._[' '�'•" 1�..,
�_.._._.__.�� Com___ =a �� i} C•�.�'° `� �
f3..•i y,,..r i !t .► w "t...U,^_r. t"F.= -" +y �.1 , t - {{i
III I ,bIK p•'4�1_'
Figure 17- Expanded Scheme C
The new retail development achieved in this district for Scheme C compared to the comparable area of
Scheme A shows the incremental development potential gained by extending an additional half -block to
the west. The appropriate comparison is with Scheme A because Scheme B incorporated structured
parking, and like Scheme C, Scheme A is supported by all surface parking.
M
The retail area south of Broadway and west of TH-25 contains 114,000 square feet of proposed retail for
Scheme C (blocks 31 and 36) and 106,000 square feet of retail for Scheme A. However, Scheme A
includes 44,000 square feet of two-story space. Adjusting Scheme A to include only the ground floor
space appropriate for retail use reduces comparable new retail floor area for Scheme A from 106,000
square feet to 84,000 square feet. On that basis, Scheme C achieves a 30,000 square -foot increase in
development as compared to Scheme A. Based on this comparison, the acquisition of multiple single-
family homes, the cost for the removal of a two -block length of Locust Street, and the cost for relocation
of several hundred feet of underground utilities are unlikely to be warranted by the potential increase in
development. The summary of redevelopment for Scheme C is listed in Table 6 below.
Table 6 - Summary of Scheme C Development
Square Feet of Floor Area
City Block
East of TH 25
Existing
Proposed
Change
16
19,000
29,000
+10,000
33
12,000
42,000
+30,000
34
27,000
45,000
+18,000
53
35,400
47,400
+12,000
West of TH 25
17
8,800
18,800
+10,000
32
21,000
38,000
+17,000
35
37,500
20,000
-17,500
52
39,000
25,000
-14,000
31
36,500
50,000
+13,500
36
27,000
64,000
+37,000
51
1 14,000
9,000
-5,000
Total
1 277,200
388,200
+111,000
The configuration required for parking in Scheme C also has a profound effect on Walnut Street,
resulting in Walnut Street and its desired pedestrian linkage traversing through the center of a parking
lot for much of the distance between 4th and Broadway. While the configuration with parking on one
side as configured in Scheme A has the benefit of a generous pedestrian corridor on at least one side,
the configuration of Scheme C has little potential appeal for pedestrians. On the basis of potential costs
and negative consequences for Walnut Street, Scheme C seems to demonstrate that Locust Street is the
appropriate edge for the retail district west of TH-25 from 4th Street to Broadway.
Minimalist Scheme D
Scheme D was prepared as a variant of Scheme A to test alternate approaches to the staging of
redevelopment, and to additional avoidance of functioning existing developments. For the use district
on the east side of TH-25, the approach to retaining the public street function of Cedar Street was again
incorporated into the plan. North of Broadway, Cedar Street was converted to parking in Scheme A, but
remains a public street connection to River Street behind Walgreen's in Scheme D. This approach
reduces parking and potential redevelopment on Block 53 adjoining the new Walgreen's store. Scheme
39
D also retains the Motor Vehicle office building at the northwest corner of 3rd and Cedar Streets,
reducing flexibility to maximize re -use of Block 34. Total development for the four block area east of TH-
25 is reduced from 137,400 square feet in Scheme A to 127,400 square feet in Scheme D. The additional
area achieved in Scheme A required vacation of a block -long street and replacement of the Motor
Vehicle building, suggesting that the Scheme D approach may be more economical.
West of TH-25 and south of Broadway, three major adjustments are incorporated in Scheme D. First,
the existing bank at 4th and Pine Street is retained, along with its existing drive-through function.
Second, the State Farm office on the west side of Walnut is retained with parking to the rear that also
serves the mixed-use building at Locust and Broadway. Finally, the retail shops parallel to Broadway are
located so that the existing structures along Broadway could stay in place until replacement structures
are completed and available for occupancy. The combined effect of these changes results in limitations
on the location and size of the desired anchor development. Scheme D is illustrated in Figure 18 below.
twcet�c.g w .�
S► �t61'EL .... t.1ti'
,I SiTI
f j
Al
Q�ON
tts-
eW
:.. _... _�. �.._ ._- .1�...i] t.�`r. � 1.�.�� ... � : _ _ -:1 ice-=-�a•� ...1 �..:i � ___... � � T.,
__....��1 _`_`-,.,....�. �. ".moi ._.__... f � 3 /""'e ._. .._._.....�.r3 .. !'"...""X fJ •�+ tr rte--'
W S-- E.
Figure 18 — Minimalist Scheme D
40
As illustrated, the anchor store has insufficient parking in the remaining area in front of the store, and
the retention of the bank further reduces available parking. The addition of structured parking to the
south provides enough spaces to hit the target parking ratio for Cargill and the anchor store, but the
location and competition for spaces with Cargill makes its use for the anchor store unlikely. The only
apparent approach under these circumstances would be the substantial reduction in size of the
proposed anchor. For that to be workable, the size reductions should occur on the south side of the
structure in a way that increases parking immediately to the south of the retail use. Reduced width
suggests reduced depth to retain reasonable building proportions for retail use, so a reduced size will
also decrease utilization of the western part of the block adjacent to Locust Street.
The approach to leaving existing structures in place until after the completion of new structures would
possibly be an attractive phasing strategy. However, as noted above, this approach constrains available
parking on the interior of the block and ultimately moves the retail uses away from the Broadway
frontage. While this may increase parking along Broadway, it dramatically changes the character of
Broadway, and creates confusion about which side of the new structures should be the front. A similar
approach is applied to the north side of Broadway from TH-25 to Locust Street, and the resulting change
to the Broadway corridor is multiplied when buildings are pulled back on both sides of the street.
Another variation illustrated in the blocks west of TH-25 and north of Broadway is creation of a more
structured, urban edge for the West Bridge Park as the northerly terminus for Walnut Street as a
pedestrian corridor. This Scheme illustrates the vacation of Walnut street north of Broadway, and the
introduction of a pedestrian plaza space in the vicinity of the former intersection of River Street with
Walnut. The purpose of this space would be to provide a useable public space and focal point to draw
pedestrians from Broadway to the park. The south and west edges of the park would be reinforced by
retail development on the south, and park facilities on the west that are incorporated as part of
potential structured parking. This approach creates an auto -free pedestrian zone around all of the park
and adjacent retail to strengthen downtown ties to the park and river.
The block by block development summary for Scheme D is listed in Table 7 below.
Table 7 - Summary of Scheme D Development
Square Feet of Floor Area
City Block
East ofTH 25
Existing
Proposed
Change
16
19,000
27,000
+8,000
33
12,000
36,000
+24,000
34
27,000
27,000
0
53
35,400
37,400
+2,000
West of TH 25
17
8,800
18,800
+10,000
32
21,000
21,000
0
35
37,500
17,000
-20,500
52
39,000
25,000
-14,000
31
36,500
87,000
+50,500
36
27,000
15,000
-12,000
51
14,000
10,000
-4,000
Total
277,200
385,200
+44,000
41
Village Green Concept
As stated in the introduction to the redevelopment plan alternatives, a consistent approach to the area
of the CCD south of the 5th street railroad corridor is a recommended part of all four alternatives as
formulated and analyzed. From a land use perspective, the primary recommendation is maintaining the
status quo. From a transportation perspective, the recommendation is to find alternatives to pedestrian
circulation in the TH-25 corridor, and to strengthen pedestrian ties between the Community Center and
the Cub Foods center in the Walnut Street corridor. From a downtown design and image perspective,
the entrance to the south end of the CCD area is lacking the gateway entrance to downtown Monticello
that is provided by the bridge and park space adjoining the TH-25 corridor at the north end of the CCD.
A "Village Green" concept is recommended to fill this need in the long term. Figure 19 illustrates a
sketch plan for the Village Green Concept.
GAQ(AILL
_ +40
1v
CITY HMt_
� t,.al.lw,r,nTv
b zH SWEET w.
�� uerrel
p N
F �
f 2
�utr� 2
OPARtg �
�L
Q
TFi STS w.
in
N
R�c'fAla. Sr+oIS '_
151` N 7L
1 +L6
LulS F^�DS
Figure 19 — Village Green Concept
LeW 'M+D-WIRY Vemf-
Rem,lomt,w-
N NI !
b'IFi ST'2EET E.
• (�a,V^jLyyN D15I1LiLT
IOE�.1'CIFIGT1w
Mia r.EeS
G8wE7�' Y f
C�1 Sf74GE
-1 T H STV-REr E.
+ r
Efforts to strengthen the image and identity of downtown should include enhancements to create an
identifiable and memorable gateway experience at the south end of the TH-25 corridor that equals the
experience provided at the north end of the CCD. Limitations posed by existing development south of
7th street suggest that the appropriate location to begin creating an entry statement is at the
intersection of 6th Street with TH-25. The cemetery on the east side of the highway already provides
42
some green, open space relief, and available space near the intersection for the creation of architectural
elements, signage, or other gateway features that announce the entry to the CCD. On the west side of
the corridor, the Municipal Liquor store is located on City -owned property that could be available in a
longer-term time horizon to create a significant public open space that helps define the southerly
entrance to the CCD, and provides a book -end to the public park at the riverfront end of Walnut Street;
a space that opens view corridors to the Community Center and that can be programmed for use in
conjunction with the Community Center.
Reduction of retail use in the south half of this block also contributes to reducing unmet parking demand
for the Community Center and for the retail shops located on the balance of the block where the Village
Green is proposed.
Preferred Alternative
Alternative plans were presented to the Steering Committee, downtown property owners and
stakeholders, and City staff to solicit feedback on the plans, their implications for changes both positive
and negative, and their degree of success at achieving stated goals and objectives for Land Use,
Transportation, and Downtown Design and Image.
The various alternatives developed for the downtown study result in differences in the efficiency of land
consumption and the amount of development that can be supported as compared to the existing
condition. Feedback on the plans from interested parties included theirjudgments based on application
of goal and objective criteria, and assessment of feasibility from the available information absent
detailed financial analysis and comparisons.
Reaction from public involvement and staff review indicated that Compact Scheme A best represented
the basis for redevelopment of the CCD consistent with goals and objectives for the downtown
Monticello area. The evolution of support for Scheme A included suggestions for modifications and
improvements that were extracted from other alternatives, or from new ideas generated from the
alternatives including:
• Adjustments to Block 53 north of Broadway and west of Cedar Street to retain the existing
former newspaper office.
• Relocation of potential structured parking to support the Community Center, retail uses in Block
14, and Cargill to the west side of Block 17 adjacent to the Wells Fargo bank.
• Alteration of the proposed retail anchor west of TH-25 to retain the State Farm office and
balance parking requirements.
• Termination of the north end of Walnut Street at a prominent open space/urban design feature
to tie West Bridge Park to Broadway.
• Vacation of River Street at West Bridge Park to ensure the potential for two-level space south of
the park if appropriate.
• Incorporation of structured parking and attached enclosed park facilities to support expanded
use and programming of West Bridge Park as a downtown attraction for weekend and evening
use.
• Vacation of River Street west of Cedar to allow expansion of West Bridge Park and connection to
retail uses on Block 52.
43
Figure 20 illustrates Refined Scheme A as the recommended basis for the further definition of financial
feasibility and implementation plans and phasing for redevelopment of downtown Monticello. The
framework of land use districts, areas for maintaining existing development, areas for promoting
redevelopment, approaches to transportation corridors, and improvements to preserve and enhance
the downtown image are represented in Refined Scheme A. These elements will become the basis for
policies and guidelines to direct future development and redevelopment in the CCD.
•"�£K+uT,t3 � 1� �J �
! 1! i"�JJJJ��JJ���J
t� tr l
10,11
TTT,
���+•
iI �3a-_--- ice z _• „� '" y i F'? I
r ir. r i
j �.._�.fl
� • i `i elAi. �- � � 6er.
I
L�_.°
_.Jj •
C/iC:'.CL
Figure 20 — Refined Scheme A
Table 8 on the following page summarizes the potential redevelopment square footage illustrated for
the CCD north of 5th Street, and identifies the block by block change from the existing condition.
r.EAI
Table 8 - Summary of Refined Scheme A Development
Square Feet of Floor Area
City Block
East of TH 25
Existing
Proposed
Change
16
19,000
26,000
+7,000
33
12,000
36,000
+24,000
34
27,000
37,000
+10,000
53
35,400
47,400
+12,000
West of TH 25
17
8,800
8,800
0
32
21,000
26,000
+5,000
35
37,500
13,000
-24,400
52
39,000
28,000
-11,000
31
36,500
64,000
+27,000
36
27,000
24,000
-3,000
51
14,000
14,000
0
Total
277,200
324,200
+47,000
Transportation Solutions for the Preferred Alternative
The development scenario illustrated in Refined Scheme A was used as the basis for analyzing potential
traffic impacts from downtown redevelopment activities. A complete copy of the Transportation Study
completed for the CCD is included in Appendix C of this report. Traffic impacts associated with proposed
CCD redevelopment are expected to be minor. In total, redevelopment as represented by refined
Scheme A is anticipated to result in a net increase of 9,000 Average Daily Trips (ADT). Of this total, the
largest increase to any one street is expected to be around 3,000 ADT. Compared to existing traffic
volumes of 30,000 ADT on TH-25, 12,000 ADT on Broadway Street, and anticipated background growth
to 2030 estimated at 20% with an additional river crossing, or up to 60% with no additional crossing,
additional traffic generated by redevelopment in the CCD will be minimal.
Under both existing and future conditions, the intersection most critical to traffic flow in and around the
Monticello CCD is the intersection of TH-25 and Broadway. Because of high east/west traffic volumes
and turning volumes at this intersection, little spare green time is available for heavy through traffic
volumes on TH-25. Current plans for the intersection of TH-25 with Broadway, as identified in the City's
recently published 2030 Transportation Plan, call for the addition of roadway capacity at this
intersection. Plans include dual left turn lanes for the two heavy movements from eastbound to
northbound, and from southbound to eastbound, and the addition of dual right turn lanes for the
westbound to northbound movement. With this improved geometric layout, the intersection is
anticipated to function acceptably through 2030, under one important condition.
The condition required for acceptable operations at the TH-25/Broadway intersection is that a second
river crossing over the Mississippi River must be constructed to provide an alternate route for trips
between Monticello and Big Lake that currently use the TH-25 crossing. This second crossing, as noted in
the City's Transportation Plan, is the difference between 20% growth in background traffic and 60%
E
growth in background traffic between now and 2030. Without this vital second connection, no
additional improvements at TH-25 and Broadway will be able to withstand projected traffic growth and
maintain acceptable performance thresholds at this critical intersection at the hub of the CCD.
As noted, the proposed CCD redevelopment will bring a modest amount of additional traffic to the CCD,
spread among the many roads and intersections within the downtown core. In order to provide for
adequate access to the proposed retail facilities, creation of an additional signalized access point at 4th
Street is proposed. This intersection will not only be capable of providing the additional access needed
by the new retail facilities, but will also provide a much-needed alternate route for local east -west
through traffic in the downtown core, improving operations at the critical TH-2-yBroadway intersection,
and in turn, along the TH-25 arterial corridor.
In order to maximize the benefit of the traffic signal at 4th Street and offset the impact of the addition of
signalized access points, access restriction at the intersection of TH-25 with 3`d Street is proposed.
Conversion to right-in/right-out access is recommended to provide local access to developments on
either side of TH-25 and to increase the spacing between full -movement intersections.
In addition to the benefit to vehicular traffic resulting from a new signal at 4th Street, pedestrians will
also benefit. Currently, a 5 -block separation exists between signalized crossing points of the high traffic
volume TH-25 corridor. The addition of a traffic signal at 4th Street will limit the distance a pedestrian
must go out of his or her way to cross TH-25 to one and a half blocks.
Improved traffic operations at TH-25 and Broadway as a result of the 4th Street traffic signal will also be
of benefit by limiting the potential for queues on Broadway to extend upstream to both Walnut Street to
the west and Cedar Street to the east. Analysis of post -redevelopment traffic operations at these
intersections shows levels of service above acceptable thresholds with little queuing impacts from the
critical TH-2-/Broadway intersection.
Other geometric roadway improvements recommended to improve traffic operations in the CCD have
been identified in the 2030 Transportation Plan and will be implemented as traffic volumes in the CCD
increase. These include an additional westbound approach lane at the TH-25 intersection with 7th Street,
and revised signal phasing and extension of the westbound storage bay at the 1-94 North Ramp
intersection, which MnDOT will soon be completing.
Transportation Solutions for Walnut Street
Potential traffic issues for the segment of Walnut Street extending from 4th Street to Broadway emerged
during review and discussion of redevelopment plan alternatives. The proposed anchor location on the
west side of Walnut Street and the parking required to support it in a configuration acceptable to a
national retailer will convert the function and image of Walnut Street for this two block segment
resulting in the following concerns:
• Roadway capacity will be reduced to the point where the function of Walnut as an overflow or
alternate to TH-25 for local traffic will be diminished, increasing congestion at critical downtown
intersections.
46
• As vehicles seek to avoid TH-25 congestion on Walnut Street, the proposed configuration with a
design similar to a shopping center parking lot will limit through traffic flow and will endanger
pedestrians moving from parking areas to the storefront areas on the west side of the street.
• Numerous intersections of parking aisles with Walnut Street will be a barrier to north -south
pedestrian flow on the east side of Walnut, and will reduce the capability of the corridor to
function as a meaningful north -south pedestrian linkage.
Several steps were taken by the consultant team to respond to these concerns. Alternate roadway
geometry was developed and analyzed that provided for continuous through movement for vehicular
traffic from Walnut Street south of 4th Street to the intersection of Locust Street with Broadway. The
variations analyzed affect on access to Cargill from 4th Street, retail access from 4th Street, right-of-way
configuration and area requirements, and impacts on proposed retail and neighboring residential land
uses. The conclusions from this analysis suggested that rerouting traffic in this fashion would be very
expensive and counter-productive to goals of capturing an anchor tenant for the downtown.
With this background, methods to encourage the rerouting of traffic on the existing street system were
discussed. Application of changes to the design and appearance of Walnut Street from 4th to Broadway
could help discourage growth in cut -through or diverted traffic as traffic volumes grow. Constricting
Walnut Street and altering its image to coincide with its function as a storefront drive aisle would
encourage through traffic to avoid this segment of Walnut. Suggested changes include:
• Narrowing the functional street to one lane in each direction
• Narrowing the throat at the intersections with Broadway and 4th to appear more like a parking
lot entrance and less like a public street.
• Removing on -street parking from the west side of the roadway.
• Changing roadway surface materials at the entrances from 4th and Broadway and at locations for
pedestrian crossing along the two -block segment between 4th and Broadway.
Assuming these techniques would be effective at rerouting traffic from Walnut to Locust Street and Linn
Street, additional intersection capacity analysis was completed for downtown intersections around the
core retail area bounded by Locust, TH-25, 4th Street and Broadway. Utilizing forecast for 2030 and
traffic projections from the proposed redevelopment, it was determined that sufficient capacity would
be available to accommodate traffic diverted from Walnut Street.
Techniques for maintaining the north -south continuity of pedestrian circulation in the Walnut Street
corridor also need to be applied to the east side of Walnut if the proposed solution is to be successful.
The following treatment of landscape islands proposed along the east side of Walnut Street will help
maintain that continuity:
• Provide islands of sufficient width to maintain an adequate pedestrian walkway through the
islands, with landscaping or urban design features on either side of the walkway.
• Provide barrier -free walking surfaces without ramp transitions where walkway intersects
curbing around the parking lot islands.
• Provide delineation of walkways across Walnut Street and through parking lot areas by changing
surface treatments on the pedestrian walkway.
• Provide canopy plantings for summer shade and winter protection.
• Provide accent landscaping with seasonal interest and human scale.
VA
• Provide pedestrian -scale lighting to supplement street and parking lot lighting and increase
pedestrian's sense of security by ensuring that they are visible to motorists at all times.
Improvements of this type in shopping center settings have successfully demonstrated that the
continuity desired for pedestrians in the Walnut Street corridor can be maintained.
Recommendations for Pedestrian Improvements in the CCD
In the Research and Analysis section, review of off-site sidewalk connections and existing facilities within
the CCD suggest that a number of missing segments of sidewalk could be added to improve connectivity
for pedestrians that would promote pedestrian use in the CCD. These include potential sidewalk
segments to be added:
• From Minnesota Street to Elm Street along either side of future 7th Street
• From Minnesota Street to Elm Street along the north side of 4th Street
• From Locust Street to Maple Street along either side of 6th Street
• From Maple Street to Elm Street along either side of 6th Street
• From Cedar Street to Washington Street along either side of 4th Street
Completion of these missing segments is recommended to proceed based on available funds. These
locations are not dependent on, or affected by proposed redevelopment within the northern part of the
CCD. In the blocks where expected redevelopment will occur, the objective for pedestrian sidewalk
facilities is to provide sidewalks and planted boulevards on both sides of all local streets to provide
continuous sidewalk connections and develop a consistent, recognizable streetscape approach.
An exception to this recommendation is the TH 25 corridor. Because the environment in the corridor is
dominated by traffic, the primary north -south pedestrian routes should follow the local streets. As
properties along TH-25 redevelop, sidewalks that currently abut the highway at the curb line should be
removed and relocated with a boulevard space protecting pedestrians from roadway impacts. The goal
is to reduce sidewalks in the TH-25 corridor to one sidewalk located along the east side of the roadway.
Suggested dimensions and relationships to the roadway are included in the recommended Design
Guidelines for the CCD.
Pedestrian crossings of the TH-25 and Broadway corridors provide important connections for the CCD
pedestrian network. However, the need for pedestrian crossing of the TH-25 corridor has been
moderated by creating districts for uses on either side of the TH-25 corridor that won't encourage
pedestrian interaction from one side to the other. The existing crossing locations will also be
supplemented with a new controlled crossing location at 4th Street with the addition of a traffic signal in
that intersection location. A detailed description of the function of the traffic signal at this location for
pedestrians is included in the Traffic study contained in the appendix to this report.
Pedestrian crossings at Broadway are also critical for continuity of pedestrian movement through the
CCD. Currently, only one signalized crossing opportunity exists for crossing under high traffic conditions,
at TH-25. Under existing conditions, low traffic volumes on Broadway permit crossing at the
unsignalized intersections to the west and east of Broadway (Walnut, Locust, Cedar, etc.) However, as
48
traffic volumes on Broadway continue to grow, crossing at these unsignalized locations will become
more problematic.
One solution for this problem would be to add a traffic signal at one of the nearby unsignalized
intersections. The mostly likely candidate for future signalization is Locust Street. Although Walnut
Street and Cedar Street experience higher daily and peak hour traffic volumes, their lack of separation
from TH-25 (one block/approximately 330 feet) suggests that operations could become problematic at
some point in the future due to queues interfering with the intersection at TH-25. Locust Street, at two
blocks separation to the west would be the next best option in terms of proximity to the heart of the
CCD, traffic volumes, and separation from TH 25.
Neither the intersection of Walnut Street nor Cedar Street currently meets peak hour vehicular volume
warrants for signalization. Noting that traffic volumes are slightly lower on Locust Street indicates that
this intersection would also not meet peak hour signal warrants for peak hour volumes. There are also
signal warrants for pedestrian crossing activity at intersections, but in order to meet pedestrian
warrants for signalization, the intersection would, at a minimum need, to experience over 190
pedestrians crossing in the peak hour. Based on field observation indicating minimal pedestrian activity,
this threshold is far from being met.
The existing downtown area is also lacking in other pedestrian facilities and amenities such as benches
and seating areas, sidewalk area landscaping, and directory and way -finding signage to facilitate
movement through the downtown. Existing facilities are limited to benches in some locations along
Walnut and Broadway Streets, and around the entries to some of the public facilities such as the Library
and Community Center. Expansion of amenities for pedestrians should be incorporated into plans for
revitalizing downtown.
Recommendations for Bicycle Trails and Facilities in the CCD
The Monticello Parks and Trails System Plan identifies two corridors within the CCD as bicycle corridors:
• Broadway is identified as a Primary Pathway Route
• Highway 25 is identified as a Secondary Pathway Route
Both corridors extend through the CCD to destinations outside of the CCD. For the purpose of these
trails, safe circulation through the CCD is the primary purpose, and opportunity to access other, local
destinations within the CCD from these corridors is a secondary objective. Due to space constraints
within the CCD, the expected route for bicycles once they have left the designated routes is on the local
street system. Downtown businesses should be encouraged to provide facilities to support the use of
bicycles for alternate transportation in the downtown area. At a minimum, bicycle racks convenient to
building entries should be provided with new developments. In public locations such as West Bridge
Park, the Community Center, and the Village Green if implemented, more substantial facilities such as
lockers, changing space, and even showers could be considered.
The designated routes through the CCD need to be planned in conjunction with MnDOT for TH-25 and
with the County for Broadway. However, the existing conditions and function of the two corridors
strongly suggest individual solutions for each. On Broadway, the desire to maintain continuous
sidewalks from storefronts to the street, and to maintain on -street parking through the CCD, dictates an
49
on -street bicycle path solution. The suggested configuration would include a striped bicycle lane
between the outside traffic lane and the parking lane on each side of the roadway. The current width of
Broadway cannot support two minimum -width bicycle lanes in addition to the traffic and parking lanes.
An on -street bicycle trail solution will need to be coordinated with future roadway design improvements
if redevelopment activities can provide the needed right -of way width.
In the TH-25 corridor, on -street bike lanes are inconsistent with MnDOT policies for arterial highways.
An off-road dedicated bike trail is proposed in the design guidelines recommendations for the TH-25
corridor. The objective for removing pedestrian walks from part of the corridor, and for providing
additional corridor width as sites redevelop will provide space in the corridor for the trail. The preferred
location as illustrated in the design guidelines is along the west side of the corridor from the 1-94 bridge
to the river bridge.
50
Chapter 3 - Downtown Framework Plan and Design Guidelines
Framework for Downtown Development
The alternative downtown redevelopment concepts, including the preferred alternative illustrated in
Refined Scheme A (Figure 20) represent and illustrate possibilities for ways that market demand that
exists in the Monticello Trade Area can fit within the northern half of the CCD where the greatest
potential for redevelopment exists. The
plans show specific uses and parking
relationships that may, or may not
accurately depict how opportunities are
captured over time within the CCD.
pab:e P°"kX
c Panung4Pub„e 't However, what is specific about the
w t x.
L'i CO�CxH 1 preferred alternative is the general
Er
Z W Convenience organization of uses, and the location
N1Ces of types of uses within the CCD. Figure
1
DALWAYSTREET 21, the Redevelopment Framework
Plan, illustrates the recommended use
w €F districts consistent with the
opreferences illustrated in Refined
U Scheme A.
6TH STREET u
`Civc c z
a Mc a
c
6:+ALNUT �-
- _ - - --i
STREET
C
0
0
Ex.st:ng Retaa
w
Figure 21— Framework Plan
Structure for Design Guidelines
. Pubhe
Ex Retail
194
'T
Proposed use areas, or districts, in the
Framework Plan are based on access,
location within the CCD, and
surrounding land use relationships. The
Framework Plan represents the
flexibility needed to capture all
potential development and
redevelopment opportunities for the
CCD. As opportunities present
themselves and are evaluated,
locations for uses should fit the
purpose and capabilities of the districts
illustrated in the Framework Plan. The
use districts are defined in greater
detail as part of the proposed Design
Guidelines for the CCD.
The Design Guidelines are intended to correspond to the limits of the CCD Zoning District, and to
establish development controls within the CCD. With the forthcoming modifications to the Monticello
Zoning Code, the development standards for the CCD District will be revised to refer to the CCD Design
Guidelines as the controlling legislation for land use, site development standards, and building design
51
standards. The proposed CCD Design Guidelines have been structured to provide these controls while
maintaining the flexibility that will be important to allow response to a wide variety of development and
redevelopment opportunities as they present themselves. A key feature of the Design Guidelines is the
attempt to draft them so that while they remain somewhat flexible, they also provide enough certainty
so that prospective owners and developers can evaluate how they relate to site and building design and
the cost implications of conforming to the standards outlined by the Guidelines.
The most basic purpose of the Design Guidelines is to establish direction and controls for land use within
the CCD. The Framework Plan is the basis for the definition of uses and relationships that have been
determined to be desirable to achieve the desired results for the redevelopment of the downtown. Use
areas or districts for the CCD are established and described in the Design Guidelines as either Landmark
Areas, or Flex Areas. The establishment of these districts, and their location in the CCD, is illustrated on
Figure 22 on the next page. The Landmark Areas represent locations that have individual, single
purpose from a land use perspective. The Flex Areas present a greater range of land use options, and
represent the most flexible portions of the CCD. Transitional areas that provide use buffers to adjacent,
established residential neighborhoods are included as one of the Flex Area land use types.
Eight Landmark Areas have been defined in the Design Guidelines as specific use recommendations that
are consistent with the recommended redevelopment plan. These include the following as illustrated in
Figure 22:
• L-1: Public parking ramp to the west of West Bridge Park
• L-2: River -oriented shopping in the northwest quadrant of Broadway and TH-25
• L-3: The Cargill properties
• L-4: The Community Center
• L-5: The Riverfront Park (West Bridge and East Bridge Parks)
• L-6: Future Open Space (current liquor store site)
• L-7: Permanent Public Open Space (cemetery)
• L-8: Freeway retail (blocks 1,2, and 3 adjacent to 1-94)
Each of these use areas has its own distinct set of requirements related to the development objectives
for the specific use zone. In contrast to the Landmark Areas, Flex Areas have also been established that
define areas within the CCD District that require land use flexibility to encourage the success of
downtown. Three types of Flex Areas have been defined and incorporated into the Design Guidelines:
• F-1: Shopping Area west of Highway 25
• F-2 : Convenience and Service Area east of Highway 25
• F-3: Transition zones
The primary distinction in the Flex Areas is to encourage retail uses west of Highway 25 and to
encourage service commercial, office, and clinic uses to the east of Highway 25. This land use
arrangement is recommended in order to emphasize Walnut Street as the primary pedestrian zone and
north -south connector through the CCD, and to limit the need for pedestrian interaction across TH-25.
The transition zones are established with uses that will help buffer commercial activity in the CCD
District from adjacent residential neighborhoods to the east of Palm Street, and to the west of Maple
and Linn Streets. The two blocks east of Cedar Street between 3`d and 5th Streets are recommended
Transition Zones, but are currently outside the CCD Zoning District. These blocks should be rezoned.
52
Landmark Areas: Corridors:
L -I Public Parking Ramp t Broadway Street
L-2 River Oriented Shopping 2 Walnut Street
L-3 Cargill Site 3 Highway 25/Pine Street
L-4
Community Center Site
L-5
Riverfront Park
L-6
Future Public Open Space
L-]
I
F-3
)
i
r
F -I
Landmark Areas: Corridors:
L -I Public Parking Ramp t Broadway Street
L-2 River Oriented Shopping 2 Walnut Street
L-3 Cargill Site 3 Highway 25/Pine Street
L-4
Community Center Site
L-5
Riverfront Park
L-6
Future Public Open Space
L-]
Permanent Public Open Space
L-8
Freeway Retail (8-4 Zoning Standards)
Flex Areas:
F -I
Shopping Area West of Hwy 25
F-2
Convenience and Services
F-3
Transition
Figure 22 — Design Guidelines Use Areas
53
Because transportation corridors within the CCD are such a large and important component of what
shapes the downtown and the use of downtown, the Design Guidelines also include use and design
recommendations for three corridors:
• TH-25 / Pine Street between 7th Street and Broadway
• Broadway Street / CSAH 75 between Linn and Palm Streets, and
• Walnut Street
The corridor component of the Design Guidelines includes recommendations for additional right-of-way
where warranted, general description of roadway travel lanes and their geometry, descriptions for
bicycle and pedestrian facilities, descriptions for streetscape and edge treatments, and
recommendations for how buildings should relate to the streets. Figures 23-25 illustrate graphic
examples of the corridor recommendations included with the Design Guidelines.
10' SETBACK/LANDSCAPE ZONE
28' TWO i' 4 40 THREE,_
__...__.LANES'
LANES
E f
Y
ZONE a
(
s i
i
l
PROPOSED
a M ZONE
BUILDING FACE OR
PARKING EDGE
16'
88' FACE TO FACE TYPICAL
¢ 16'
B. rt 14'.-
_
EDGE FEATURES
(WALL OR FENCING)
___ _' IV5A
SO' LANDSCAPE
100' EXISTING R.O.W. 10' SETBACK/LANDSCAPE ZONE
� I
7
1
4' i 14' 12' T 4'
9' MULTI -USE TRAIL L-6' BLVD. WITH I -CONCRETE 6' BLVD. —
(PED. & BIKE) 2' CONC. STRIP MEDIAN WITH 2'
CONC. STRIP
Figure 23 — Highway 25 from 7th to Broadway
10' SETBACK
i
10'6'
4 ..-.._. ,._,..
STOREFRONT -
PROPOSED BUILDING FACE
OR PARKING EDGE
EDGE FEATURES
— (WALL OR FENCING)
10' LANDSCAPE ZONE
6' WALK
EX'STING 100' R.O.W. 10' SETBACK
STREET TREES AT
BUMP' -OUT AREAS
ONLY;
6', ?a' .
--- EXISTING STOREFRONT
r
- -- PROPOSED STOREFRONT
x OR EDGE FEATURES
t7F
STOREFRONT/ � a':
f... --_. y �..
SIDEWA�ti aa.i
28' TWO i' 4 40 THREE,_
__...__.LANES'
LANES
Vt-
z Di 74RE�k J. T
�Q�SIDEWACK
ZONE a
I
l
a M ZONE
m'
16'
88' FACE TO FACE TYPICAL
¢ 16'
Figure 24 — Broadway Street from Linn to Palm
54
6'-16' CONCRETE
SIDEWALK
80' EXISTING R.O.W.
t
40' 40'
i STREET TREES REQUIRED TO
12 12 s REINFORCE BLOCK" PATTERN
I wii
X'- z a 6' CONC. LIMIT OF
BUILDING LINE � a � WALK SURFACE
FOR NEW RETAIL a'� I"EDGE" PARKING
PLANTING TREE
PLANTING ZONE
----- f PARKING
f 24' 16' I 16' i 6 y 6 12'—i STREET SCALE
STOREFRONT LANE LANE LANDSCAPE LIGHTING
I SIDEWALK s ISLAND 24' '
ZONE , i
Figure 25 — Walnut Street looking north at Anchor Block
Component Parts of the CCD Design Guidelines
Beyond the land use directives contained in the Design Guidelines the document provides direction and
controls for site development standards and building design necessary for the creation of a mixed-use
pedestrian -oriented development. Architectural controls have been intentionally structured to allow
enough flexibility for creative building solutions while remaining prescriptive in areas where necessary
to complete the downtown vision. Although many of the historic structures which have contributed to
the identity of downtown Monticello no longer exist, they can still provide visual cues for proportion,
character, and rooflines. Figure 26 illustrates how historic buildings from Broadway Street were used to
inform recommended building proportion criteria contained in the Design Guidelines.
t
Figure 26 — Historic Building Proportions
55
_ ,J
411f� �i
Component parts of the architectural controls included within the Design Guidelines include:
• Building Orientation
• Building Design and Massing
• Building Materials
• Screening
• Franchise design
• Site treatments
• Parking
• Exterior Lighting
• Signage
The use, site development, and architectural design controls included in the Design Guidelines are
intended to apply to all of the Landmark and Flex Areas except for Landmark Area L-8, the Freeway
Retail areas adjacent to 1-94. A unique approach is recommended for development control within
Landmark Area L-8 so that any new or redeveloped uses within this area conform to the existing site and
building standards that occur there. Because the L-8 areas have been developed under zoning
standards consistent with the current B-4 District requirements, the Design Guideline recommendation
for this particular Landmark Area is to apply the B-3 District standards for use, site development,
architecture, and signage to this part of the CCD District.
A complete copy of the proposed CCD District Design Guidelines is contained in Appendix B to this
report.
56
Chapter 4 - Implementation Approach
Capitalize on Market Opportunities
Market research conducted as a part of the planning process identified demand for additional stores
and services in downtown Monticello. Market support was demonstrated for stores which typically
anchor shopping districts including department stores and grocery stores. These stores would be
located in the portion of downtown north of the railroad tracks. These stores would complement Hi -
Way Liquors and the recently opened Walgreens which anchors the north end of downtown and Cub
and Kmart at the south end of downtown. Anchor stores attract customer traffic that can shop at
smaller retail stores and services. A medium size department store would attract an average of 600
customers per day to downtown Monticello. A small grocery store could attract over 400 customers per
day. Market support also exists in the food service category, full service restaurants and limited service
restaurants. Demand for additional services includes personal services and health care.
Attracting more shoppers to downtown is a key ingredient in revitalizing the business district. Attracting
more stores to downtown will reduce shopping trips to neighboring communities reinforcing the shop
local movement.
Redevelopment Objectives
Value creation for business and property owners is one of the primary objectives of the implementation
plan. The City of Monticello and its residents will benefit from increased property valuations and
economic activity. A key component of the value creation strategy is to capitalize on the customer
traffic attracted by anchor stores to provide customers for existing and new retail stores, restaurants
and services. Attracting additional customers to downtown Monticello creates the opportunity for
businesses to increase their sales and grow the value of their business. Property owners will benefit
from the increased value of their buildings. The City of Monticello will benefit from the increased real
estate value which will result in larger tax revenues, creating tax increment that will pay for
redevelopment costs. Businesses, as a result of their increased sales volume, will be able to afford
additional property taxes.
An example of value of creation is provided by Union Crossing anchored by SuperTarget and Home
Depot. Recently, the inline store portion of that mall, known as Monticello Center, located between
Home Depot and SuperTarget sold for about $7.9 million or $176 per square foot. Tenants in this
building include Office Max and Petsmart. This center sold at this price because the retail sales
performance of the individual stores supports the rental rate, which justifies the purchase price of the
shopping center. In contrast, two buildings on Broadway have been offered for sale at $46 and $68 per
square foot in the past year. While these prices may represent the extreme end of the value spectrum,
there is a significant disparity, which reflects age, location and anchor store presence of the properties.
Many downtown buildings have low values because of their location, size and shape. These are
conditions that are difficult to change in response to market demand. Those buildings that do not have
the ability to be adapted to current space and location needs of prospective tenants will need to be
61YA
replaced over time by buildings that are desired by retail tenants. Value creation for businesses,
buildings and the City of Monticello occurs when:
• Each business and building has a location that is appropriate for its business occupant.
• When each business has a store space is the right size to properly display merchandise or
perform the tenant's service.
• Each building can offer its tenants an affordable rent that is supported by sales potential.
• Each retailer experiences sales increase as a result of the larger customer draw of the re-
developed downtown area.
• Each building owner has rental income and net operating income that supports building cost or
value.
• Potential for increased rental income is created by increased tenant sales.
The anticipated results of the value creation strategy are:
• Increased economic activity and vitality in downtown Monticello.
• A growing number of businesses with increased sales and profits.
• Buildings that increase in value based on increased sales derived by its tenants.
• Increased tax revenues to the City of Monticello resulting from more prosperous businesses.
• Increased tax increments to support continued revitalization in downtown Monticello.
Flexible Implementation
Downtown Monticello is a relatively small geographic area with a limited amount of land for
redevelopment. Successful redevelopment will depend on flexibility in building location, parking, rental
rates and other development related issues.
Parking
Parking is currently the largest land use in downtown and will be the largest land use in the future.
Parking requirements for new and existing buildings become a constraint on buildable area on each
block. In planning for redevelopment or new development, the amount of parking allocated for each
use needs to be carefully considered. A parking ratio of five spaces per 1,000 square ft of retail store
space is commonly considered a minimum requirement by zoning codes. Not all businesses, however,
need five spaces per thousand square feet and many can be successful with substantially less parking.
As each new development moves through the approval process the parking needs must be carefully
considered to meet the needs of the business, but not over allocate the amount of space devoted to
parking. Requiring parking that is not needed has the effect of limiting the amount of development and
tax base that can be created, and reduces economic vitality.
Location
Businesses have different locational needs based on their relative relationship on a scale of convenience
to destination. Convenience retailers (supermarkets, drug, liquor and hardware) are examples of
58
businesses that need convenient and visible locations. Destination businesses such as many services
and office uses, need accessible and visible locations but not necessarily TH-25 frontage. Typically these
businesses have a more personal business relationship with their customers.
Rental Rates
Rental rates in downtown will need to vary based on location, type of business and store size. In a
typical shopping center, rents per square foot can range from $7.00 per square foot to over $35.00 per
square foot. In most cases, those stores with the lower rents are larger and serve as anchors to draw
customers to the shopping area. In evaluating development proposals it is important that rents be
affordable by the individual business based on its sales and gross margin. The implementation plan
needs to have the flexibility to recognize the different needs of businesses considering a location in
downtown Monticello.
Downtown Property Values
Values of downtown properties vary widely based on site size, building size and location. A summary of
downtown property values is included in Table 9 below. Block numbers for downtown are shown on
Figure 27 on the next page. Much of the land that will be redeveloped in downtown Monticello is also
occupied by buildings which increase the value and the cost of acquisition. The land and building value
by block for existing buildings that may be redeveloped at some point in time range from $13.70 to
$70.43 per square foot of land area as shown in Table 9. These values are as of January 2, 2010 for taxes
payable in 2011.
Table 9 — Downtown Property Values
RANGE OF PER SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL LAND VALUES
(TAXES PAYABLE 2011)
Block
Land & Building
Vacant Land Low High
1
$ 11.45* $ 20.57 37.61
16
14.64* 30.07 30.07
17
24.00 24.00
31
14.69 18.12
32
13.70 15.03
34
19.77 58.75
35
20.98 70.43
36
7.55 16.43 33.63
51
20.80 30.57
52
17.99 37.21
—..— F,-1 I'S ivy unNi uvcincnu
Source: MLS, Wright County, City of Monticello and McComb Group, Ltd.
There are very few privately owned vacant commercial land parcels in downtown. Two parking lot
parcels were valued at $11.45 and $14.64 per square foot respectively. A vacant parcel in the northeast
corner of Locust and 3`d Street west was assessed at $7.55 per square foot. This parcel was recently
59
appraised at about $8.94 per square foot based on other land transactions in Monticello. High land and
building cost is a common problem in redevelopment that generally results in the need for a land cost
write down.
Illustration of Potential Land Plan for Implementation
Refined Scheme A represents one concept for how individual blocks in downtown could be redeveloped.
Figure 27 below illustrates Refined Scheme A with the Block Numbers labeled for reference. It is
unlikely that downtown will redevelop with complete consistency with the layout illustrated in Refined
Scheme A, but as the recommended plan it illustrates a number of important components responding to
the physical and market analysis of the Monticello CCD.
ri
EN
Kle11lE4
•Ey,IM+D Jfff
dR ;5
r� �
xtF t 'I`... 4''1G,
° 34 1
j Q L-41
a
i Y�'j ih Lte: f�
i
H ' 30 31
'3
u ff
—A � j}L',�• -0 jl
o J
—. 4T1f 4�E'T W. 4lMR`a +16
4 �A4L'4
a�q
EL
L X11
Figure 27— Implementation Plan Illustration
. ��
The most important message conceived by Scheme A is the relationship of building area to parking area
at a parking ratio of four spaces perthousand square feet of building area. This plan is recommended to
serve as a guide on which to base implementation planning.
Much of the land that will be incorporated in potential development sites is currently owned by the City
or the EDA. The City of Monticello has compiled a list of willing property sellers of downtown property.
The potential redevelopment sites have been created taking into consideration the City owned land and
willing property sellers.
Implementation Framework
Downtown Monticello is laid out on a typical street and block grid with individual lots on each block.
This street and block grid system does not provide for anchor store sites and needed parking in the most
efficient manner. The solution to this problem is to combine blocks to create larger developments and
to incorporate concepts from the shopping center industry. In many shopping centers the anchor store
owns (or leases) its building pad site and the shopping center owns the common area which includes
parking, circulation, sidewalks and landscaping. Tenants pay common area maintenance (CAM) fees to
cover operating costs of the shopping center and common area.
The shopping center approach has been adapted to downtown Monticello. Buildings will own their
building pad and the City will own and maintain the common area. The common area contains all other
areas including parking, circulation, landscape elements, sidewalks and other features commonly
associated with a shopping center. This approach provides the flexibility to offer the appropriate
amount of parking to retailers and simplifies the provision of shared parking for businesses whose peak
demands are different. This reduces the overall amount of parking required to support the proposed
developments.
Implementation of this approach is fairly simple. Building owners will purchase from the City its building
pad site plus a variable width maintenance perimeter. Building pad sites will be priced at a cost
appropriate for each use. In addition, each building will purchase a parking license from the City for the
number of spaces needed to support its business. The parking license will provide each building with
parking rights on the common area. Common area maintenance charges will be assessed to each
building based on the amount of common area utilized for their business and construction costs
associated with the common area.
Sources and uses of capital funds for redevelopment are summarized below. Tax increment funds may
also be utilized along with other revenues depending on total costs. Building developers will purchase
pad sites for their building and will also purchase a parking license for needed parking spaces. The
parking license will be a per stall price with two components:
• Land cost for the parking area
• Development costs for constructing the parking and other common area elements
Uses of funds include the typical redevelopment costs (acquisition, relocation, demolition, etc.) and the
cost for the construction of new improvements. Development costs include both hard and soft costs.
61
Downtown Development Costs
Sources
Building Pad Sales
Parking License— Land
Parking License— Development
Capitalized Tax Increments
Other Funds
Uses
Land Acquisition
Tenant Relocation
Demolition
Site Preparation
Common area Development
Parking
Sidewalks
Landscaping
Streetscape
Infrastructure
Other Costs
The downtown common area described above will be owned and maintained by the City. The costs of
operation and maintenance will be recovered through Common Area Maintenance (CAM) charges paid
by each building for its proportionate share of the parking and common area. It is assumed that building
owners will pass CAM costs on to their tenants. Typical CAM cost components are shown below:
Downtown Operation and Maintenance Costs
Sources
Common Area Maintenance fees
Downtown Marketing Funds
Property Owner Contribution
Business Owner contribution
City Contribution and/or
Convention and Visitor Bureau Contribution
Uses
Common Area Maintenance
Parking Lot and Sidewalk
Lighting
Landscaping
Snow Removal
Security
Trash removal
Other Maintenance and Repair
Insurance
Downtown Marketing and Promotion
Advertising
Promotions and Events
Seasonal Decorations
Other
Many shopping centers have marketing funds that are supported by tenants and the shopping center
owner. If such a marketing fund is created in downtown, the fees could be collected as part of the CAM
charges. The City could also contribute to the promotion fund to promote shopping in downtown.
Preliminary Financial Planning
The estimated preliminary redevelopment costs for each downtown block were calculated using
assessor's market values and a contingency to cover other costs. The amount of additional retail or
office space that could be located on each block, if it was developed, was based on Refined Scheme A
62
along with the estimated tax increment generated from the new development and estimated revenues
from sale of pad sites and parking license fees. The result was a preliminary estimate of the financial
feasibility of redeveloping each block.
Preliminary estimated costs and revenues of redeveloping blocks in downtown are contained in Table 10
below. This table is generally based on Refined Scheme A with modifications, in some cases, to reflect
how the private sector would approach development. Information considered in these estimates
includes square feet of land area to be acquired, estimated acquisition cost, proposed new building size,
total revenues, and positive or negative balance for each block. Land acquisition has been reduced by
the assessed value of City or EDA land on each block. Revenues include tax increment supported bonds
and sales of pad sites and parking license fees. Positive and negative balances for redevelopment per
block range from $215,000 positive to over $1.7 million negative. This analysis demonstrated that some
blocks are relatively inexpensive to redevelop, while others are more expensive and/or yield less tax
increment. This analysis was used to identify the areas where redevelopment would be most effectively
implemented.
Table 10— Preliminary Downtown Redevelopment Economics
Block
Estimated
Cost
Total
Revenues
Balance
Southwest Block 34
$ 279,890
$
472,625
$ 192,735
Block B
$ 322,400
$
537,200
$ 214,800
Anchor Block(s) 31,32,35,36
$ 3,636,750
$ 2,493,864
$(1,142,886)
Block 33
$ 998,270
$
695,077
$ (303,193)
Northeast Block 34
$ 1,462,110
$
235,611
$(1,226,499)
Block 52
$ 1,948,310
$
563,161
$(1,385,149)
Block 53
$ 948,350
$
490,860
$ (457,490)
Block 35
$ 2,246,010
$
515,589
$(1,730,421)
Block 36
$ 1,291,680
$
400,050
$ (891,630)
Block 51
$ 1,255,540
$
310,846
$ (944,694)
Block 16
$ 1,189,760
$
647,914
$ (541,846)
Catalytic Redevelopment Sites
Market research, planning, and financial analysis results were considered along with development
related events in downtown to prioritize areas for redevelopment. Based on the study findings and local
retailer needs and opportunities, three types of development blocks were identified. These are: Anchor
Blocks, Relocation Blocks and Priority Blocks.
Anchor Blocks
Market research indicated support for a medium size department store and planning analysis
determined that an anchor store site could be created along Walnut Street. This site, shown on
Figure 27, and its associated parking, would utilize portions of Blocks 31, 32, 35 and 36, which are
63
referred to as Anchor Blocks. There are several businesses on this site that may need to be
relocated and buildings to be acquired. The actual number of businesses and buildings will depend
on the size of the anchor store and more detailed planning. Two buildings are potentially available
for purchase: Ace Hardware and the NAPA Building. NAPA is moving its business to a new building
south of 1-94.
Relocation Blocks
Planned property acquisitions are creating a need for buildings to accommodate existing downtown
businesses. Based on financial analysis, planning, City land ownership and willing sellers, blocks 34,
B and 53 were identified as Relocation Blocks.
The City currently owns a large site on Block B. An adjacent parcel is currently for sale and could be
incorporated in this site.
Block 34 has several city owned parcels and properties owned by willing sellers. Two city wells are
located on this block. Preliminary relocation planning indicates this block can be redeveloped
without having to move the wells. This block is a good location for Ace Hardware and other retail
businesses. Redevelopment of this block should include redeveloping the remaining parcels along
Broadway to create a fully redeveloped block.
Block 53 has been partially redeveloped with Walgreens. Three other parcels could be redeveloped.
The former Times Building is a potential relocation site for one or more of the businesses to be
relocated.
As downtown redevelopment planning proceeds, other business relocations will occur. The
objective should be to use these relocations to cause new buildings to be developed downtown.
Priority Blocks
Two Priority Blocks were identified. Block 33 is relatively inexpensive to redevelop and could
accommodate a 20,000 square foot building in addition to the existing office building. There is
potential for a small grocery store in downtown. Block 33 would be a good location for that type of
business.
Block 52 is a priority block due to its location near the park and Mississippi river. This block should
be redeveloped with uses that can capitalize on the block's proximity to the park and Mississippi
River.
Short -Term Implementation
Redevelopment of downtown can be initiated with two current opportunities. The planned acquisition
of 100 Broadway on Block 34 for proposed TH-25/CSAH 75 intersection improvements will require
relocation of four businesses. It would be best if these businesses were retained downtown. Ace
Hardware would like to expand its business in downtown and move to a more visible location. Block 34
is a logical location for Ace Hardware. To provide for future expansion of the hardware store, the owner
64
plans three retail tenant spaces. With coordinated relocation, this could accommodate some businesses
displaced from 100 Broadway. This would require acquisition of one building and relocation of a tenant.
Redevelopment of a portion of Block 34 for a possible Ace Hardware store appears to be economically
attractive because the 100 Broadway building will be acquired with other funds and the City owns
parking lots on the block.
The anchor block is the potential site for a medium size department store. The proposed department
store pad would be located on Block 31 and would incorporate parking on Blocks 32, 35, and 36 along
with portions of street ROW on 3`d Street West and Locust. Relocation of Ace Hardware and purchase of
the NAPA building and the vacant land at 213 3`d Street West would provide most of the site.
Acquisition of Walnut Plaza would be required and possibly 321 Walnut. This would require additional
business relocations. Preliminary analysis indicates a negative balance of about $1,150,000.
Anchor block parcels result in a negative balance of over $1.1 million, but is proposed for a medium size
department store. This estimate includes three of the blocks that are part of this proposed
development. There will be additional costs, such as reciprocal parking easements and other
development costs for an anchor store.
Block B is a relocation block and is an excellent location for a professional office building that could
accommodate relocated businesses. Block B results in a positive balance since much of the proposed
development site is currently owned by the City. A small commercial building and a house east of the
City parcel are recommended for acquisition to unify land use on the block.
The desire for a specialty grocer to complement the offerings of Cub was expressed during the course of
the downtown evaluation. Block 33 could be the location of a 20,000 square foot store, possibly a
grocery store. This block would require acquisition of several residential properties and associated
relocation. This block has an estimated negative balance of about $300,000.
These four development opportunities have a combined negative balance of slightly more than $1.0
million. These costs may rise as planning for each development proceeds, but they appear to be within
the City's available resources. Preliminary redevelopment economics for this short-term redevelopment
scenario are summarized in Table 11 below.
Table 11— Short-term Redevelopment Scenario Economics
Block
Estimated
Cost
Total
Revenues
Balance
Southwest Block 34
$ 279,890
$ 472,625
$ 192,735
Block B
$ 322,400
$ 537,200
$ 214,800
Anchor Block
$ 3,636,750
$ 2,493,864
$(1,142,886)
Block 33
$ 998,270
$ 695,077
$ (303,193)
Subtotal
$ 5,237,310
$ 4,198,766
$(1,038,544)
65
Redevelopment Summary
Existing building acquisitions and business expansion needs create the opportunity to launch
redevelopment in Downtown Monticello. Seizing these opportunities will set the stage for additional
redevelopment.
Downtown Redevelopment Financing Tools
A number of tools for financing redevelopment and public infrastructure for redevelopment are
available to the City of Monticello. Success in identifying and utilizing available funding sources will
contribute greatly to the success of achieving Monticello's redevelopment objectives. Part of
Monticello's approach to financing redevelopment should include constant monitoring of federal, state,
county, and private foundation and non-profit sources for grants that can be applied to public and
private costs for redevelopment activity. The primary financial tools available for redevelopment at this
time include:
Tax Increment Financing (TIF): TIF can provide assistance for land write-down, public infrastructure
and/or site improvements. Redevelopment TIF Districts are established based on blight and
functional obsolescence criteria and may be 25 years in length. Monticello has a fund balance of
over $1 million in two TIF districts (1-5 and 1-6) that will decertify in 2012 and 2013. Another TIF
district (1-22) will expire in 2024; it could provide additional resources for downtown revitalization.
Public hearings are required by the governmental unit for review and approval of a TIF District
budget and spending plan as well as a Development Agreement.
Tax Abatement: Tax Abatement can be established to operate in a fashion similar to TIF, but with
potentially more flexibility in the use of funds. The state statute establishing tax abatement allows
political subdivisions to grant an abatement of the taxes they impose to be used for increasing or
preserving tax base, providing employment, acquiring or constructing public facilities, redeveloping
blighted areas, or financing or providing public infrastructure. Revenue from abated taxes is used to
fund bonds for improvements in a fashion similar to the typical use of TIF revenue, but without the
stricter use limitations applied to TIF districts. Tax Abatement may be applied for periods up to 15
years for the purposes outlined above. The City of Monticello could request that other political
subdivisions such as the County or School District also abate taxes within a district established by
the City, but the other jurisdictions are not obligated to do so. Tax abatement cannot be applied
within an active TIF District, so for the downtown area of Monticello this financial tool may have
more applicability in the future as the current TIF districts expire.
The EDA and Monticello City Council would need to establish a policy for the utilization of Tax
Abatement to finance redevelopment activities.
USDA Rural Development Community Facilities Grant and Loan Program —These funds are used to
assist communities with population less than 20,000 in developing/redeveloping essential public
facilities and/or infrastructure. Grants require other funding sources to be involved; the grant
amount is based on a community's economic capacity & economic distress data. Loans generally
carry favorable interest rates and long payback periods of 25 to 30 years. Applications must be
submitted to the USDA staff/offices. The USDA staff will work closely with applicants via a pre-
application process to ensure that projects meet the eligibility guidelines and the goals and risks are
understood by the involved parties.
Minnesota DEED Redevelopment Grant Program: Grant funding can be used in Downtown
Redevelopment efforts/projects for land acquisition, demolition, infrastructure and other
redevelopment project related improvements. The Grant dollars may total up to 50 percent of the
costs for the eligible items. A Redevelopment Grant application must be submitted to the
Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) per the application
schedule/deadline. The next deadline is January 3, 2012.
Minnesota DEED Small Cities Development Program (SCDP): Funding is awarded as a grant directly
to a public entity to support development of public infrastructure, housing, small business growth
and expansion; funds may offered by the public entity to private sector developers/businesses and
non-profit organizations as loans for real property purchases/renovation and/or new construction
and equipment purchases or improvements; an application must be submitted to Minnesota DEED
per the application schedule/deadline.
Minnesota Legacy Grants: In 2008, Minnesota voters passed constitutional amendment dedicating
an additional 3/8 of one percent of sales and use tax to Clean Water, Wildlife, Cultural Heritage and
Natural Areas for a 25 -year period beginning July 1, 2009. These funds can provide a key source of
funding for parks and trail connections, Mississippi River amenities, history and history preservation,
clean water, and arts and cultural projects associated with Monticello's downtown revitalization
effort. In 2011, $10.5 million was available for Arts and Cultural Heritage — this represents about
20% of the total funding available each year. Applications are submitted through different state
agencies based on funding category. Agencies involved include the MN Department of Natural
Resources, MN Historical Society and MN Arts Board.
Small Business Administration 'SBA 504' Loans - The Small Business Administration provides direct
loans to qualifying for-profit businesses for fixed assets (land, building and equipment) for 40% of
total project costs. They require 10% equity, 50% loan participation from a private lender as well as
job creation. SBA 504 loans provide an attractive option for small businesses seeking to own their
own facility. Benefits include a low down payment (10%), longer term (20 years for loans that
consist primarily of real estate); and a fixed interest rate, at a low rate (currently less than 5%).
Small Business Administration Loan Guarantee 'SBA 7A' — The Small Business Administration
encourages private lenders to lend to small businesses by providing a loan guarantee which reduces
the lenders exposure if there is a default. These loans can be used for equipment purchases and/or
working capital; the bank completes the application steps with the borrower and makes the loan to
the borrower.
Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund (GMEF): The Monticello EDA acts as a lender to commercial
and industrial businesses. The minimum loan size is $25,000 and maximum may not to exceed 50%
of the remaining GMEF balance. Funds can be used for acquisition of real estate and/or
construction or renovation of buildings and purchase of equipment, providing the business meets
certain economic development criteria. There is some flexibility in how funds are deployed; options
include a direct, subordinated loan; loan participation or loan guarantee.
67
Designated Downtown Loan Funds: Many communities involved in downtown revitalization
establish revolving loan funds to support fagade improvements and/or renovation activities related
to bringing older buildings up to current code building code standards. Examples of this approach
include:
• Facade improvement loan programs typically provide relatively small ($2,000 — 8,000) loans.
They may carry no/low interest rate and be subordinated to bank and may require a matching
contribution from a bank or the business or property owner. They may be structured to provide
an incentive for property owners to freshen up the exterior appearance in accordance with
design guidelines. Because they are relatively small loans, the term on these loans is relatively
short.
• Loan funds targeted to code related building renovation (e.g. electrical, mechanical, handicap
access, etc.) typically provide larger loans ($8,000 — 15,000). In all other respects they are
structured similar to the fagade improvement loans.
The EDA and Monticello City Council would need to establish a policy for the utilization of
Designated Loan Funds finance building renovations.
MnDOT Transportation Economic Development Pilot Program (TED): This program is an example
of grant initiatives that appear from time to time through MnDOT to address transportation -related
issues like economic development, safety, roadway beautification, and other, similar issues. The
TED program was set up in 2011 to provide $39 million in MnDOT funds for transportation
improvements that would improve the statewide transportation network while promoting economic
growth through the expansion of an existing business, or development of a new business. Grants of
up to $10 million dollars were available under this program. Proposals were solicited from
applicants that were required to be governmental entities as defined by state law, but governmental
entities were allowed to partner with private concerns. Typical of most state funding programs, a
local match for a portion of the funds was required, so governmental units applying for a grant must
have some local funding available for the proposed project. Monticello should actively monitor
funding programs offered by MnDOT and other state agencies.
Organizing to work together effectively
Successful downtown revitalization requires common purpose and vision for redevelopment efforts, and
cooperation between participants representing public and private -sector interests. Simply stated,
revitalization requires:
• Commitment to a shared vision;
• Clear understanding of market realities;
• Establishing ground rules for valuation of property;
• Engagement of public and private sector leaders, and downtown business and property owners
• A long-term commitment to civility and cooperation through the complex process of
redevelopment and revitalization.
It is important to address the following organizational topics in a forthright manner to ensure successful
project implementation:
1. Structure
2. Leadership
3. Organizational processes
a. Strategy
b. Systems to measure progress and impact
c. Systems to inform/update strategy
4. Financial resources aligned/targeted to support plan implementation
5. Strong communications plan & execution
Recommended approaches for establishing the organizational framework for effective implementation
of the redevelopment of the Monticello CCD are outlined in the sections which follow.
1. Structure
Successful implementation of the downtown revitalization initiative will require the engagement of
public and private sector leadership. The Monticello Economic Development Authority (EDA) will
play the key public sector role in the revitalization of downtown because it has:
• Statutory powers to engage in development projects in the City of Monticello,
• Land in downtown Monticello
• Financial resources, and
• Staff resources.
The EDA has responsibilities beyond downtown revitalization and its structure does not actively
engage community resources that can be critical to success. Its role should be complemented by the
creation of a downtown development corporation. The two should have a close working
relationship, with at least one EDA member participating on the development corporation governing
board. It may be possible for the development corporation to affiliate with another non-profit
organization to minimize the administrative burden.
Consistent with the principle of "form follows function" Monticello's downtown revitalization effort
should maintain a clear focus on redevelopment/revitalization. Promotional activities and special
events for downtown businesses are best addressed by existing organizations. It should be lead by a
public-private partnership (e.g. development council or corporation) that includes individuals with
specific expertise, as well as representatives of key groups and organizations that have a vested
interest in the success of downtown, and the capacity to contribute leadership and resources.
• Major employers should be represented — they have a vested interest in health of the
overall community — as a business location and as a place to which they bring customers,
suppliers. The health of the community impacts the living/working environment for many of
their employees and impacts their ability to attract employees. Senior managers in these
organizations have the skills to manage complex projects. As significant taxpayers, they
have a vested interest in ensuring the long-term health of Monticello's tax base.
• Business and property owners provide critical insights into the real challenges and
opportunities facing business and property owners downtown and must be actively
engaged. Because of the potential for real or perceived conflicts of interest, representatives
should be carefully selected and recuse themselves from deliberations if a potential for
conflict of interest exists.
• Certain technical perspectives are valuable: finance, real estate, legal, and accounting.
• In Monticello, the Community Center and Eastbridge/Westbridge Park can be important
traffic generators and are critical to creating downtown Monticello as a distinctive
destination for shopping, dining and recreation. Representatives of the parks board and
civic center management should be part of the team.
• Development corporation leadership should include representation from the following
categories. The structure should allow for staggered terms to ensure both continuity of
leadership and integration of new leadership.
o Major employers
o Business owners
o Property owners
o Banking
o Accounting
o Legal
o Downtown Association
o Chamber of Commerce
o Parks Board
o Civic Center
o Monticello EDA / City Council
o City staff
2. Leadership
There are two components to leadership — volunteer and staff/consulting resources.
Volunteer leadership - The goal is a functional, balanced team with the qualities and skills needed to
accomplish the community's downtown revitalization goals.
• Effective leaders and effective team players
• A balance of entrepreneurial creativity/ drive and caution/risk-management
• Demonstrated experience in managing complex organizations and projects
• Unquestioned ethics and integrity
• Creative, problem -solving skills
• Respectful communication skills
• Priority focus on community goals and community service
Staff/consulting leadership — City staff and consultants are available to support the EDA and can
provide important support to the development corporation. The development corporation may
want to secure part-time help; engage consulting support; and/or retain the services of an existing
organization to meet the range of administrative and professional services that will be required.
As a first step, all personal qualities (e.g. communication and problem -solving skills) and potential
responsibilities should be outlined. Opportunities to engage existing local organizations to provide
in-kind or contracted support should be explored. Required skills and capacity not available
70
through existing resources should be identified and serve as the basis for a position description or
request for proposal. In addition to appropriate technical skills, part-time staff or consulting
resources should demonstrate many of the same qualities as described above for volunteer
leadership.
• Effective leader and effective team player
• A balance of entrepreneurial creativity/ drive and caution/risk-management
• Demonstrated experience in managing complex organizations and projects
• Unquestioned ethics and integrity
• Creative, problem -solving skills
• Respectful communication skills
• Priority focus on community goals and community service
3. Organizational Processes
A well -researched strategy is a key foundation of effective organizational processes. Executing the
plan is the next step and should include performance measurement. The EDA and development
corporation should agree on metrics to measure progress and impact over the near term and long
term — including measures involving successful business relocations, sustainable rents, new
investment, employment, increase in traffic, sales and other relevant factors. Performance
measures should be communicated regularly to all public and private stakeholders and serve as the
basis for informing and refining the strategy.
4. Financial Resources
Financial resources must be aligned to support implementation of the plan. A three-year budget for
the development corporation should be developed and funds committed in advance by public and
private sources to ensure that staff/consulting leadership can focus on achieving results rather than
fundraising.
5. Communications
Leadership should develop a communication strategy based on input from all key stakeholders in
the redevelopment process (property owners, business owners, EDA members, city council
members, development corporation funders, etc.). The communications plan should reflect
different approaches for each group (e.g. property owner outreach will be different than city council
communication; some audiences want weekly communication, for others quarterly may be fine). As
much as possible, the communications strategy should be agreed to by all groups in advance. A
range of communications activities should be part of the plan including electronic media,
community meetings and presentations, individual outreach, opportunities for engagement in
committees, etc. An annual report should be prepared summarizing goals, progress, impact,
volunteer recognition and a look ahead to the next phase of revitalization.
71
Chapter 5 - Implementation Action Plan
A coordinated plan of action is essential for the implementation of the redevelopment plan for the CCD
that has evolved from the Embracing Downtown Monticello study process. The following sections
describe specific actions recommended to implement the plan approach outlined in the preceding
chapter.
t5 ej
ej `� f
El r
Ll
as I e'F i
a {is
0 � � �, � Oji � � , '�' � ft
Figure 28 — Illustrative Redevelopment Plan
Planning and Zoning Actions
The initial Planning action required for implementation of the redevelopment plan for the CCD following
adoption of the study results will be completing a Comprehensive Plan update for the Downtown Focus
Area segment of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Chapter. The primary purpose of the focus area
description will be to identify, summarize, and communicate the changes in Land Use policies, goals, and
objectives established through the Embracing Downtown Monticello study process.
72
Zoning actions will also be required following the study to adjust the limits of the CCD - Central
Community District zoning district to add blocks F and G between Cedar Street and Palm Street to the
district so that the Design Guidelines will apply to these two blocks and identify their role as transitional
areas between commercial development flanking TH-25 and the largely single-family residential
neighborhood to the east of Palm Street. Because the recent Zoning Code update anticipated the use of
the CCD design guidelines to regulate use and design within the CCD District, it will be necessary to
codify the draft Design Guidelines and adopt them as part of the CCD District.
Transportation Improvements
The traffic study completed for the CCD Redevelopment scenario analyzed critical downtown
intersections and intersections along TH-25 from the 1-94 ramps north to County Highway 11 on the
north side of the river. The traffic impacts from redevelopment of the CCD are minor as compared to
the impacts from continued growth of background traffic that utilizes TH-25 as a river crossing between
1-94 and Highway 10. For that reason, the single most important transportation improvement that will
help maintain the viability of the downtown area is the implementation of another river crossing to
relieve traffic growth on TH-25. The analysis of alternative routes and effects on other parts of
Monticello has already been undertaken in the recently completed 2030 Transportation Plan
component of the Monticello Comprehensive Plan. Selecting the second river crossing location and
developing funding for a second crossing and related roadway improvements should be a high priority
for the promotion of the CCD as an ongoing downtown business center.
Another series of needed short-term capacity improvements are occurring as a result of the
redevelopment of the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Broadway with TH-25 for Walgreens.
Intersection improvements that have been completed or are pending will provide sufficient capacity to
support CCD redevelopment to at least the year 2030 if a second river crossing is implemented. Pending
improvements at the intersection of 7th Street with TH-25 also fall into the category of needed
improvements that have been identified and are in the process of being planned and completed.
Improvements at Broadway and at 7th Street will provide sufficient traffic capacity to support the
revitalization plan for the near term, and for the long term with the addition of a second river crossing.
Other transportation improvements have been identified that are desirable for business promotion and
convenience of local access, but that are not essential for the maintenance of adequate traffic capacity
in and through the downtown core area. These include:
• The proposed traffic signals at the intersection of 4th Street with TH-25
• The conversion of the intersection of 3`d Street with TH-25 from full movement to right -in and
right -out movements together with the addition of a median on TH-25 from 4th street north to
Broadway, and
• The addition of a signal system to promote pedestrian accessibility across Broadway at Locust
Street, when warranted.
While these improvements may not be critical for short-term successful traffic operations, they are all
extremely important for establishing an environment that promotes retail use by improving access from
TH-25, and improves pedestrian movement through the downtown area. The timing for these
improvements will be based on the ability of Monticello to establish funding sources for their
implementation. Since they are not critical for traffic operations, Wright County and MnDOT are
73
unlikely to participate in funding for them except, or unless they qualify for an existing or future grants
program with transportation funding, such as the TED program for 2011 that MnDOT offered in
conjunction with the Department of Employment and Economic Development. The recommended
strategy for these improvements will be to work with the agencies to obtain approval to implement the
changes, followed by efforts to identify funding for the improvements. For the traffic signals to be
implemented at 4th Street, the requirements for meeting signal warrant eight will need to be pursued as
the side street traffic volumes will preclude the ability to meet any of the other warrants. A part of
meeting the requirements of warrant eight is local approval of the access or development plan that
requires installation of the signals. Adopting the CCD Redevelopment plan will be the first step in that
process for the Monticello City Council.
Other recommended improvements in the TH-25, Broadway, and Walnut Street corridors can occur over
a long period of time as redevelopment transforms the downtown area. These improvements include:
• Landscaping and visual or aesthetic enhancements, increased corridor width to implement bike
lanes along TH-25
• Increased corridor width for medians and turn lanes on TH-25
• Increased corridor width on Broadway to allow on -street bike lanes and retained on -street
parking
• Sidewalk area expansions and improvements for pedestrians on Broadway and along Walnut
Street.
Figure 29 — Walnut Street at the Anchor Block
The Design Guidelines recommend building setbacks for these corridors that are aimed at retaining
needed corridor width for the improvements recommended and listed above. Since local funding will be
required for all of these improvements, timing will need to follow the availability of funding. As
74
properties develop and redevelop along these corridors, the City should encourage the implementation
of improvements identified for the adjacent corridors.
Parks, Trails & Community Center
The Community Center and West Bridge Park can serve as important traffic generators for the
downtown. The Community Center and meeting rooms generate well over 230,000 visits per year with
additional visitors to the senior center and National Guard facility. Strategic programming of both assets
can bring visitors to the downtown area in all seasons, during the week, on weekends, throughout the
day and evening. Some events and activities can be purposefully structured in concert with the business
community to bring additional traffic to downtown businesses. Examples of possible activities for the
park include:
• Individual or family activities: skating, sledding, picnicking, canoe/kayak rentals,
canoeing/kayaking, bicycling, walking, fishing, historic interpretation, Great River Road
interpretation, gardens, birding
• Small group activities: rentals of pavilion/shelter space for reunions, weddings & other
gatherings, scouting or other youth activities, island camp -outs
• Events: Farmer's market; triathlon, marathon or fun runs; snow sculpture contests; fishing
contests; canoe races; summer concerts, swan -themed activity, Mississippi River or Huck Finn
themed event; partner on a paddle event with St. Cloud, Coon Rapids or another partner;
historic -themed event (ferry boat or other local historic connection)
Interviews indicate that residents south of 1-94 visit the Community Center, but don't connect to
downtown further to the north. Increased programming at West Bridge and East Bridge Parks can draw
more regional residents to Monticello and draw south -side residents through the downtown area. A
revitalized downtown shopping district can capture additional spending power related to this traffic.
Expansion of physical development in West Bridge and East Bridge Parks was one of the primary
concepts included in the strategy for redeveloping the CCD as alternative plans were explored and
discussed. The following components could be developed over time to help promote pedestrian traffic
movement along Walnut Street and to attract new users to downtown Monticello:
• Plaza and public gathering space at the terminus of Walnut Street
• Fountain or interactive water play feature
• Amphitheater or other outdoor performance space
• Hard -surface or grass area for Farmer's Market
• Nature Center or Interpretive Center for swans on the river
• Trail head facilities for nature walk on islands
• Bicycle trail user facilities
• Small boat/canoe/kayak launch facility
• Fishing Pier
• Restaurants and outdoor dining space
• Kitchen facilities for catering and/or food preparation
• Picnic shelter or enclosed dining facilities
• Public restrooms
75
• Public food and snack concessions
• Surface and/or structured parking
Figure 30— Walnut Street from West Bridge Park
Redevelopment Implementation Actions
The preceding chapter described redevelopment opportunities involving portions of six blocks in
downtown. If implemented, these opportunities would have a significant impact on improving business
in downtown. This section describes actions that will be needed to implement the initial phase of the
Embracing Downtown Monticello plan.
♦ Marketing Program
Targeted marketing programs and information should be prepared for use in marketing
downtown Monticello. This will include information from the Embracing Downtown Monticello
plan and other Monticello marketing collaterals.
♦ Market Business Opportunities to Those That Can Execute
Downtown Monticello and its retail and development opportunities should be marketed to
retailers, brokers, and leasing agents that represent desired retailers, as well as developers,
bankers, and lenders.
76
♦ Contact Interested Retailers
Submit development and store location offers to department stores and interested retailers.
♦ Refine Redevelopment Costs
Determine redevelopment costs for anchor block, relocation blocks, and priority blocks.
Redevelopment costs include, but may not be limited to: land acquisition, demolition cost,
identify potential contamination issues, relocation costs, administrative costs, and other costs.
♦ Common Area Development Costs
Development costs need to be prepared for common area elements including, but not limited
to: infrastructure, parking, landscaping and entrance features, pedestrian areas, street furniture,
and other items.
♦ Relocation Planning
Business relocations resulting from proposed redevelopment need to be identified. Businesses
need to be contacted and kept informed on progress. Relocation sites must be identified in
existing or new buildings. Developers for new buildings need to be identified. Relocation
should be coordinated with new building construction.
♦ Financing for Small Businesses
Summarize financing tools available to for small businesses and make available electronically or
in a flyer. Engage bankers, accountants and attorneys in the community — inform them of the
overall redevelopment strategy and tools available to help small businesses. Conduct a financing
workshop for small businesses and involve bankers and accountants as presenters or panelists.
♦ Anchor Block Acquisitions
Initial land acquisitions for anchor block redevelopment should be completed. Key parcels
include acquisition and relocation of Ace Hardware, NAPA building, and land at 213 3rd Street
West.
♦ Implement Initial Relocations and Redevelopment
Initial relocation resulting from acquisition of 100 Broadway West and 216 Pine on Block 34
must be implemented. Costs associated with these activities must be determined.
♦ Build Organizational Capacity
Strengthen public-private cooperation and leadership for downtown revitalization through the
engagement of business and community leaders experienced in addressing complex projects
and achieving long term goals; downtown business and property owners; professionals who
understand redevelopment and business finance; and city, parks and civic center leadership.
77
Develop appropriate structure, processes, and budget. Note: this process may take time, and is
not a pre -requisite to getting underway with other steps.
♦ Communications plan
Establish a communications plan for outreach to business and property owners based on
dialogue with all key stakeholders including elements such as an easy -to -find web presence; a
monthly e -newsletter; meeting notice procedures, etc.
These implementation actions and tasks are necessary to properly promote downtown Monticello to
businesses and developers and determine the cost and benefits of implementing the Embracing
Downtown Monticello plan.
The City of Monticello must embrace the findings of the Embracing Downtown Monticello process.
Implementing the initial steps identified in the Embracing Downtown Monticello report will require City
staff and/or representatives acting on behalf of the City to make financial representations and/or
commitments. Developers and businesses will need to be assured that these commitments and/or
representations will be honored by the City. Planning for a major development is expensive. No
business is going to commit funds planning a development in Monticello if it does not believe the City is
committed to implementation.
78
EXHIBIT "B"
Attach Final Comprehensive Plan Amendment Text
Additional public objectives and strategies for Places
to Work can be found in the Economic Development
chapter.
Places to Shop
Places to Shop designate locations that are or can be
developed with businesses involved with the sale of
goods and services. Places to Shop may include offi ces
for service businesses. Places to Shop guides land uses
that are both local and regional in nature.
Policies - Places to Shop
In guiding land uses for Places to Shop, the Compre-
hensive Plan seeks to:
1. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to attract and retain
businesses that provide goods and services needed
by Monticello residents.
2. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to capture the op-
portunity for commercial development that serves
a broader region. Places to Shop with a regional
orientation should be located where the traffic does
not disadvantage travel within Monticello.
3. Commercial development will be used to expand
and diversify the local property tax base and as an
element of a diverse supply of local jobs.
4. Places to Shop will be located on property with ac-
cess to the street capacity needed to support traffic
from these businesses.
5. Each parcel should supply an adequate supply of
parking that makes it convenient to obtain the
goods and services.
6. Building materials, facades and signage should
combine with public improvements to create an
attractive setting.
7. Site design must give consideration to defining edg-
es and providing buffering or separation between
the commercial parcel and adjacent residential
uses.
These policies help to create sustainable locations for
Places to Shop in a manner that enhances Monticello.
The Comprehensive Plan describes issues, plans and policies related to the Downtown in several
sections of the Plan.
Downtown
Downtown is a unique commercial district that is part
of Monticello's heritage and identity. It is, however, no
longer possible for downtown to be Monticello's cen-
tral business district. The mass of current and future
commercial development south of Interstate 94 along
TH 25 and in east Monticello along interstate 94 have
replaced the downtown area as primary shopping dis-
tricts. The future success of downtown requires it to
be a place unlike any other in Monticello.
The Comprehensive Plan seeks to achieve the Vision,
Guiding Principles and Goals ebjestives described in
the 2011 Embracing Downtown 1997 r,,.....,•1,.w and
RiN,er-f+eeT Plan. Downtown is intended to be a mix
of inter -related and mutually supportive land uses.
Businesses involved with the sale of goods and services
should be the focus of Downtown land use. Residential
development facilities reinvestment and places poten-
tial customers in the Downtown area. Civic uses draw
in people from across the community.
During the planning process, the potential for allowing
commercial activity to extend easterly out of the Down-
town along Broadway was discussed. The Compre-
hensive Plan consciously defines Cedar Street as the
eastern edge of Downtown for two basic reasons: (1)
Downtown should be successful and sustainable
before new areas of competition are created; and (2) The
Comprehensive Plan seeks to maintain and enhance
the integrity of residential neighborhoods east of
Downtown.
2008 Comprehensive Plan Land Use 13-13
More than any other land use category, Downtown has 5,
strong connections to other parts of the Comprehen-
sive Plan. Therefore, the City has adopted the 2011
Embracing Downtown Plan as its guiding planning
document for the Downtown. The following parts of
the Comprehensive Plan also address community desires
and plans for the Downtown area: 6.
The Land Use chapter contains a specific focus
area on Downtown. The focus area contains a
more detailed discussion of the issues facing the 7.
Downtown and potential public actions needed to
address these issues.
The operation of the street system is a critical
factor for the future of Downtown. The
Transportation chapter of the Comprehensive Plan,
(and the related T -r -a+ sj9ei.,.68 P and the
Transportation chapter of the Embracing
Downtown Plan, influence the ability of residents
to travel to Downtown and the options for
mitigating the impacts of traffic on Highway 25 and
other Downtown streets.
A shared understanding of realistic market
potential is the foundation for design and
generation of a healthy business mix.
Wher-&ver pessible, street ffents , ld be a
fe-b
A safe, attractive human scale environment and
entrepreneurial businesses that actively emphasize
personal customer service will differentiate
downtown from other shopping districts.
Property values can be enhanced if property owners
and the City share a vision for downtown and
actively seek to cultivate a safe, appealing
environment and attractive business mix.
8. Housing in the downtown can facilitate necessary
redevelopment and bring potential customers di-
rectly into the area. Housing may be free-standing
or in shared buildings with street level commercial
uses.
6
The Parks chapter of the Comprehensive
Plan provides for parks in the Downtown and the
trail systems that allow people to reach Downtown
on foot or bicycle. 10.
The Economic Development chapter and the
Financial Implementation chapter of the
Embracing Downtown Plan lay the foundation for 11.
public actions and investments that will be needed
to achieve the desired outcomes.
PolicieslGuWing Principles - Downtown
1. Downtown is a special and unique part of Mon-
ticello. It merits particular attention in the Com-
prehensive Plan and in future efforts to achieve
community plans and objectives.
2. Downtown is intended to be an inter -connected
and supportive collection of land uses. The primary
function of Downtown is as a commercial district.
Other land uses should support and enhance the
overall objectives for Downtown.
3. The City will build on core assets of greater
Downtown Monticello as identified in the
Embracing Downtown Plan.
4. A shared vision among property owners, business
owners, and the City is the foundation for effective
team work and long tenn success.
Downtown is the civic center of Monticello. To
the degree possible, unique public facilities (such
as the Community Center, the Library and the Post
Office) should be located in the Downtown area
as a means to bring people into the Downtown.
Downtown should emphasize connections with
the Mississippi River that are accessible by the
public.
Downtown should be a pedestrian -oriented place
in a manner that cannot be matched by other com-
mercial districts.
12. Downtown should have an adequate supply of free
parking for customers distributed throughout the
area.
13. The City and business community must work
actively with MnDOT to ensure safe local access
to business districts.
14. The City
-.. ....�
.•n o lita , t 4 t
:.ixx xaoixxtucc�'r'dcrcczirrcacxrrcacrr
iwes4:flef4-.
All of these policies work together to attract people to
Downtown and to enhance the potential for a successful
business environment.
3-14 1 Land Use City of Monticello
the Comprehensive Plan extends this land use south to
the planned expansion of School Boulevard.
It is important to recognize that activity generated by
business development can create conflicts with resi-
dential development. The Comprehensive Plan seeks
to create both high quality business parks and residen-
tial neighborhoods in this area. Careful site planning
and development management will be needed to meet
these objectives.
School Boulevard Extension
The Northwest Area serves as a good example of the
need to coordination land use and transportation plan-
ning. An extension of School Boulevard is needed to
provide access to the area and to connect development
to the rest of the community. The route of this roadway
should be identified and preserved as development
occurs.
School Boulevard has several other Comprehensive
Plan implications:
. This major collector street will influence the nature
of adjacent land use.
. Streetscape improvements would help to define
the high quality character desired by the City as a
gateway to the regional park and to new neighbor-
hoods.
The street is a means for bringing trail connections
to the park.
Golf Course
In 2006, the Silver Springs Golf Course was part of a
development proposal (Jefferson at Monticello) that
would have redeveloped this property mixing golf and
housing. Th e development did not proceed beyond the
environmental review.
Th e Comprehensive Plan shows the area as Places to
Recreate based on the continued use as a golf course.
This designation does not preclude a future proposal
and Comprehensive Plan amendment for residential
development. It is likely, however, that this scale of new
development will require the access provided by a new
highway interchange. Th e Comprehensive Plan seeks to
fill in other development areas and make effective use
7he CarpdmwePlanseeAsbatancetheex"carxrmweabng&wdo Wbybtddng
strong connections with the Aterfmt and the cmtr/retail disOd on the south end of Walnut
street
of other infrastructure investments before extending
utilities for redevelopment of the golf course.
Downtown Focus Area
Downtown Monticello needs special attention in the
Comprehensive Plan. Following the 4a4 2008
Comprehensive Plan update, the community undertook a
separate downtown planning process. This process
resulted in the 4997 T,,.wnte..,. ;a 2011
Embracing Downtown Plan. This Plan emphasizes the
importance that the community places on Downtown.
The 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update ee- 4aues to rely
. the 199:7 ..aa n;.,e�..t D,,.ft relies on the
Embracing Downtown Plan as a guide for public and
private actions in the Downtown area.
T e 1007 ni s4hey"s; 44„t „ 4461 ., Plan are at
e ..1. to e ate the
type
of Do -m tey,.. den;. t+..
OHO ;t., While . e „t 8HS .,e ,.oa
er-eate
afty ..trans; tl...t v'41-11
„1-1 e -di telt' t.-aasfevm_
objecti-aes. Revitalizing and sustaining Downtown
Monticello requires a collaborative effort of the City,
3-211 Land Use City of Monticello
businesses, property owners and other stakeholders. btfilding is oriented to Walittt Street 9,aeh sites vrE�
Planning for the future of the Downtown must recog- axe g and f the ability t eet toe ti
a..r� .,-.Y.. � z.v-vnzT`arr6
nize the practical realities facing commercial develop- r,, w fft,.wn eeae withthe 88dth 814a
ment in Downtown:
The configuration and traffic volumes of Highway
25 significantly reduce opportunities for direct ac-
cess from the Highway to adjacent properties.
Traffic volumes on Highway 25 will continue to
increase. Greater volumes and congestion act as an
impediment for people living south of I-94 coming
to Downtown.
There is no controlled intersection on Highway
25 between Broadway and 7th Street. The lack
of a controlled intersection combined with traffic
volumes make pedestrian connections between
Downtown and residential areas to the east very
difficult.
. "Big box" and retail development continue to oc-
cur in other parts of Monticello. These businesses
directly compete with the Downtown and attract
smaller businesses (that might otherwise consider
a Downtown location) to adjacent parcels.
Downtown Goals
Given current plans and conditions, the Embracing
Downtown Plan and the Comprehensive Plan
recommends the following goals for Downtown.
Concepts for downtown redevelopment should
provide solutions to problems and issues identified
in the research and analysis of downtown conditions
that are directed by the stated goals for Land Use,
Transportation, and Design and Image. The
preferred solutions should be those that best meet
these goals.
■
Downtown Goals
Given current plans and conditions, the Embracing
Downtown Plan and the Comprehensive Plan
recommends the following goals for Downtown.
Concepts for downtown redevelopment should
provide solutions to problems and issues identified
in the research and analysis of downtown conditions
that are directed by the stated goals for Land Use,
Transportation, and Design and Image. The
preferred solutions should be those that best meet
these goals.
2008 Comprehensive Plan Land Use 13-22
ian
-
I
- \
Y.
2008 Comprehensive Plan Land Use 13-22
LAND USE
1. Diversify land use in the downtown; supplement
retail and service uses with other activities that
generate traffic.
2. Encourage redevelopment of old and obsolete
structures; encourage consolidation of small parcels
with multiple ownerships.
3. Balance parking and land use to ensure availability
of adequate parking at all times.
4. Encourage mixed use but don't make it a
requirement or prerequisite for development or
redevelopment.
5. Discourage residential as a free-standing land use
within the core downtown area.
6. Establish physical connections between the core
downtown area and the riverfront and park.
7. Encourage land uses that serve as evening and
weekend attractions to the downtown area.
8. Expand facilities and parking adjacent to
Westbridge Park to help create an anchor attraction
at the north end of Walnut Street.
TRANSPORTATION
1. Acknowledge that TH-25 will be limited in terns
of providing direct property access.
2. Develop circulation patterns that utilize local streets
for individual site access.
3. Recognize TH-25 as a barrier between the east and
west parts of the historic downtown core areas
extending to either side of the TH-25 corridor.
4. Consider developing in districts to reduce the need
or desire to cross Highway 25 between 7th street
and the river crossing.
5. Strengthen pedestrian ties throughout downtown
including connections to other parts of the City to
the south, west, and east. Downplay Highway 25 as
a corridor for pedestrian movement.
3.23 1 Land Use City of Monticello
6. Improve pedestrian connections between Broadway
Street and the riverfront Park area to allow the park to
serve as an attraction that brings people into the
downtown area.
7. Improve access to the Mississippi River to expand on
recreational opportunities.
8. Explore creation of a fourth signalized intersection on
Highway 25 between 7th Street and Broadway Street
to improve access to areas with development and
redevelopment potential on either side of the Highway
25 corridor.
DOWNTOWN DESIGN AND IMAGE
1. Encourage design standards that elevate the quality of
downtown development without creating undue
hardships for property and building owners.
2. Acknowledge that the historic "Main Street" buildings
and developments along Broadway Street are
functionally obsolete for many tenants and users in
today's automobile and convenience -driven
marketplace.
3. The public realm of streets, boulevards and sidewalks
represents the best opportunity to create an interim
image for downtown as it redevelops.
4. The TH-25 and Broadway corridors should be
softened with streetscape and landscape features to
offset the effects of high traffic volumes, and to help
establish an identity for the CCD.
5. Development should orient toward the intersection of
TH-25 with Broadway to take advantage of high
traffic volumes in the TH-25 corridor.
6. New development in the TH-25 corridor should be
scaled to allow visibility to development up to a block
or more away from TH-25.
7. New buildings in the TH-25 and Broadway corridors
should be located to allow for eventual widening of the
corridor right-of-way and roadway.
8. To the extent possible, buildings should occupy street
frontages and should front on public sidewalks with
connections to a continuous "downtown" sidewalk
pedestrian system.
9. Proposed uses should have adequate parking (private
or public) within easy and convenient walking
distance.
10. The downtown plan should provide strategically
located public gathering spaces to bring people
together to experience a sense of community that is
associated with downtown.
Figure 3-12 —1997 Downtown Plan — Land Use
to be deleted and replaced with
2011 Embracing Downtown— Downtown
Framework Plan
2008 Comprehensive Plan Land Use 13.24
6. Consideration of authorizing a $2,000 dollar contribution to the Initiative
Foundation:
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Initiative Foundation is an organization that provides gap financing for new or
expanding companies. The organization also provides grants to various non-profit and
government agencies. The Foundation granted the City of Monticello a $5,000 grant in
2010 to assist in completing a BR&E program.
The Foundation is requesting the Monticello EDA contribute $2,000 to the organization in
2012. The EDA did authorize a $2,000 contribution in 2010 and 2011. Per State Statute
Cities are able to contribute not more than $50,000 annually for promoting, advertising,
improving, or developing the economic and agricultural resources of the city or town.
B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City Staff recommends contributing $2,000 of the 2012 EDA general fund to the Initiative
Foundation. The Foundation is a well known and established organization that provides
great economic growth to Wright County. They also have a strong community focus that is
shown through their grant programs.
C. ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
1. Motion to approve contributing $2,000 of the 2012 EDA general fund to the Initiative
Foundation.
2. Motion to deny contributing money to the Initiative Foundation.
3. Motion to table action for further research and discussion.
D. ATTACHMENTS:
1. Information regarding the Initiative Foundation
EDA 12.14.11
4
n
DS
0
-n
O� c 0=
�
0
o
N
y
�man0) m m
c
0
o'
OC�Tmo
O
3 CD O
�o
rte•cc
_. C 7 W< N
=>
N
a
to
S Q
S CD n
cQ ,< °
N
N i
(DCL-0(Dowmm
]-n-
> Q N Q (D O
. . . .
N
. . . . .
_ (D
vSc)ON
_
Q�$_�=D
. . . .
Ul
vn
rnm°
S v �. ,<
o=
CD D_ N j
N 3
-a �
O O 7 (@
W R N
O
D 0.a (D
N Q
fD �•
V7 O N
N' O (n
N rn m
D O
Q to
Q S
< _� CDD (�
y
�p O
n .�. pn
N (L]
o
6 C _�
lD
o° o N 0
Q°��
-h
O1v3
tj
am 3 c; 3
O
L2
7 N
Q
o
N
�v
SZo
ra
�
c m
b A A
vc:.
< O W
O O N
O a
_
Q°
?�c c
G
ao
O
c(a
0
N O.
O
4 a 0 (D
n �
CD
N O N
(fl
(D
Z3
(On Cl) (D' c a)
7
W
N
N N
S
<' 3 `<
a(D
O
Q
T
j= Q Q
(D
x
j (D
N CD
n
(D NCD
N
rt
"6
CD
acM
(D
-4
��•
�cn
c2)
..
(<D O
_
C
0
CD
S tU
�y
3
_Q
. . . .
G) Efl n W
CL
. . . . .
C7 V •--1 W
A
. . . . .
y O EA �I
. . . .
00
NO
v
o
(n mO(o
O O n
m a) m
(.n NN
m VW
(D
ON
b j
(OO
ON fl3
=O
m m'QUto
(D O
SD
dN 0
m
nO 5
-o
m
r-oa)(n=
mNn
oh
ovO
o a Nen°m
ov
° d
m
° p
o
4
n
07
0:*
=N•
0
0m
rte•cc
c
. . . .
N
. . . . .
. . . .
CiTA
OA
. . . .
0 A N
(
. . . .
Ul
vn
Ov
Ln
CD D_ N j
Q 111 O
J Q 1 pl
7
O O 7 (@
W R N
A (D 7�
O d 7
O) O
E; o
V7 O N
N' O (n
N rn m
!R O
W O N
0 O y
y
W 0 O N
o
o
D'
'
0 °'..W
CD Gj
tj
a
N !" 69
W O O)
L2
7 N
(y Q.
(D W A
(°
< R
<' O. N 69
N W
<
b A A
< O W
O O N
O O
O
(D p• O (°)n
(WT (n
T N . 'p O O
N O• Q)
V
< `O' j -+
W
(D
< O W
N O.
O
4 a 0 (D
(o fn 0?
d to ?
CD
N O N
(fl
(D
(D
(D (D
(D
W
N
07
(1)
acM
-4
��•
�r
c2)
`«
�G(D
�G�
�y
l�
. . . . .
Sn j A
m
. . . .
G) Efl n W
(n
. . . . .
C7 V •--1 W
A
. . . . .
y O EA �I
. . . .
00
NO
-r,)O U)
N N )
A N_(D
o
(n mO(o
m a) m
(.n NN
m VW
SND
ON
b j
(OO
ON fl3
=O
m m'QUto
(D O
SD
dN 0
m
nO 5
-o
m
r-oa)(n=
mNn
oh
ovO
o a Nen°m
ov
° d
m
° p
o
a<i ° i`) o
N
o v D Co
�'
T< a w o
o (m a- o `o
CD
m L n�i<n
W j
(D j m
co
°
6-c
o m (D o) (o N�
Ut Q
j
mC
(D
< C)
N
c, (D N
?D
O
p
v m O
m
j O
Nm
O
)
y0
0
fD 5. fA
0pA .p.
5D A W
(D
-o•
(D N A
N w
W
C
P
A
4
2 o
y
m
M p N
N
� �
�' N uj N
0) +C+
O
_
M
ccm .0 >
N N ,�
M
Q
0
o a�
s .
CD'T Mro y
MN > z
- c
rn
i3c6'a
(-6 C
0)
` -
O N
O
a
tf> N -
a"
m to y >
__ 0).5 a
O
CL CL
=
>,
T �. J
ON
L p
7
y 0 COO
(o
O M
w
:n •_
N N
(q
L
cu c 'O Om
a) LOE
C w -p W
a) 0
O [6N
m
M N CO
r »�
• • • •
NLo
a 0)mU
O N
co
• • • •
to N
N L
LO
LO LO
0w
M o
a)
O W M
LO C-4
0.
CC
N >L
O)
2 O O
L a
c0t0
'0 NLO
m°'N
NNa
G
.L_
U O 7
N
C N Z
M M
Q
_ L�
L
mU O
�U)
i
Nyco
Z
CD
U
to
N"
M co CD
N
0
a L O
O N
N c
> c6
U-
c7
O N
N F
r N O
U
:Q O
C
O= m
N
N m
N
m to aj
W
N 0 O ,N
(� L C
to -a
c c
�' +-'
-J
L LL
a 0
C\!'— N
o w m
(c) of Q f6
f6
� N _
O O
fQ 0
H
C,
N 0 V' >
n
0 H3 o_
M
N c0 to "
O(4
I
UO 0
p 0
Na
O N c
in-ffi
a Z6
OC •>
�= O NZ6 O
0
N c
ZQ
C
V
co
co a o
N c6 0 E C
O (V LO c c
N V '� N
�[ _
O
O t ._ N .� W
ca E
'� to O C
> 0)(nM—N.y U
co O
N o
Lom
.N m$ o N m E
CL E r N V to
-t
N O O
N m 0 Cl)
m
M L cII
°p a
m
vvi m
�
(o•.•v•3
Uts
N•�.•••
O O
�CD
O�
y
N ca QQN
c rn
M>,O
0.
E� aW aQ
�C
co >.E:cco(o
O CO CD O O cII fO M v- 2 op "t
L C
G =
(D U') N �
0rML.N
d O
�-' pCD
00
� M (D 0) a .
cu
(DUa
��Q
8. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING A 2012 EDA WORK PLAN:
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Every year the EDA reviews the Economic Development section in the City of
Monticello's Comprehensive Plan. In conjunction with direction set in the Comprehensive
Plan and responding to current trends, the EDA determines priorities and a yearly work
plan. Attached to this report is a copy of the Economic Development section of the
Monticello Comprehensive plan.
Staff has provided a draft 2012 work plan. This document is simply a starting point for the
EDA to further discuss and add or subtract as determined necessary.
B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Please review the proposed 2012 work plan. The EDA will need to discuss appropriate
priorities and related work plan for next year.
C. ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
1. Motion to approve a 2012 Work Plan.
2. Motion to table action for further research and discussion.
D. ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed 2012 EDA work plan
1"D NVAE,991
EDA 2012 WORK PLAN:
Purpose:
The EDA is charged with coordinating and administering the City of Monticello's economic development
and redevelopment plans and programs. The EDA is also responsible for housing and redevelopment.
Job attraction and retention:
1. Promote amenities in Monticello
2. Implement a technical training program in conjunction with existing business workforce needs
L_Provide appropriate higher education classes / training opportunities
}4.4. Work with the Monticello School district to implement a strong STEM pronam and better
coordinate opportunities between the students and industries
Attracting New Businesses:
1. . ".A.ediec: taaaufaetufing, data aeateffi, '-°_-"ng ind °° Industries that provide livable wage jobs and
compliment Monticello's current businesses
3:2. Market to companies in St. Cloud and CEO's in Monticello and surrounding areas
43. Host a Broker Breakfast
S. Partieipate in the! 94 PeFFidof Can"
Expanding Tax Base:
1. Promote gap financing options to help facilitate new development and business expansions
2. Promote business expansion incentive program
3. Review land area options for future industrial park and initiate a master planning process in
coordination with the IEDC
4. Develop a strategic plan for use of surplus TIF
Business Retention:
1. Promote GMEF, business expansion incentive, and other financing options
2. Communicate on a regular and consistent basis
3. Ge hest the A�al industry of the Yew Bouquet with the IEDC
4. Complete a web and print FeSOUFOe guide in eeaMingtinis ;v th the Ghambsr%, workfaree center, and
3. Participate on the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) to continue to move transportation
initiatives forward to improve traffic flow in and through the city.
3:4. Work in conjunction with the IEDC to develop a follow no BR&E sury ey
Enhancing Downtown:
1_Start initiating recommendations from the Embracing Downtown plan
4-a. Initial catalyst proiects could include redevelopment of Block 34 and the "Anchor" Block - - - - -- f Formatted
2. Apply for a Small Cities Grant to assist with the redevelopment of downtown
3. Pursue purchasing properties that fit within the "next steps" or recommendations stated in the
Embracing Downtown Plan
L--Look at the potential to sell 413 4' Street for a single lot user or retain for future redevelopment
possibilities
45. Establish a Downtown revitalization program
Facilitating Redevelopment:
1. Initiate recommendations from the Embracing Downtown Plan
2. Participate in residential redevelopment when determined appropriate
Housing & Redevelopment Authority:
L Purchase distressed properties and promote redevelopment of said properties at such time when they
will add additional tax capacity and value to the community.
9. Economic Development Director Updates:
IEDC:
The IEDC approved a work plan for 2012. See attachment.
Planning Commission:
December agenda attached.
Inquiries:
Ford Site
Mayor Herbst and City Staff met members of the group that are working on the old
Ford site primarily to review the site plan the week of November 21, 2011. They
discussed the recent news article in which the developer of the Ford Site, Calvin
Fruendrich, stated his concern that the City is very difficult to work with. A partner in
the team (Arnold Weinhold) was apologetic for the remarks made by Fruedenrich and
noted that his comments do not reflect his feelings. He went on to say that he thought
the remarks by his partner were unwarranted. The site designer (Eric Munt) is the
same engineer that worked on the Mielke project across the highway. He noted that
the Mielke project went well and he thought that any criticism of the City relating to
work to date on the Ford site was completely unwarranted. His view was that the City
bends over backwards for the developer in assuring things go as smoothly as possible.
Subsequent to the meeting, the developer submitted a formal concept development
application for the development of the old Ford site. The concept includes renovating
the existing Ford building and constructing two additional retail /service buildings.
Minnesota Youth Soccer Association
MYSA has decided to hire a site planner and engineer to work with Monticello and
Wright County in development of its business and field headquarters in conjunction
with the Bertram Project. As you know, some months ago we hosted a visit by the
organization in hopes of attracting this organization to the community and for the
economic impact of being a host to tournaments. Since that time, the organization
looked at various options for development of its facilities and is now directing its
energy toward the Monticello option only.
Marketing / Venues:
The Economic Development Director recently attended the MN Real Estate Journal Industrial
Land Summit. The conference /tradeshow was mostly attended by commercial brokers. Several
brokers and end users spoke about activity in the market and how the public and private sector
need to work together to get deals done. There is certainly a much more positive buzz this year
compared to the past two years. Monticello was an exhibitor at the event and therefore was
able to showcase the many assets of the City to individuals that have direct connections to
industrial end users.
Also since I am on the Board of Directors for the Economic Development Association of MN,
I have had the recent opportunity to have a meeting with Board Members from the Minnesota
Commercial Broker Association of Realtors (MNCAR). Commercial brokers are very
interested in working directly with economic development entities. We are in the process of
determining how we can enhance exposure to each group. This is a great opportunity for
Monticello to get in front of many key commercial brokers. People need to be talking about
Monticello and I plan to talk to as many commercial brokers as possible through this venue.
I am also on the Partnership Advisory Council for Greater MSP. This organization gives us
firsthand knowledge and access to companies searching for locations on a national level.
Greater MSP is focusing on marketing and distributing business inquiries throughout the 13
County Metro area. Staff will continue to stay involved in this organization in order to once
again further our exposure to key decision makers. We have great amenities to offer and it is
important that decision makers hear about Monticello over and over again. O
Business Communications & Retention Initiatives:
The Monticello Concierge Team toured Industry of the Year award winner Aroplax's recently
finished an 18,000 square foot expansion on Wednesday, November 30'h at 9am. We learned a
lot and further strengthened our relationship with a local company. It was a great site visit.
2012 Budget:
Please see attached budget staff report written by Tom Kelly, Finance Director, and related
attachments.
Future Meeting Dates:
1. IEDC: January 3, 2012
2. EDA: January 11, 2011
EDA December 14, 2011
INDUSTRIAL & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
2012 WORKPLAN
Mission Statement:
To increase the tax base and the number of liveable wage -level jobs in Monticello by promoting
industrial and economic growth and working to maintain a desirable business environment.
2012 Objectives:
The IEDC is dedicated to being pro- active in following the guidelines established in the
Monticello Comprehensive Plan. It is the intention of the IEDC to work within the areas
identified below as supporting actions and objectives:
Land Use:
a. Review Economic Development section of Comprehensive Plan
b. Evaluate best location for a 2nd industrial park utilizing large tracks of land approach
*Meet a market demand
*Provide a recommendation to the EDA by Fall of 2012
Quality of Life:
a. Continue to support and participate in the progress of the Bertram Chain of Lakes
project.
b. Lead a City wide effort to define the City's brand and implement the brand
*Request the EDA and CC authorize an RFP process to engage advertising firms
*March of 2012
c. Support implementing the Embracing Downtown Plan
*Participate in the creation of a new downtown leadership team
Transportation:
a. Continue to lead the City in moving forward key transportation projects including but
not limited to: Second River Crossing, Fallon Avenue, and the expansion of I -94
Economic Development:
BR &E:
a. Follow up BR &E survey
*Determine objective of survey
*Electronic Survey - Monkey Survey
*Send out by March
*Set up in order to allow issuance on a yearly basis
b. Implement a monthly IEDC e -news update for the business community, written by the
Chair and /or Vice Chair
c. Educate and inform the manufacturing community about the IEDC
Training / Leadership Courses for local Businesses:
a. Work with colleges and local manufactures group to assist in establishing effective
training programs
*Evaluate if appropriate and applicable to bring such courses to Monticello
b. Work with Monticello School District to implement Project Lead the Way or a similar
STEM program.
*Facilitate more frequent events between manufacturers and students.
Monitor Progress:
a. Establish a monitoring process to begin documenting success of programs (see
attachments).
REGULAR MEETING
MONTICELLO PLANNING
Tuesday, December 6th, 2011
6:00 PM
Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
Commissioners: Rod Dragsten, Brad Fyle, Charlotte Gabler, William Spartz, and
Barry Voight
Staff- Angela Schumann, Bruce Westby, Megan Barnett, Ron
Hackenmueller, Steve Grittman - NAC
1. Call to order.
2. Consideration to approve Planning Commission minutes.
a. Regular Meeting of November 1'% 2011
b. Planning Commission and City Council Special Meeting of November I st, 2011.
3. Citizen Comments.
4. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
5. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit
for Planned Unit Development as related to residential design standards for R -1 (Single -
Family) District lots.
Applicant: McCann, Steve /Sunset Ponds, LLC
6. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Amendment to Conditional Use Pennit for
Development Stage Planned Unit Development as related to residential design standards for R-
DA (Single - Family) District lots.
Applicant: Keyland Homes
7. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Concept Stage Planned Unit
Development. (Lot 2, Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 2, Carcone Addition, 1005 State Hwy 25)
Applicant: Weinhold Investments, LLC
8. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for Conditional Use Permit for Co- location
of a Wireless Telecommunication Service Antenna.
Applicant: RKZ Consulting
9. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for Amendment to the Monticello
Comprehensive Plan for the adoption of the Embracing Downtown Plan.
Applicant: City of Monticello
10. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for Amendment to the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance as related to Permitted and Conditional Uses in the B -3 (Highway Business)
District.
Applicant: City of Monticello
11. Community Development Director's Report
a. Development Cost Study
b. Permit Cost Study
12. Adjourn.