HRA Agenda 12-07-1994MINUTES
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, November 9, 1994 - 7:00 p.m.
City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Al Larson, Vice Chairperson Ser,
Smith, Everette Ellison, acrd Brad Barger.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom St. Hilaire.
STAFF PRESENT: 011ie Koropchak.
STAFF ABSENT: Rick Wolfsteller and Jeff O'Neill.
GUEST: Bob Murray, Residential Development, Inc.
CALL TO ORDER.
Chairperson Larson called the HRA meeting to order at 7:00
p. M.
2. CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER S. 1994 HRA MINUTES.
Ben Smith made a motion to approve the October 5, 1994 HRA
minutes. Brad Barger second the motion and with no
corractioris or additions, the minutes were approved as
written.
3. CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION MODIFYING THE
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN AND BOUNDARIES FOR REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT NO, 1, MODIFYING THE TIP PLANS FOR TIF DISTRICT NOS.
1-1 THROUGH 1-17, AND APPROVAL OF TIF PLAN FOR TIF DISTRICT
NO. 1-18.
Bob Murray, Residential Development, Inc., explalned to HRA
members that City Council tabled the approval of the
annexation because Joe Abbott withdrew his application for
annexation into the City. The Council and Reduvuloper
roBuusted additional time to review the application. Joe
Abbott withdrew his annexation applicatlon because of the
potential for no direct access off County Road 75 with the
creation of a media (no left -in & out). This control being
very remote with tare potential of a full I-94 Interchange at
County Road 118. In further eonvereationo with Mr. Abbott, he
offered to sell the Hawk's Bar property for $500,000 (no
negotiating) to Residential Development, Inc. The Murray's
are not interested as they can proceed without the Abbott
property.
Koropchak reviewed the plan fur TIF District No. 1-18.
highlighting the budget of $102,000 for Solls Correction and
Page 1
HRA MINUTES
NOVEMBER 9, 1994
$11,333 for Administrative Costa. It is anticipated that the
District will be de -certified in 1999. Additionally, the
resolution for adoption modifies and enlarges of the
Redevelopment Project No. 1 Boundaries to include the proposed
District No. 1-18 parcels subject to annexation approval by
the Municipal Board. Lastly, the resolution modifies the plan
for TIF District No. 1-9 and all other plans of existing
districts. The budget of TIF District No. 1-9 is proposed to
increase by $30,000 for Site Improvements and $2,000 for
Administrative Costs. The proposed 18,000 sq ft manufacturing
expansion will generate sufficient tax increment to cover the
HRA debt and add 15 new jobs to the community.
Ben Smith made a motion to adopt the enclosed resolution;
however, Chairperson Larson requested separate motions be made
for approval of the plan for TIF District No. 1-18 and for the
modification of the plan for TIF District No. 1-9. Ben Smith
made a motion to amend his first motion and to adopt a
resolution modifying the plan for the Redevelopment Project
No. 1, modifying the plans for TIF District Nos. 1-1 through
1-17, and approving establishment of TIF District No. 1-18 and
Its plan. The motion was seconded by Everette Ellison and
with no further discussion, the motion passed 3-1. Yeas: Ben
Smith, Everette Ellison, and Brad Barger. Hay: Al Larson.
Ben Smith made a motion to adopt a resolution modifying the
plan for the Redevelopment Project No. 1, modifying the plans
for TIF District Nos. 1-1 through 1-18, specifically the plar,
for TIF District No. 1-9. Brad Barger seconded the motion and
with r,o further discussion, the motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Murray Informed commissioners that entry-level
advertisement for twin -homes in Hastings was $79,900 with the
average twin -home selling at $93,000. Single -homes ranged
between $115,000 and $120,000. Mr. Murray said tuning of the
project may be changed because of the delay in the annexation
process,
Chairperson Larson thanked Mr. Murray for attending the HRA
meeting.
CONSLDEPATION TQ REyI.9W TRE FIRST DRAFT Of THE @RiVATE.
REDEY13kOP14ENT j;ONTRACT BETWEEN THE HRA AND RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT, INC.
Koropehek highlighted tho first draft of the Private
Redevelopment Contract and noted the prepared note to be sold
by the HRA to the Redeveloper at a proposed 8.5% interest
Pago 2
NRA MINUTES
NOVEMBER 9, 1994
rate. It was the HRA's understanding or Intent that the use
of TIF to assist with the reclamation of the mined gravel pit
was an amount not -to -exceed $102,000 flat, no interest nor Net
Present Value. The HRA members recommended the Tax Increment
Revenue Note with interest be deleted from the Contract and to
insert that the Redeveloper assume the responsibility of the
HRA Administrative expenses.
CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW AND TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY CONCEPT
FOR USE OF TIF (HOUSING DISTRICT) FOR THE CONGREGATE SENIOR
HOUSING PROJECT.
The HRA members reviewed the proposed senior housing project
with the TIF Policies and determined four of the four criteria
were satisfied. Additionally, they determined the proposed
market -rate congregate facility was consistent with the
results of the HRA Senior Housing Study as prepared by Health
Planning & Management Resources, Inc. (HP&MR); therebye, the
project supports one of the HRA objectives. They determined
the proposed project satisfied the "but for" tent, and felt
the proposed project would qualify to meet the requirements of
a Housing District. Al Larson made a motion to approve the
preliminary concept for use of TIF to assist with the
financing of the senior housing project. The motion was
seconded by Brad Barger and with no further discuselon, the
motion passed unanimuuoly. Members requested Koropchak
prepare a written informational update informing City Council
of the HRA's preliminary concept approval for use of TIF to
assist with financing of the senior housing project.
Koropchak Informed members that Dan Lindl, Presbyterian Homes;
Lenny Kirscht, Public Resource Group, Inc. (PRO); Steve Bubul,
Holmes & Graven; and Koropchak scheduled a meeting for Friday,
November 18, 1994, 10:00 a.m. at the office of PRG to discuss
the TIF project and process. Al Larson expressed lutereot in
attending and requested Koropchak invite Barb Schwlentek to
the scheduled meeting.
CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW AND TO AUTHORIZE REIMBURSEMENT OF HRA
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SENIOR HOUSING MARKET STUDY.
A total of $8,600 was disbursed from the HRA General Fund to
pay for Phase I of the Senior Housing Market Study prepared by
HP&MR for the HRA. Brad Burger made a motion authorizing the
$8,600 HRA expenditure be recovered es an Administrative Cost
within the proposed TIF Plan for proposed TIF Dlstrlct No. 1-
19, a Houoing Dlutrlct. Al Larson second the motion and
without further discusaion, the motion passed unanimously.
Page 3
HRA MINUTES
NOVEMBER 9, 1994
7. CONSIDERATION OF BILLS FROM PRG AND HOLMES & GRAVEN.
HRA members OK'd payment of the October PRG and Holmes &
Graven bills.
8. CONSIDERATION OF OTHER BUSINESS.
Koropchak updated members of new industrial prospects, noted
the letter from the H -Window regarding their plans to complete
the site improvements by June 15, 1995, and noted the
Invitation to Mr. Birkeland, O'Neill, and Anderson for
attendance at the November HRA meeting. Mr. O'Neill had to
cancel.
HRA members requested Koropchak compile a list of business
names with expertise slmiliar to PRG for review and potential
interview.
9. ADJOURNMENT.
The HRA meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
1
d 01
011ie Koropchak, HRA Executive Director
%. Page 4
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 7, 1994
3. Consideration to discuss the Letter received from Stephen
Birkeland, Jr. and reconsideration of the Pav-As-You-Gu TIF
Assistance.
A. Reference and Background:
DISCUSSION OF LETTER AND RESPONSE.
Enclosed you will find the letter received from Mr. Birkeland,
Jr. and Jeff O'Neill's response. At the October HRA meeting,
the general agreement among HRA members was to invite all
three individuals: Mr. Birkeland, Jr., Jeff O'Neill, and Gary
Anderson to discuss the contents of the letters. Mr. O'Neill
was unable to attend the November meeting; therefore, the item
did not appear on the November agenda. Once again all three
individuals were contacted and it appears convenience for all
to attend.
RECONSIDERATION OF THE TIF ASSISTANCE.
The Private Redevelopment Contract of April 12, 1993, utdlcb
construction of the minimum improvements will be completed by
Decumber 31, 1993 and upon the issuance of the Occupdnuy
Permit by the City Official will the Certificate of Completion
be issued. Minimum improvements must comply with the City
Ordinances.
November 9, 1993 - Letter reminding Mr. Birkeland of the terms
and conditions of the Private Redevelopment Contract.
December 20, 1993 - Letter to tour Custom Canopy.
January 19, 1994 - Tour cancelled, Mr. Birkeland out-of-tuwn.
February 14, 1994 - Toured Cuutom Canopy.
March 2, 1994 - HRA approved and extunded cumpletiun dale fur
the non-•acreaned fanee and gate area Lu July 1, 1994 b cause
of inconsistent ordinance information received by the
developer from staff and because the City lids issue a
temporary Occupancy Permit.
March 8, 1994 - Letter to Mr. Birkeland advising of HRA's
decision.
August 15, 1994 - Lotter to Mr. Birkeland advlolrng default of
the Private Redevulopmunt Contract; therufore, no ruclpt of
TIF assistance.
IN. Page 1
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 7, 1994
September 13, 1994 - Mr. Birkeland's letter to HRA Chairperson
Larson.
September 16, 1994 - Mr. O'Neill's response to Mr. Birkeland's
letter.
October 5, 1994 - HRA agreed to invite Mr. Birkeland, O'Neill,
and Anderson to the November HRA meeting.
November 9, 1994 - Mr. O'Neill unable to attend.
December 7, 1994 - Discussion of letters and reconsideration
of TIF Assistance.
As of December 5, 1994, the non -screened fencing area has nut
been completed and the City has not iuuued a permanent
Occupancy Permit.
B. Alternative Action:
1. A motion to reaffirm the default of the Private
Redevelopment Contract and to deny the TIF assistance
based on non-compliance of the City's Screening Ordinance
and therefore default of the completion date for the
minimum Smpruvemuntu, December 31, 1993, and extended
date, July 1, 1994, as per the Private Redevelopment
Contract.
2. A motion to reconsider Issuance of the Certificate of
Completion upon the City's isauancu of the permanent
Occupancy Permit only if the permanent Occupancy Permit
is Issued prior to the first scheduled date of the TIF
payment, December 31, 1995.
3. A motion to roconsidur and appruvo TIF payment baoud on
tale HRA findings that Custom Canopy's minimum
Improvementu are complete and meet the upirit of the
Pr.ivatu Development Cuntract.
C. Recummr.ndatiun:
It Ju clearly the HRA's call; howover, if Action 91 Is taken
Attorney Bubul advlsuu a second notltu of default be iasuud by
certifled mall as the HRA could become subjoct to a IawuUlt.
Under Actiun 02, I'd uuggeut tho City Ilut condltlunu
necesuavy for isuuance of the permanent Occupancy Permit.
` Page 2 �%
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 7, 1994
Supporting Data:
Copy of Mr. Birkeland and O'Neill's letter and copy of the
temporary Occupancy Permit.
Page 3 f,
CUSTOM CANOPY
z,aDundnFtd
Mardloeft,
TOW000141(1166813D
Fa 14MD6"13D
September 13, 1994
City of Monticello
Housmg and Redevelopment Authority
250 East Broadway
PO Boa 1147
Monticello, MN 55362
1 was extremely disappointed with the HRA decision to deny Custom Canopy the TIF
payments to which we aro entitled. The purpose of this letter is to review what has
transpired with our project to date and to try to prevail upon you to reconsider your
decision.
It seems the main problem is the 60 ft of fencing that is not completed and never was to be
completed due to the fact that we will be putting up another building. We were not issued
a building permit until June 15, 1994, so in reality there was no possibility to be completed
by July 1, 1994. Butler Buildings has a 10-15 weer lead time and the building is
scheduled to be completed by mid-October. I ask you to reconsider your decision to deny
our TIF payments.
I am loathe to write to write lengthy letters but when such a large amount of money and
fiituro good will is involved, I feel I must. Please bear with me as 1 review my point of
view, a position neither you nor many of the other members maybe aware of. 1 have
waited almost a month to write to you, after talking to my bankers and attomeys, in order
to "cool down'. 1 do feel, however, that I have been treated unfairly, and prevail upon
you to be just.
Our project was designed to have a U-shaped driveway. This would have enabled us to
utilize our entire building by being able to drive [nucha through both sides, to unload with
a forklift. As we started the project we were infomted that city code required that
driveways had to have 125 ft of separation, therefore we would only be allowed (1) 20 ft.
driveway. The architect firm redesigned the parking area with a radius that would
supposedly still allow us to drive through both sides of the building. This was the first of
many added expenses 1 incurred.
Immediately after occupancy of the building it became clear we would not be able to get a
truck through the east We of the building. This resulted in our being forced to afore
vehicles and steel outside. 1 remember Gary Anderson came over and we talked about the
driveways. He has a CDL license and has driven trucks, he knew right away that it was
impossible for trucks to get into the east side of the building. He suggested I go before
the city council for a variance to put in the driveway that was on the original plans. The
variance was denied upon review. He then put us on the agenda for November of 1993.
Before the meeting Jeff O'Neill came out and said that with the steel being stored outside
we would need a fence down Fallon Ave. I wasn't crazy about the idea but agreed in
order to ger the second driveway. As our conversation went on Jeff asked if maybe we
would go part way down the northside of the property, so that people turning onto Fallon
would not be able to see into our yard. I agreed and thought we were set for the planning
Oleg•
By this time I was resigned to putting up some fencing and excavating and filling with
crushed concrete the area behind our building, this was another cost increase.
When the planning meeting started, one of the members asked the question why the city
would want 125 ft of spacing between driveways and why there was a 24 R. maxis um.
One of the other members said that they were changing that because of the H -Windows
and Standard Iron projects and that many of the other driveways were wider than 24 ft.
and closer than 125 ft. Gary Anderson then said that actually he had researched the
ordinance and that an owner was allowed (1) driveway for every 125 ft of road ftromage.
In other words my original plans where in compliance, I could put another driveway
anywhere 1 wanted. Actually I was within 10 ft of being able to put in (3) driveways.
Needless to say I was stunned. Here i was trying to get a variance to pun in the original
site plan, which had been denied rendering half of my building useless, when I didn't need
a variance nor should my original plan been denied. As 1 stated 1 was stunted, as a direct
result of that decision I had already spent over $30,000 extra. Now 1 was looking at
another 55,000 to cut in another driveway, or 55,000 for fencing.
Next Jeff O Neill comes up with his fencing plan. It was not at all what we had discussed
previously. He now had a 6 ft high fence going around the entire property, over twice as
much fencing and over a foot higher. This was approved by the committee.
We're now into November of 1993, fall being my busiest pan of the year and I have to
shop for fencing while most fencers had closed down for the season. None of them could
imagine a 6 ft fence with screening, the wind loads would be too great, Done would even
guarantee such a fence. I then called Gary Anderson to explain my problem he told me
that he had done more research and that actually by ordinance I was not allowed to build a
6 ft high fence. Anything over 6 ft requited a variance and engineered drawing. 1 would
have to go to another meeting for a variance or get the city council to change the planning
comtnissions recommendation to conform to the ordinance and allow for a 5 ft high fence.
1 went to the council meeting and they approved exactly what I had put up, a 5 R fence
around my property, to the pour the additional building would be, with no gates installed.
However, with the additional fencing 1 would be required to add additional trees and
shrubs, another expense.
Around ThanksgMig, ie 0 degree temperature and partially frozen ground, our force is
put in and the trees are planted. This was done at considerable expense due to the cold
conditions.
In the spring the HRA comes out and tells me I now need to put a gate in the fencing.
The city council had Willy told me that a gate was not a requirement. By now I am
quite weary of all the constant changes in requirements. My busing has almost tripled
since I first planned to move to Monticello. I just wanted to do my work, make everyone
happy and be left alone.
When the grand thawed out, the femms company came back and removed the poles and
concrete they had installed that past fall. They repoured the concrete and installed larger
poles to support the installation of a gate, that was now required. Everything was
completed accept the last 60 ft of fencing, which would neva be dome because we were
putting a building them.
I waited for my building permit, about luxe 10, 1994, I wan to see Gary Anderson
wondering where my permit was. He said he had been crazy busy and would get to it. On
June I Sth 1 got the permit and immediately poured the slab for the now building. I then
called the contractor and was informed that with all the problems with the veriance/non- O
vwiav= issues, he had not ordered the building and that it would be 10-1 S weeks. This
would put us in late September or early October, which is where I am at today.
I fed that in Neu of all that has gone on, you should reconsider your decision. I fed that
since the building permit was not issued until mid -lune, it is mot reasonable to expect a
July 1 at completion. I also fed that dace the slab for the building is poured and the
building ordered, it was not reasonable to expect 60 R of fencing to be erected. 1 believe
that the time for completion should be extended uuW November or December. Even if we
are not entitled to this years TIF payment, I believe that once in compliance we should
receive all our TIF payments starting in 1995.
Thank you for tatting the time to listen. I would like to meet ecce to discuss this matter
with you but though a would be more productive to let you know my thoughts and giro
you time to cmWder the matter first, before we mat.
Sincerely.
Stephen P Birkdand, Jr
SPBrNb
a: 011ie Koropehak HRA Executive Director
Gary Anderson. Building Official
250 East Broadway
P. O. Box 1147
Monticello, MN
55362.9245 MEMO
Phone: (612) 295.2711
Metro: (612) 333.5739
Fax: (612) 295-4404
TO: 011ie Koropchak, Economic Development Director, HRA members
FROM: Jeff ONeill, Assistant Adminiatrator�) .'u)
DATE: September 16, 1994 �W-
RE: Letter from Steve Birkeland
I have reviewed the letter from Steve Birkeland to Al Larson regarding development
issues associated with Custom Canopy. In his letter, Birkeland points to the City as the
cause of delays in completion of required site improvements. This is to let you know that
at your request, I would be very happy to make a complete response to each item
Birkeland has noted.
I can't help but make a partial response to his letter, so here it is.
1. During the initial site planning process, Custom Canopy officials were asked if
there would be any outside storage on site. Custom Canopy said no, all materials
would be stored inside. Surprise, once the facility was occupied, the required
parking area in the rear along with the yard area became a storage and work yard
area which, without a conditional use permit, is in violation of the ordinance.
It was after this practice of storing material outside began that the City required
that Custom Canopy obtain a conditional use permit. The Planning Commission
and City Council required screening of stored materials in compliance with the
ordinance. If Custom Canopy had informed City staff about the outside storage
during the site planning process, they would have found out about the
CUP/screening fence requirement and avoided the "surprise."
2. The initial landscaping plan and associated tree planting requirement was based
on the initial site plan presented to City staff, which did not include an area for
outside storage. Once the true developed area was defined, including the outside
Memo
011ie Koropchak and HRA
September 16, 1994
Page 2
storage area, the tree requirement was adjusted accordingly. Again, custom
canopy would have avoided the tree planting surprise if staff had been provided
accurate site plan data in the first place.
With regard to the gate, it is the view of staff that it is correct to require
installation of a screened gate. The ordinance requires that outside storage be
screened Brom the public right-of-way. Without installation of a screened gate, the
material inside the storage area can easily be seen &am Fallon Avenue.
If you would like me to provide a more detailed response and associated paper trail,
please let me know.
cc: Gary Anderson, Building OTIcial
Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator
TEMPORARY
Qkiniifiratr of 0rrit4aturij
CRitJ lif MONTICELLO
P1,1111rUnrttt cif Uldlibilig 311104lerfililt
Ibis Ca•ti f iratt imited pursttaut to the requireme lli of Seetiou 306 of 1/m Uniform Building
Code euti f ying that at the time of utaance this structure was in compliance with the eariot!
1 ordinam-ei of the Cit regulating buildiu comtructiou or use. fortbe ollomin
7 b 8 g f 8'
UseCI&Wfadly ManufacturinR BuildinR
Group R-2 I-WConYrudbn V -Non Ratedpua7mw
owntr of ilulwhrg Stephen and .loan Rirknlnnd Ad&m
Dullding Addre 219 Dundas Road ocawr
By:
�ii3ldk% 04cw Date
11dj. Psrmh W 93-2033
i hr7aae T-2
4013 Highway 125
Buffalo. MN. 553)1
Monticello, MN. 55362
Cert/ Anderson
AuRuet 31. 1993
POST rrr A ConMrtaoua Puce
r —J /
v
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 7, 1994
Consideration to adopt a resolution authorizinu Public
Resource Group. Inc. to Prepare a TIF Plan relating to the
establishment of TIF District No. 1-19, a Housinq District.
A. Reference and Background:
AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISE3MT OF THE TIF PLAIT.
The Monticello -Big Lake Housing, Inc., a non-profit
organization, is proposing to construct a 48 -unit Independent
senior housing facility. In order to finance the estimated
$3.2 million dollar project (includes furnishings), the HRA is
being asked to participate In the community project by
creating a twenty-five year Housing TIF District. The TIF
will be based from an estimated market value of $1,850,000.
Legal TIP uxpendltures are land write-down and site
Improvements. If the HRA proposed to use TIP to assist with
the land -write down of the two -lots to the east of thu Zum
Brunnen Medical Clinic, City Staff may not be supportive of
the use of TIP (land -write down) at that site because of its
close proximity to the Waste Water Treatment Plant and the
potential release of odors. Secondly, no matter what dollar
amount used by the City in an attempt to correct odors from a
e Waste Water Treatment Plant, the attempt will never uuarantse
absolute control of the odors.
In addition to TIP, Housing Inc. is requesting the HRA or City
consider issuing Revenue Bonds for the 501 (c) (3)
organization.
It lu anticipated the newly created district will qualify au
a "Qualified Housing District" for exemption of the HACA LOGu
to the City.
Enclosed la a schedule, prepared for the TIP approval process
which complements the augressivu ochudulu of Housing, Inc.,
plcaue note it Is anticipated that the HRA will adopt the
ruuolution eutabliohing TIP Dlctrict No. 1-19 at thu January
I1, 1995 HRA meeting.
PRELIMINARY AORSEMHNT AND CASHIER CHECK
Iu :addltlon to authorizliig PRO to pruparu the plan for the new
district, the rosolutlon states the HRA dgruuu to walvu the
rucoipt of the TIP Prullminary Agruemunt and the $5,000
ca Uhler chuck rolatlny to the Huuulug District project: and
page I
113
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 7, 1994
BRA/DISTRICT NO. 1-19 ADMINISTRATIVE COST'S
Agrees to allocate the estimated $7,500 PRG and Holmes &
Graven fees and previous $5,600 Health Planning & Management
Resources, Inc. fee as Administrative Costs within the Plan
(Budget) relating to TIF District No. 1-19; and
PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
Authorizes Holmes & Graven to prepare the Private
Redevelopment Contract between the HRA and Monticello -Big Lake
Housing, Inc.
After discussion of the above items, the HRA members should
consider the following alternative actions.
B. Alternative Actions:
1. A motion to adopt the resolution authorizing Public
Resource Group, Inc. to prepare a TIF Plan relating to
the establishment of TIF District No. 1-19, a Housing
District.
2. A motion to deny adoption of the resolution.
3. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
Staff does not recommend the use TIF to auslat with the hand-
write down of the proposed two -lots; however, Staff supports
the use of TIF for situ impruvomeutu or for land -write down at
a different uitu. The project Ju a community pruject, it
sustains the TIF Policies, and appuars to be consistent with
Laud and Situ Plan Study completud for the Hospital District
Area.
D. Suoportinq Data.
Ruuolutiun for adoption Lind TIF approval schudule.
Paye 2
A RESOLUTION BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, WRIGHT COUNTY
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PREPARATION FOR THE
MODIFICATION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN, TIF DISTRICTS,
AND ESTABLISHMENT OF TIF DISTRICT NO. 1-19 AND ITS PLAN.
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), in
and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota, has been requested by
Monticello -Big Lake Housing, Inc., a Minnesota non-profit
organization, (the "Redeveloper") to establish a Tax Increment
Finance (TIF) District; and
WHEREAS, the HRA agreeri to waive the receipt of the Preliminary
Agreement from the Redeveloper; and
WHEREAS, the HRA agrees to waive the receipt of a $5,000 cashier's
check from the Redeveloper; and
WHEREAS, the HRA agrees to allocate the estimated $7,500 PRG and
Holmes & Graven fees and the previous $5,600 Health Planning &
Management Resources, Inc. fee as Administrative Costs within the
Plan relating to the proposed TIF District; and
WHEREAS, the Monticello -Big Lake Community Hospital District (the
"Seller") is considering to proposer the sale of the following two
parcels to the Redeveloper (the "Buyer") for redevelopment, the
parcels identified as:
PID#
PIDA
WHEREAS, the Redeveloper requests the HRA or City consider Issuing
Revenue Bonds for the 501 (e) (3) non-profit organization; and
WHEREAS, the Redeveloper proposes to construct a 48 -unit
independent senior housing facility; and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 1994. the HRA approved the preliminary
concept for use of TIF to aesiot with financing the proposed senior
housing project: and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 1994, the City Council received an
Informational update relating to the HRA'o preliminary concept
approval for use of TIF on the senior housing project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Monticello Housing and
Redevelopment Authority, in and for the City of Monticello,
Minnesota:
Page 1
Authorizes Public Resource Group, Inc. to prepare a
modification of the Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and
the Plans for TIF District Nos. 1-1 through 1-18 and for
establishment of TIS District No. 1-19, a Housing District,
and Plan relating to District No. 1-19.
Authorizes Holmes & Graven to prepare the Private
Redevelopment Contract between the HRA and Monticello -Big Lake
Housing, Inc.
Adopted this th day of December, 1994.
ATTEST:
HRA Executive Director
HRA Chairperson
Page 2
v
TAX INCREMENT FINANCE (TIF) HOUSING DISTRICT
SCHEDULE
NORMALLY, THE HRA DOES REQUEST A $5,000 CASHIER CHECK, EXECUTED
PRELIMINARY TIF AGREEMENT, AND COPY OF LAND PURCHASE AGREEMENT.
WED DEC 7, 1994
HRA AUTHORIZES PUBLIC RESOURCE GROUP TO
BEGIN PREPARATION OF THE TIF PLAN FOR TIE
DISTRICT NO. 1-19.
HRA AUTHORIZES HOLMES 9 GRAVEN TO PREPARE
THE PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
BETWEEN THE HRA AND MONTICELLO SENIOR
HOUSING ALLIANCE, INC.
TUES JAN 3, 1995
PLANNING COMMISSION.
MON JAN 9
PUBLIC RESOURCE GROUP DISTRIBUTES TIB
PLAN TO THE TAXING JURISDICTIONS: SCHOOL,
COUNTY, AND HOSPITAL. NO LATER THAN
JANUARY 13.
WED JAN 11
HRA ADOPTS RESOLUTION APPROVING TIF PLAN
AND REQUESTS CITY COUNCIL CALL A PUBLIC
HEARING.
HRA REVIEWS FIRST DRAFT OF THE PRIVATE
REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT.
MON JAN 23
CITY COUNCIL CALLS FOR PUBLIC HEARING OF
TIF.
WED FEB 1
HRA APPROVES FINAL DRAFT OF THE PRIVATE
REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT.
THUR FEB 2 AND 9
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE APPEARS IN LOCAL
NEWSPAPER.
TUES FEB 7
PLANNING COMMISSION.
FRI FEB 10
PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT EXECUTED
BY NRA AND THBZAf16i�NCB, INC.
MON FEB 13
CITY COUNCIL HOLDS PUBLIC HEARING AND
ADOPTS RESOLUTION APPROVING TIF PLAN.
NORMALLY, SITE AND BUILDING PLANS HAVE
BEEN APPROVED BY CITY AND CITY ENGINEER,
AND PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
EXECUTED.
PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES GROUP, INC.
Cams
1214/94
Ms. 011ie Krahl, Administrator
Monticello -Big lake Community Nursing Home
1104 River Street Fast
Monticello, MN 55362
RE Odor Complaint 1 Monticello Wastewater Treatment Facility
Dear Ma Krahl:
Thanks for your call on 11/10194 to report %asuwater treatment plant odors over the week.:nd of
November 5th and 6th. Public input is needed to effectively work to control odors. In the future I
would ask that you call when the odor is being Lencrated. There aro often things that uT can do to
help minimize odor but we need to know at the :imc of the odor. You can call me day or night,
my home phone number is 295-5609. 1 would particularly appreciate a call When odors are
substantial enough to cause residents, as you said, to be "sick and some of them throwing up".
To control odors is a never ending battle. We do the best we can with the equipment and
conditions that exist. Public input is also an important pan of the odor control formula. The City
could spend millions of taxpayer dollars on the problem and still not "eliminate" odors. By the
very nature of this facility, a wastewater treatment plant, some odor will exist. Your continued
assistance is appreciated and helps us to minimize the !frequency and severity of odor.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
�L
Kelsic McGuire
Project Manager, Monticella W WIF
1401 NArt Blvd., ` twficello, MN 55361
,421295-22211 TAX 61212MAT73
budget should stay healthy
facility and the hospitallnursinghome
axnpkx. It mentioned ancems int. of o
recent city council meeting ohm rxnsible
Ubjeetinrhs from senior residents to odor
and noise from the aeatmem facility next
door. However, long-term care Director
011y Krahl sad she did nut consider the
facility a problem and hard memher Don
Biske w' there are m altcmauve silo for
the development.
i Biske and board chair Helen Weiden-
bach were ruminated as hospital district
mprrsematiyes in the new non-profit cor-
pirafirm
""Hcwd from Schwientek that adminiura-
live law Judge Sara Jay moorrunended the
state commissioner of health approve an
upgrade firm basic to Advar tee fe Sup
pm (ALS) amhuh m service.
Commishioner Mar} to O'Brien is
expected to nuke a finil decision m the
Upgrade soon.
We have No rtaon to behove that (her
JJti� t be positive, Schwientek
Cold
layy held a heanng on obe AIS upgrade
June 0 and wrote in her rtpon to the ixxn-
mmsioner that the hospital district "her
fully demonstrated that the licensure
re ted is needed and will benefit the
public health in the ala to he served."
• Heard from Director of SafetyMary Onh
that worker's compensation claims are
down 44 percent h mh this time last year.
Orth said that following a high of 13
claims in March, the distrroy recorded only
five claims in lune. She need that Waal of
these claims were for minor injuries and
none resulted in lost time.
After the mating, Onh said she consid-
ers the drop in clarms to be the result of
efforts by district employees to identify
trends and seek solutions to common pmb-
kms
..Over the past five years we have been
looking at Ii tf ing injuries for nurses,' a
maptr sewrce of worker injuries in the di%.
trice sM sad.
• Approved new appointments recom-
mended by medical staff luuon Dr.
Matlhcw Snorstolt.
The appointments include two new
en+ergcncy physicians, Mark Thayer and
Jere Wardlow, who both move to the dis-
trict from Waterloo, Iowa, and nuclear
medicine technologist Benjamin Joerg
from Rice lake,
sena
settinc
prima]
shows
by Thor Carlson
Races to replace rte
Brno Adkins are hrew
ratic and Rc�uhlican c
two state office amte>
13 primary election ha
Each party's enk)r
facing a challenger
pvI week. Wright C.
Ken Jude steppppieed tar
endorsed oarhtlidate
fab. Earlier last week
endorsement conven
nod to Judy Beaudry
Barbara Chaffee. Br
would also be vying
through the pnmary c
Adkuts is rorgmnc
due to health reavms ..
midway thnwgh he -
special cicetum will r
remaining tion year
Filings for slate :r.
on Tuesday. (here w
tots for county race
tested pxsitkms.m the
Thine ram incluc
len6e to one•tenn me
m smoncr Pat Sawat-
teat. The other owe
where incumbent Ws
challenged by lame,
MuPhad. riding to
missioner seats on
Eugene Lorentz in c:
misshoncr Dick Ma
mann u run agonist !
Judie Wise.
The %tate secreta
reported that no unc-
have stepped touwars:
ELEC710 -Con
In other business at the meeting, the
1
boarI�dget°
• Appoved salary aril benefit adjustment
for rhonmttraa workers.
Board member Trish Taylor told the
seal year
hwrJ that the rocuto nded adjustmcnu
include a throe -percent raise stanmg July
11, two a freeze on knkcvity raise for one
t right now," said hospitaf district
080 hoar step perud starting October 1.
T w 2,080•hour period is roughly one
e Director Barbaro Sidhwientek.
year of work for a full-time employee.
1945 operating budget does not
increases for the nursing
"Everyroily will skip one 2,080 in•
rate
f+m docs have a 9.7• rccnt rate
ozease," Schwientek said after the meeung.
: for the hospital and counseling
But Schwientek added that non -cm.
Schwientek described the rate
nation that tract em to ees-a designation
P Y 8
as "within the usual range" and
inchrdes everyone by tic nurse in the dis•
necessary to kap the hospital dt-
tria-nay get a flu payment in Mardi and
npetitive.
S"mher of scat year if the duaia's net
ther favorable financial news,
marVncquahfattrPerm
motive Dimctor Nancy Dahkn told
11'rsda hedge on oar financial situatierk"
ad tout final rcpwr fa the 'nond
�J�
showed a gun of $68,000 in to �T
to the capes. 1
•Approved the concept of a non-profit
�pwntion composed of repmentativa
as mm
f a loss Neu rtumA of $23.000. Ea
i eight rmnths of this fiscal year,
of the Mspital district city ctwnctL Hous•
ing and RedevekVmmi Authority and the
.cd activity in the hospital has
the district post a total gain of
community at large to oversee the building
and management of a senior housing
a).
development in Montncello.
are $464,000 ahead of last year,
l The board briefly discussed the pro-
is wonderful," Dahlen told the
posed site for the development on property
between the city's waste -water treatment
facility and the hospitallnursinghome
axnpkx. It mentioned ancems int. of o
recent city council meeting ohm rxnsible
Ubjeetinrhs from senior residents to odor
and noise from the aeatmem facility next
door. However, long-term care Director
011y Krahl sad she did nut consider the
facility a problem and hard memher Don
Biske w' there are m altcmauve silo for
the development.
i Biske and board chair Helen Weiden-
bach were ruminated as hospital district
mprrsematiyes in the new non-profit cor-
pirafirm
""Hcwd from Schwientek that adminiura-
live law Judge Sara Jay moorrunended the
state commissioner of health approve an
upgrade firm basic to Advar tee fe Sup
pm (ALS) amhuh m service.
Commishioner Mar} to O'Brien is
expected to nuke a finil decision m the
Upgrade soon.
We have No rtaon to behove that (her
JJti� t be positive, Schwientek
Cold
layy held a heanng on obe AIS upgrade
June 0 and wrote in her rtpon to the ixxn-
mmsioner that the hospital district "her
fully demonstrated that the licensure
re ted is needed and will benefit the
public health in the ala to he served."
• Heard from Director of SafetyMary Onh
that worker's compensation claims are
down 44 percent h mh this time last year.
Orth said that following a high of 13
claims in March, the distrroy recorded only
five claims in lune. She need that Waal of
these claims were for minor injuries and
none resulted in lost time.
After the mating, Onh said she consid-
ers the drop in clarms to be the result of
efforts by district employees to identify
trends and seek solutions to common pmb-
kms
..Over the past five years we have been
looking at Ii tf ing injuries for nurses,' a
maptr sewrce of worker injuries in the di%.
trice sM sad.
• Approved new appointments recom-
mended by medical staff luuon Dr.
Matlhcw Snorstolt.
The appointments include two new
en+ergcncy physicians, Mark Thayer and
Jere Wardlow, who both move to the dis-
trict from Waterloo, Iowa, and nuclear
medicine technologist Benjamin Joerg
from Rice lake,
sena
settinc
prima]
shows
by Thor Carlson
Races to replace rte
Brno Adkins are hrew
ratic and Rc�uhlican c
two state office amte>
13 primary election ha
Each party's enk)r
facing a challenger
pvI week. Wright C.
Ken Jude steppppieed tar
endorsed oarhtlidate
fab. Earlier last week
endorsement conven
nod to Judy Beaudry
Barbara Chaffee. Br
would also be vying
through the pnmary c
Adkuts is rorgmnc
due to health reavms ..
midway thnwgh he -
special cicetum will r
remaining tion year
Filings for slate :r.
on Tuesday. (here w
tots for county race
tested pxsitkms.m the
Thine ram incluc
len6e to one•tenn me
m smoncr Pat Sawat-
teat. The other owe
where incumbent Ws
challenged by lame,
MuPhad. riding to
missioner seats on
Eugene Lorentz in c:
misshoncr Dick Ma
mann u run agonist !
Judie Wise.
The %tate secreta
reported that no unc-
have stepped touwars:
ELEC710 -Con
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 7, 1994
,
5. Consideration to review and auprove the second draft of the
Private Redevelopment Contract between the HRA acrd Residentlal
Development, Inc. and adopt the resolution rulatina thereto.
A. Reference and Backaround:
The HRA is being asked to adopt a resolution:
Approving the Private Redevelopment Contract 1n substantially
the form presented, subject to:
1. Final annexation; and
2. Some modifications to the Contract that do not
materially alter the nature of the transaction
which are approved the by Chair and Lire Executive
Director.
And authorizing and directing HRA officials to execute lite
Contract.
As per the direction of the HRA, Lite note with the proposed
Interest rate was deleted from the Prlv,,te Redevelupment
Contract as it was the HRA's understanding the $102,000 was a
nut -to -exceed amount (no Interest and not based on Nut Present
Value). However, the Redeveloper's responsibility for tine
HRA 'a Administrative Costs were not inserted as Attorney Bubul
felt the HRA may be eomewhal unreasonable in relationship to
Lire amount of asslotance (not -to -exceed $102,000).
The contract does include lire soil corrections must be
commencud and completed concurring with the Phaue I
development and as approved by the City Englneur. The
cuutract outlines the four Phases, cummencement and completion
d,ntes of each Phase, and minimum estimated market value of
single and twin-homeo and commerical develupmurrtu In each
Phase. TIF Payment bogln August 1, 1998 and end February 1,
2000. TIF payment is aloo subject to the development
t�vmplying with the Subdiviulnn AUreument. Certificate- of
Completion lsouud aftur completion of each Phaue.
The sueund draft was submitted to Jim Causerly, Attorney for
Ruoldentlol Development, Inc. Basad oil my ruvivw of the
cuutract, a few housukuepiug ltumu will be ouUgvuted.
Page 1
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 7, 1996
B. Alternative Actions:
1. A motion to adopt the resolution approving the Private
Redevelopment Contract between the HRA and Residential
Development, Inc. in substantically the form presented.
2. A motion to deny adoption of the resolution.
3. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation:
The context of the Contract has been reviewed with Rick
Wolfsteller, recommendation is Alternative Action 02.
D. Sunaortina Data:
Excerpts from the Private Redevelopment Contract and copy of
the resolution for adoption.
9
Page 2
ARTICLE III
Soil Corrections
Section 3.1. Status of Redevelonment Propertv. As of the date of this
Agreement, the Redeveloper has entered a purchase agreement (the "Purchase
Agreement") to acquire the Redevelopment Property from a third party. Before the
Authority has any obligations hereunder, the Redeveloper shall close on acquisition
of the Redevelopment Property in accordance with the terms of the Purchase
Agreement. The Authority has no obligation to purchase the Redevelopment
Property or any portion thereof.
Section 3.2. Soil Corrections. The parties agree and understand that
development of the Redevelopment Property is hindered by the presence of a former
gravel pit with steep slopes and other soil deficiencies, all as further described in
A Geotechnical Evaluation Report for Residential Development, Inc., dated August
3, 1994 prepared by Braun Interteo Corporation and on file in City Rall. In order
to make development of the Minimum Improvements economically feasible, the
Authority will reimburse the Redeveloper for the cost of the Soil Corrections
described in Schedule B hereto, in the maximum amount of $102,000 and subject to
the terms of Section 3.3 hereof. In the event that the Soil Correction costs exceed
$102,000 such excess costs shall be the responsibility of the Redeveloper. The
Authority shall have no obligation to the Redeveloper or to any third party with
respect to any defects in the constru tion of improvements financed or reimbursed
by the Authority as Soil Corrections.L,The Soil Corrections shall be commenced and
completed by the dates required for Phase 1 of the Minimum Improvements as
specified in Section 4.3 hereof, and shall be carrie out in accordance with the
Construction Plans approved under Section 4.2 hereof Soil Corrections shall be
deemed commenced upon commencement of grading and Sm
within the gravel pit
area of the Redevelopment Property, and sha be deemed complete upon the
reasonable determination of the City A Einglnec
Section 3.3. Financia of Soli Corrections. The Authority will reimburse the
Redeveloper for the cost of Soil Corrections paid by the Redeveloper pursuant to
Section 3.2 hereof in the total amount of $102,000, in accordance with the following
terms and conditions:
(a) The Soil Correction costs will be paid by the Authority to the
Redoveloper without Interest thereon In semi-annual installments payable on each
February 1 and August 1 ("Payment Dates") commenMng August 1, 1998 and
concluding no later than February 1, 2000, which payments will be made from
Available Tax Increment as defined in thls Section and from no other source..
(b) Tho term "Available Tax Increment" means 90 percent of the Tax
Increments paid to the Authority with respect to the TIF District during the six
months preceding any Payment Date.
(o) The Authority shall have no obligation to pay any portion of the Site
Improvement costs that remain unpaid after termination of the TIP District. The
Authority may prepay the Site Improvement costs at any time.
(d) The Authority shall not be obligated to make any payment under this
Section If: (1) the Authority has not issued the Certificate of Completion for the
ra"nno
10110.4:
minimum Improvements Is an Event of Default on the Redeveloper's pail
under this Agreemea or the at��w__� nn��, bat has not been cured as of the
" payment Date; or (iii Redeveloper wiled to comply withthe payment
procedures described in paragraph (e) herein. If an Event of Default Is cured in
accordance with this Agreement, the Available Tax Increment withheld shall be
deferred and paid, without interest thereon, on the next Payment Date after the
Event of Default is cured.
(e). At least 30 days before the first Paymant Date (August f,. 19") -''the
Redeveloper must submit to the Authority a payment request oerdfl=te signed'by,
its duly authorized representative stating that the Redeveloper has paid the Soil
Correction costa in at least the amount of ;1101,000 and. that"no Event of Default has
occurred and is continuing under this Agreement. The first payment request
oertiflcate must be accompanied by a certificate of a project engtueer or other project
supervisor showing in adequate detail that the, Site Improvement costa, spedSed In
Section 3.2 have been incurred and paid by the Redeveloper: m _.
(f) The parties agree and understand that ilia Authority and' City may. at
their sole discretion, terminate the TIF District on the Maturity Date or any prior
date on which the Authority, has received or Is entitled to receive Available Tax
Increment in amount sufficient pay the Soil Correction costa in full In accordance
with the terms of this Section.
Section 3.4. Pavment of Authoritv Expenses. Pursuant to that certain
Preliminary Agreement between the Authority and the Redeveloper dated as of
October S, 1994 (the "Preliminary Agreement"), the Redeveloper has deposited the
sum of $5,000 with the Authority. As specified inihe Preliminary Agreement, the
Authority will return the Redeveloper's deposiq_upon commencement of the Soil
4 Corrections. the Soil Corrections are not conmenced by the date for commencement
Phase 1 nified in Section 4.3 hereof, all right, title and interest in the deposit
shall be deemed transferred to the Authority. In all other respects, this Agreement
supersedes and replaces the Preliminary Agreement.
sumo
01.0-4.
ARTICLE IV
Construction of Minimum Improvements
Section 4. 1. Construction of Minimum Improvements. (a) The Redeveloper
agrees that it will construct the Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment
Property in accordance with the approved Construction Plans and at all times prior
to the Maturity Date (while Redeveloper owns the Minimum Improvements) will
operate and maintain, preserve and keep the Minimum Improvements or cause the
Minimum Improvements to be maintained, preserved and kept with the appurtenances
and every part and parcel thereof, in good repair and condition.
(b) The Minimum Improvements shall consist of the following improvements:
Phase 1: 4 single family detached homes
4 twinhome buildings (8 units)
Phase 2: 24 single family detached homes
19 twinhome buildings (38 units)
2 Commercial improvements
Phase 3: 24 single family detached homes
19 twinhome buildings (38 units)
Phase 4: 12 Single family detached homes
6 twinhome buildings (12 units)
(c) Upon the date for completion of each Phase specified in Section 4.3
hereof, the Minimum Improvements for each Phase shall have an
assessor's estimated market value (including land and improvements)
as follows:
'ltJ i
a Phase 1: At least 3 single family homes shall have as estimated
market value of at least $95, 000; 1 single family home shall
have an estimated market value of at least $110,000, and all
4 twinhomo buildings shall have an estimated market value
of at least $80,000.
Phase 2: At least 19 single family homes shall have an estimated
market value of at least $110,000; at least 8 single family
homes shall have an estimated market value of at least
$120,000; at least 15 twinhome buildings ehatl have an
estimated market value of at least $85,000; at least 4
twinhome buildings shall have an esdamtod market value of
at least $115,000; and two commercial facilities oombtnad
shall have an estimated market value _of at least
$1,012,000.
Phase 3: At least 15 single family homes shall have an oadmated
market value of at least $120,000; at least 8 sioglo family
homes shall have an estimated market value of at least $
annaao
10190-46
130,000; at least 1 twinhome building shall have an
estimated market value of at least $95,000; and at least 18
twinhome buildings shall have an estimated market value of
at least $90,000.
Phase 4: All 12 single family homes shall have an estimated market
value of at least $130,000; and all 6 twin home buildings
shall have an estimated market value of $95,000.
The parties agree and understand that the covenant under this Section
4.1(c) shall not constitute an "assessment agreement" within the
meaning of Section 469.177, Subd. 8 of the Tax Increment Act, and that
such covenant is not intended to bind owners of individual housing
units upon acquisition from the Redeveloper. Any failure by
Redeveloper to perform its obligation under this paragraph constitutes
and Event of Default hereunder for which the Authority retains all
remedies specified in Article IX hereof.
(d) The parties agree and understand that as of the date of this Agreement
the Redeveloper is undertakings. subdivision plat of the Redevelopment
Property, and that in connection with such plat the Redeveloper will
enter into a subdivision development agreement with the City (the
"Subdivision Agreement"). The parties hereto anticipate that the
Subdivision Agreement will include customary obligations by the
Redeveloper regarding landscaping, restrictive covenants and related
matters. Any obligations of Redeveloper under this Agreement are In
addition to Its obligations under the Subdivision Agreement. Further,
any default by the Redeveloper under the Subdivision Agreement shell
constitute an Event of Default under this Agreement.
Section 4.2. Construction Plans.
(a) Before commencement of the Soil Corrections, the Redeveloper must
submit Constructions Plans for such corrections to the City Engineer, who shall
review such plans on behalf of the Authority. Before commencement of construction
of any Phase of the Minimum Improvements, the Redevoloper shall submit
Construction Plans for such Phase to the City Building Official, who shall review
such plane under this Section on behalf of the Authority. The Construction Plans
shall provide for the construction of such Phase of the Minimum Improvements and
shall be In conformity with the Redevelopment Plan, this Agreement, and all
applicable State and local laws and regulations. The City Building Official will
approve the Construction Plans in writing if: (I) the Construction Plans conform to
the terms and conditions of this Agreement, including without limitation all the terms
of Section 4.1 hereof; (ii) the Construction Plans conform to the goals and objectives
of the Redevelopment Plan; (iii) the Construction Plans conform to all applicable
federal, state and local lows, ordinances, rules and regulations; (iv) the
Construction Plans are adoquate to provide for construction of the Minimum
Improvements; (v) the Construction Plans do not provide for expenditures In excess
of the funds available to the Redevoloper for construction of the Minimum
Improvements; and (vi) no Event of Default has occurred. No approval by the City
Building Official shall relieve tho Rodoveloper of tho obligation to comply with the
terms of this Agreement or of the Redevelopment Plan, applicable federal, state and
local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, or to construct the Minimum
Improvements in accordance therewith. No approval by the City Building Official
&"Too,J
".1W-.6
or CityEngineer shall constitute a waiver of an Event of Default. If approval of the
Construction Plans is requested by the Redeveloper in writing at the time of
submission, such Construction Plans shall be deemed approved unless rejected in
writing by the City Building Official or the City Engineer with respect, to the.Soil
Corrections, in whole or In part. Such rejections shall set forth in detail the reasons
therefore, and shall be made within 30 days after the date of their receipt by the
City Building Official. If the City Building Official or City Engineer, rejects any
Construction Plans in whole or in part, the Redeveloper shall submit new or
corrected Construction Plana within 30 days after written notification to the
Redeveloper of the rejection. The provisions of this Section relating to approval,
rejection and resubmission of corrected Construction Plans shall continue to apply
until the Construction Plans have been approved by the City Building Official and
City Engineer with respect to the Soil Corrections. The City Building Official's and
City Engineer's approval shall not'be Viiieasonably withheld. Said approval shall
constitute-a-coaclusive determination that the Construction Plans (and tbi-Sid
Corrections end the Phase of the Minimum Improvements constructed in accordance
with said plans) comply to the Authority's satisfaction with the provisions of this
Agreement relating thereto.
(b) If the Redeveloper desires to make any material change in the
Construction Plans after their approval by the City Building Official and City,
Engineer, the Redeveloper shall submit the proposed change to the City Building
Official (or City Engineer in the case of Soil Corrections) for approval. If the
Construction Plans, as modified by the proposed change, conform to the
requirements of this Section 4. Z of this Agreement with respect to such previously
approved Construction Plans, the City Building Official or City Enghteer, as the
case may be, shall approve the proposed change and notify the Rodevelopea in
writing of its approval. Such change in the Construction Plans shall, in any event,
be deemed approved by the Authority unless rejected, in whole or in part, by
written notice by the City Building Official or City Engineer. as the case may be, to
the Redeveloper, setting forth in detail the reasons therefor. Such rejection shall
be made within ten (10) days after receipt of the notice of such change. The City
Building Official's or City Engineer's approval of any such change in the
Construction Plans will not be unreasonably withheld.
Section 4.3. Commencement and Comoletion of Construction. Subject to
Unavoidable Delays, the Redeveloper shall commence and complete construction of
the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the following schedule:
Phase 1: Commence by June 1,_1995 and complete by Jenuar�R, 1987
Phase Z: Commence by January 1, 1997 and complete by January 4, 19991
Phase 3: Commence by lannary 1, 1899 and complete by Jaaitary 4, 1989'.
Phase 4: Commence by January 1, 1999 and oomplete by January 4,_9A00
Ali work with respect to the Minimum Improvements and related Soil Corrections to
be constructed or provided by the Redeveloper on the Redevelopment Property shall
be In conformity with the Construction Plane as su�nmitted bathe Redeveloper and I
approved by the City Building Official. Q,,d `-1 R
The Rodovoloper agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, and every
successor in interest to the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof, that the
u.nwoW4:
"VI10
Redeveloper, and such successors and assigns, shall promptly begin and diligently
Prosecute to completion the redevelopment of the Redevelopment Property through
the construction of the Minimum Improvements thereon, and that such construction
shall in any event be commenced and completed within the period specified in this
Section 4.3 of this Agreement. Until construction of Phase 4 the Minimum
Improvements has been completed, the Redeveloper shall make reports, in such
detail and at such times as may reasonably be requested by the Authority, as to the
actual progress of the Redeveloper with respect to such construction.
Section 4.4. Certificate of Comnletion.
(a) Promptly after substantial completion of any Phase of the Minimum
Improvements in accordance with those provisions of the Agreement relating solely
to the obligations of the Redeveloper to construct such Phase (including the dates
for beginning and completion thereof) , the Authority will furnish the Redeveloper
with the Certificate shown as Schedule C hereto. Such certification by the Authority
shall be a conclusive determination of satisfaction and termination of the agreements
and covenants in the Agreement and in the Deed with respect to the obligations of
the Redeveloper, and its successors and assigns, to construct the relevant Phase
and the dates for the beginning and completion thereof. Such certification and such
determination shall not constitute evidence of compliance with or satisfaction of any
obligation of the Redeveloper to any Holder of a Mortgage, or any insurer of a
Mortgage, securing money loaned to finance the Minimum Improvements, or any part
thereof.
(b) If the Authority shall refuse or fail to provide any certification in
accordance with the provisions of this Section 4.4 of this Agreement, the Authority
shall, within thirty (30) days after written request by the Redeveloper, provide the
Redeveloper with a written statement, indicating in adequate detail in what respects
the Redeveloper has failed to complete the relevant Phase of the Minimum
Improvements in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement, or is otherwise
in default, and what measures or acts it will be necessary, in the vp.Lion of the
Authority, for the Redeveloper to take or perform in order to obtain such
certification.
(c) The construction of any Phase shall be deemed to be substantially
completed when the responsible inspecting authority has issued a certificate of
occupancy for n all the housing units and commercial facilities constituting such
Phase. -
&Wl"0
=190.46
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
IL RESOLUnON NO .
RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMB r
WITH RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, INC.
WHEREAS. the Horsing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello (-Mdw lty')
is administering its Redevelopment Project No. 1 ('Project; and
WHEREAS. within the Project the Authority has approved creation of Ta: Inerrmem Financing
District No. 1-18 in order to facilitate ceratin will Corrections and related residential and cammndal
developmem and
WHEREAS, dse Authority has reviewed a Contract for Private Redevehoplant between the Authority
and Residential Development, Inc. (the "Contract' specifybtg the respective obflgalm of Resid-ial
Development, Inc. and the Authority fegudlog developmem within the TIP District: and
WHEREAS. the Autbaity has determined that it is in the beat Interests of the Authalty rod the City
as e whole to enter hdo the Contract
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of me Housing sand
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello n follows:
1. The Contract Is hereby approved in substantially the form pmsrmted to the Authority on this
date, subject to:
(a) MW annexation by the City of Monticello of do property Included within the TTP DiMicl: arrd
(b) nwMk ti ms to the Contract that do oat materially alter the mNre of the traatsctim which are
approved by the Chair and Executive Director, provided that execution of the Contract by such officials ahW
be conelasive evidence of such approval.
2 Upon satisfaction of the conditions specified In Section 1, the proper Aubft officials am
authorized and directed to execute the Contract on betmlf of the Authority. and to Cony out an behalf of the
Authority the Authority's obtiguiam thereunder.
Approved by the Board of Commissimers d the Homing and IL/., J, , ..... AnIhO y In std far
Bre City of Monticello this _ day of 1994.
C
ATTEST:
uuoars
o�uo•a
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 7, 1994
6. Consideratlun to review and acorove the first draft of the
amendment to the Private Redeveloument Contract between the
HRA and William and Barbara Taaoer and adopt the resolution
thereto.
A. Reference and Backaround:
The HRA is being asked to adopt a resolution:
Approving the Private Redevelopment Contract is substantially
the furm presented, subject to:
Modifications to the Contract that do not materially
alter the nature of the transaction which are approved by
the Chair and Executive Director.
And authorizing and directing HRA officials to execute the
Contract.
The amendment to the Private Redevelopment Contract states the
Redeveloper will construct a 18,000 oq ft manufacturing
facility (the "Additional Improvements"). Constructlun
commencing May 1, 1995 and completion by December 31, 1995.
The 11RA will reimburse the Redeveloper $30,000 for site
lnprovements: excavatlou, landscaping, and curb constructiun
necessary for the develupment of the additional improvements.
Reimburoement upon 90% completion of the additional
improvements and certification by do Independent architect.
The annaul Tax Increment Guarantee increaseo Crum the original
$26,000 to $34,500. The Aseeuument Agreement's minimum
estimated market value will increaoe from $750,000 to
This amount will co ViLdill the lneruaued
tax Incremunt guarantee but not ovu Hoot mated market value.
B. Alternative Actlun:
A motion to adopt the resolutlon approving the Private
Redevelopment Contract butwevn thu HRA and W1111am R. and
Barbara R. Tappur, in substantially thu form presented.
2. A mu tluu to deny adoption of the reuulutiun.
3. A motion to table any action.
I Pdyu 1
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 1, 1994
C. Recommendation:
Staff recommends Alternative Action No. 1 as the modification
of the TIF District No. 1-9 Plan was approved by the HRA and
the City Council.
Supportinq Data:
Excerpts from the contract and copy of the resolution for
adoption.
tPagn 2
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made on or as of the day of , 1994, by and
between HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN ZTD-7-0-1 THE CITY OF
MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA, a public body corporate and politic (the "Authority") ,
established pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 489.001 to 489.047 ( hereinafter
referred to as the "Act"), and WILLIAM R. AND BARBARA R. TAPPER, husband
and wife (collectively, the "Redeveloper") .
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Authority and the Redeveloper have entered into that certain
Contract for Private Redevelopment dated July 13, 1990 (the "Original Contract");
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Original Contract the Authority conveyed the
Redevelopment Property as described in Schedule A hereto to the Redeveloper and
the Redeveloper constructed the Minimum Improvements as defined therein; and
WHEREAS, the Redeveloper has proposed to construct certain additional
improvements on the Redevelopment Property and has requested certain additional
assistance from the Authority in order to make such improvements financially
feasible; and
WHEREAS, the Authority believes that the redevelopment of the Project Area
pursuant to this Agreement, and fulfillment generally of this Agreement, are in the
vital and best interests of the City and the health, safety, morals, and welfare of its
residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of the applicable
State and local laws and requirements under which the Project has been undertaken
and to being assisted.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations
of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other
as follows:
1. Construction of Additional Improvements. (a) In addition to the
Minimum Improvements previously constructed by the Redeveloper, the Redeveloper
shall construct an approximately 18,000 square foot manufacturing facility (the
"Additional Improvements") on the Redevelopment Property. Prior to commencement
of construction of the Additional Improvements, the Redeveloper shall submit
Construction Plans for the Additional Improvements to the City Building Official,
who shall review such plans on behalf of the Authority. The Construction Plana shall
provide for the construction of the Additional Improvements and shall be in
conformity with the Redevelopment Plan, this Agreement, and all applicable State
and local laws and regulations. The City Building Official will approve the
Construction PWw in writing if: (i) the Construction Plans conform to the terms and
conditions of this Agreement; (fl) the Construction Plans conform to the goals and
objectives of the Redevelopment Plan; (iii) the Construction Plans conform to all
applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations; (iv) the
Construction Plans are adequate to provide for construction of the Additional
Improvements; (v) the Construction Plana do not provide for expenditures in excess
of the funds available to the Redeveloper for construction of the Additional
Improvements; and (vi) no Event of Default has occurred. No approval by the City
Building Official shall relieve the Redeveloper of the obligation to comply with the
anwm
smio-ii 1
terms of this Agreement or of the Redevelopment Plan, applicable federal, state and
local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, or to construct the Additional
Improvements in accordance therewith. No approval by the City Building Official
shall constitute a waiver of an Event of Default. If approval of the Construction
Plans is requested by the Redeveloper in writing at the time of submission, such
Construction Plans shall be deemed approved unless rejected in writing by the City
Building Official, in whole or in part. Such rejections shall set forth in detail the
reasons therefore, and shall be made within 30 days after the date of their receipt
by the City Building Official. If the City Building Official rejects any Construction
Plans in whole or in part, the Redeveloper shall submit new or corrected
Construction Plans within 30 days after written notification to the Redeveloper of the
rejection. The provisions of this Section relating to approval, rejection and
resubmission of corrected Construction Plans shall continue to apply until the
Construction Plans have been approved by the City Building Official. The City
Building Official's approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Said approval shall
constitute a conclusive determination that the Construction Plans (and the Additional
Improvements constructed in accordance with said plans) comply to the Authority's
satisfaction with the provisions of this Agreement relating thereto. Construction
Plans shall be modified only in accordance with Section 4.2(b) of the Original
Contract.
(b) Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Redeveloper shall commence
construction of the Additional Improvements by May 1, 1995 and shall complete
construction by December 31, 1995. All other provisions of Sections 4.3 and 4.4 of
the Original Contract apply by substituting the term "Additional Improvements" for
the term "Minimum Improvements."
2. Authoritv Reimbursement for Certain Site Improvement Costs. In
addition to the assistance provided under Section 3.7 of the Original Contract, the
Authority agrees that it will reimburse the Redeveloper for a portion of the cost of
preparing the Redevelopment Property for construction of the Additional
Improvements. Specifically, the Authority will reimburse the Redeveloper for up to
$30,000 of the cost of undertaking excavation, landscaping, and curb construction
necessary in connection with development of the Additional Improvements. Prior to
the Redeveloper's commencement of such site improvement activities, the
Redeveloper shall furnish to the Authority for its review and approval plans and
specifications relative to the construction of said site improvements. The Authority
shall reimburse the Redeveloper for up to $30,000 of the cost of such site
improvements at such time as the Redeveloper has completed 90% of the Additional
Improvements, as certified by an independent architect' retained by the
Redeveloper. Reimbursement by the Authority shall be conditioned on the
Redeveloper not being In material default under this Agreement at the time such
reimbursement Is requested; provided, however, that the Authority shall first give
written notice to the Redeveloper of the existence of the Redeveloper's default,
which notice shall include a description of the nature of the default and the actions
required to be taken by the Redeveloper to cure such default.
3. Tax Increment Guarantee. Section 8.1 of the Original Contract is
oo modified to provide that, beginning to calendar year 1997, in the event that the Tax
40eIncrement generated by the Tax Increment District in any year until the Maturity
Date is less than $34,500, the Authority shall provide written notice to the
Redeveloper of such fact and amount of the deficiency in Tex Increment. The
remainder of Section 8.1 and 8.2 of the Original Contract shall continue to apply
without modification.
•nw2oo
MIM -]1
4. Assessment Agreement. Upon execution of this Agreement, the
Redeveloper and the Authority shall enter into an Amended and Restated Assessment
Agreement substantially in the form attached hereto as Schedule B. The Amended
and Restated Assessment Agreement shall provide that the Minimum Market Value of
the Minimum Improvements together with the Additional Improvements shall be
f as of January 2, 1996.
S. Financing. (a) Before commencement of construction of the Additional
Improvementseveloperihall submit to the Authority evidence of one or more
commitments for mortgage financing which, together with committed equity for such
construction, is sufficient for the construction of the Additional Improvements.
Such commitments may be submitted as short term financing, long term mortgage
financing, a bridge loan with a long term take-out financing commitment, or any
combination of the foregoing. Such commitment or commitments for short term or
long term mortgage financing shall be subject only to such conditions as are normal
and customary in the mortgage banking industry.
(b) If the Authority finds that the mortgage financing is sufficiently
committed and adequate in amount to provide for the construction of the Additional
Improvements then the Authority shall notify the Redeveloper in writing of its
approval. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld and either approval or
rejection shall be given within thirty (90) days from the date when the Authority is
provided the evidence of mortgage financing. A failure by the Authority to respond
to such evidence of mortgage financing shall be deemed to constitute an approval
hereunder. If the Authority rejects the evidence of mortgage financing as
inadequate, it shall do so in writing specifying the basis for the rejection. In any
event the Redeveloper shall submit adequate evidence of mortgage financing within
thirty (30) days after such rejection.
(c) In the event that there occurs a default under any Mortgage authorized
pursuant to this Section, the Redeveloper shall cause the Authority to receive copies
of any notice of default received by the Redeveloper from the holder of such
Mortgage. Thereafter, the Authority shall have the right, but not the obligation,
to cure any such default on behalf of the Redeveloper within such cure periods as
are available to the Redeveloper under the Mortgage documents.
6. Insurance. The Redeveloper shall comply with all requirements set
forth in Sec on . a) of the Original Contract as applied to the Additional
Improvements. The remainder of Article V of the Original Contract shall apply to the
Additional Improvements as well as the Minimum Improvements.
7. hibitions Aaninst Assig nt and Transfer; indemnification. All
provisions of Article VIII of the Otiglnafcontract shall apply to the Additional
improvements as well as the Minimum Improvements.
8. Effect of Amendment. All other terms of the Original Contract remain
in effect and are deemed to apply to the Additional Improvements as well as the
Minimum Improvements. Unless otherwise provided herein or the context clearly
requires otherwise, the term "Minimum Improvements" in the Original Contract shall
be deemed to include the Additional Improvements. All capitalised terms used herein
have the meaning provided in the Original Contract unless the context clearly
requires otherwise.
M 3M
10110-31
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPKENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
RESOLUTION NO._
RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
WITH WILLIAM R. AND BARBARA R. TAPPER
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Monticello ("Authority") is administering its Redevelopment Project No. 1
("Project"); and
WHEREAS, within the Project the Authority has approved creation of Tax
Increment Financing District No. 1.9 in order to facilitate certain manufacturing
development; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has reviewed an Amendment to Contract for Private
Redevelopment between the Authority and William R. and Barbara R. Tapper (the
"Contract") specifying the respective obligations of William R. and Barbara R.
Tapper and the Authority regarding certain manufacturing development within the
TIF District; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has determined that it is in the best interests of the
Authority and the City as a whole to enter into the Contract;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello as follows:
1. The Contract is hereby approved in substantially the form presented
to the Authority on this date, subject to modifications to the Contract that do not
materially alter the nature of the transaction, which are approved by the Chair and
Executive Director; provided that execution of the Contract by such officials shall
be conclusive evidence of such approval.
Z. The proper Authority officials are authorized and directed to execute
the Contract on behalf of the Authority, and to carry out on behalf of the Authority
the Authority's obligations thereunder.
Approved by the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of Monticello this _ day of , 1994.
Chair
ATTEST:
Secretary
am=I
Anlorl,
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 7, 1994
7. Curialderatlon of Brad Baraer to accept reappointment to thu,
Five -Year HRA Commlasioner Position.
A. Reference and Backaround.
HRA commissioners are appointed each year by the Mayor and
City Council at the first Council meeting field in January.
Au records indicate, Brad Barger was appointed to the HRA
position vacated by the resignation of Lowell Sehrupp. That
five-year term expires December, 1994.
Assuming Mr. Barger will agree to remain on the commluulun,
the HRA may want to endorse Mr. Barger's re -appointment. On
January 9, the Mayor and Council will appoint Mr. Bargur and
rulnstate the four remaining HRA members as folluws:
Ben Smith
December
1995
Tom St. Hilaire
December
1996
Everette Ellison
Decembur
1997
Al Larson
December
1998
Brad Barger
December
1999
Reca=endation is a motion endorsing the re -appointment of
b Brad Barger for a five-year HRA term, explratici, dote %f
tecember 1999.
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 7, 1994
Other Business:
a) TIF District No. 1-17 (Fay -Mar) Update - Upon receiving
the final building plans or as-builfs, the landing
Institution has a project appraised. The land and
building appraisal for Musich project was approximately
$100,000 less than the costs associated with construction
financing through the Lank and SBA. The appraiser is re-
appraising the project and Ron Muslclt is re-negotlating
costs. The bank is confident the project will proceed;
however, the Private Redevelopment Contract reads
construction to begin no later than November 20, 1904 and
Land Purchase Agreement reads option expires October 20,
1994. Although the project seems to be coming together,
the HRA may find this project on their agenda In January.
b) Retailer Services Corpuration - The IDC Proopect Team
toured this NE Minneapulle facility on November 29. The
team characterized the two plant/operational managers as
hard-wurking individuals. One lives in Maple Lake and
the other in Anoka. Mr. Sullivan, the headman, has the
pocketbook. The team viewed the company which produces
retail/commercial sales/dlsplace cabnetary as well -ran.
The team's suggestion is to assist the company but not
give away the farm. Mr. Sullivan's first priority was to
contact Charlie Pheffer regarding the available facility
otherwise will consider building. 25,000/30,000 sy ft
rectangle facility, 8-10 full-time employment, seasonally
up to 16-18 people. Average wages, $7.00-$9.00 per
hour. Players are Becker, Rogers, Elk River.
4-) IDC brainstorm Workshop - Although final plans are still
in the making, the IDC would llka HRA memburs to earmark
Thursday, January 19, 1995, as the date of a bralnotorm
workshop to assist in evaluating the economic development
strengths and weaknesses of the community acid to
establish one and live -year goals. The workshop will
begin at 7:00 p.m. at the NSP Training Center. The IDC
would like to see, at a minlmum, one rupresontative from
the HRA at the wurkahup.
d) Larson Letter - Submitted for your Information. Rick
Wolfeteller is resuarching this fur recorded easements,
Although some years ago the HRA establiuhed a
Redevelopment District in this area, the Hauo property
and the property directly to the north of Metcalf/Laroon
Rental Office Bulldlug were purchased and buildingo
demolished by the City.
L Pagu 1
HRA AGENDA
DECEMBER 7, 1994
e) Other - Ron Johnson, Quality Welding, and Gene Guad,
Rogeu Corporation, are Inquiring of TIF assistance for a
proposed project. The IDC Prospect Team toured Quality
Welding in Rogers this fall.
Page 2
/I *14&Xarfoa
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
P,O. 8" uA
V 30 Welt B.oee�y
MontkNb, Mirwed� 0530244M
JAMES G. METCALF TELEPHONE
BRADLEY V. LARSON (012) 78$3232
METRO
November 28, 1994 M12) 421-3393
FAX
(012) 2853132
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
P. O. Box 1147
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
ATTENTION: Jeff O'Neill
Dear Jeff:
Pursuant to our recent telephone conversation, please
consider this a letter of request that the HRA deal with the issue
of opening up another driveway out of the post office over the
former city owned Hass property lying north and west of the post
office. After dealing with this weekends snowstorm, plowing and
irate postal customers driving through our parking lot during the
plowing process, we are prepared to block off the post office
access through our parking lot. The post office and their
landlord have never contributed monetarily for snow removal, seal
�- coating or bituminous maintenance and to the best of our knowledge
they do not have an easement. Our benevolence is about to cease.
Respectfully yours,
METCALF 6 LARSON
By.
B ley
HVL/gls
cc: United States Post Office
ATTENTION: Jack
Se it resolved by the City'Council of Monticefto,"
?Minnesota, as follows:
I. Monticello Ford, Inc. is the owner of the
following:
Parcel #19j65 _ Lot 10 and E 6ft. of Lot 4
except N 50 ft. of Lots
10 and 4
and has granted to the City of Montic,•llo an
alley easement on north side of said property
for $1.00.
2 rite City of Monticello hereby agrees to pay
$1.00 and accepts value over and above $1.00
as lift from Monticello Ford, Inc.
Perpetual easement for use of alleyway is
granted to Monticello Ford, Inc. and sub-
sequent owners of above described property.
4. Granting of easement by Monticello Ford, Inc.
will not limit land use of 'above described
property or limit building ;ermit requirements
in any more stringent manner than would such
property be limited,were itl,not for the
alleyway easement. +
'rL•� ,/J 7
Mayr
d / 4Q --
Cit
--Citnistrator, i
• - i
nye,. �%•%j7,s '�:r.
"F-/1 1 S 03
Agenda Item 3. Review and recommendations from engineer on
maintenance building bids.
At the last council meeting the councils
decision was to refer plans and specifications
back to the engineer for review and cost revision.
Thursday, August 8, 1975, (subsequent- to this
supplement), John Badalich will be meeting
with maintenance building commission and
review his findings.
Agenda Item 4. Consideration of adoption of resolution for
allev easement granted by Larry Flake for Post
Office.
Larry Flake has agreed to granting the post
office an easement for an alleyway on the back
of his property. He would like the following
stipulations put in the easement and on re-
cord at City Halls
1. Easement will not restrict future building
permit requests. Basically Mr. Flake was
concerned about setback requirements in
that easement would not make it more
difficult to situate future structures.
2. City would accept easement as a gift
above the amount of $1.00.
3. A perpetual easement would always be
granted Larry Flake on alleyway and he
could transfer this to future owners.
Agenda Item S. Set public hearing for final Community Develop-
ment Block Grant application.
Due to additional funds being appropriated for
the Community Development Block Grant program,
HUD is now accepting final applications. Ap-
plications must be complete by August 30, 1975•
The City of Monticello is in the Twin Cities
region and currently ranks 9th out of 43 cities
with a possible appropriation up to $100,000.
.. . : :illi %• 4i
:iC..�:�:n: `rim:� ^i• .�.
^1 �
Agenda Item 3. Review and recommendations from engineer on
maintenance building bids.
At the last council meeting the councils
decision was to refer plans and specifications
back to the engineer for review and cost revision.
Thursday, August 8, 1975, (subsequent- to this
supplement), John Badalich will be meeting
with maintenance building commission and
review his findings.
Agenda Item 4. Consideration of adoption of resolution for
allev easement granted by Larry Flake for Post
Office.
Larry Flake has agreed to granting the post
office an easement for an alleyway on the back
of his property. He would like the following
stipulations put in the easement and on re-
cord at City Halls
1. Easement will not restrict future building
permit requests. Basically Mr. Flake was
concerned about setback requirements in
that easement would not make it more
difficult to situate future structures.
2. City would accept easement as a gift
above the amount of $1.00.
3. A perpetual easement would always be
granted Larry Flake on alleyway and he
could transfer this to future owners.
Agenda Item S. Set public hearing for final Community Develop-
ment Block Grant application.
Due to additional funds being appropriated for
the Community Development Block Grant program,
HUD is now accepting final applications. Ap-
plications must be complete by August 30, 1975•
The City of Monticello is in the Twin Cities
region and currently ranks 9th out of 43 cities
with a possible appropriation up to $100,000.
.. . : :illi %• 4i
:iC..�:�:n: `rim:� ^i• .�.
9�jig bibeuturt, .tend. this. _
bcltoecn--Monticello-Fiord. Tor _ r._..�_.__ �._......_.._._.._
a corporation tender the late* o/ the Salto o%—.. Minn"— party of W Jori part, and
__The_City_.of...Monticello.—a_.munirlpal-_....____..__�_ ..... -., __ .
a corporation ender Me tats* of W Stab of Mlnnpenta
party of the second pert.
Elftntssetb, that W Bald party of W JU*t pert. In tantideredim of the tans of
-ere. Dollar..and...other�oad_�nA_v_a�uakle_sonaid�ra.t�uo.
to it in hand paid by the said party of W second part, W roeotpt whereof is hereby ark otafedlkd.
don hereby Grant. Bargaln. Qultalaltn, and P.oeaey ants the said party of the second part. W
suarrson and assigns, lorsasr. aU the trad._._or psrct ---of land lyin[ and bs4s# In ahs County
o/ W Sht -%d Stats of J/tnneseta. deeeribsd as foUoas. to -wit:
The Northeduterly Twelve (12) feet of the parcel described as:
Ain .npi h •. • • . • 'r -r' -"'' i — s C !' � I .• I ''
Lot Ten (10) and the East Six (6) feet of Lot Nine (9)
908*b4n .Block 50, Town of Monticello, according to the
401hb►W record.
vv r Ufew
CUMN Ot AumAnce is subject to and contingent upon the
building of a United States Poet Office adjacent to the grantor's
property and should that not occur within three (3) years from
date hereof, then the property herein conveyed will revert
to grantor. If said Post Office is built, this conveyance is
subject to a perpetual easement for ingress and egress over the
above described property reserved unto the Grantor, its
successors and assigns.
Qa INU atO (01{ 0 lbt lYanu. Together uM ail W hawdItantents and appur4sances (hers
unto bebn/ter/ or In anywise appertaining, to the said party of W second part. W n ounsn and assigns
ltereusr.
\ 1a 9duamnf wbrf"L The said prat party hw asanl A."
\\ panne* b be o=roubd Ls W co►pbraU near by U .._ _
I prrtdsnt and Ib corporate nal so
be brsuteto aJJLed Wday and yr,► ped abnw UW"
JNffJ0kL4D PORDt. INC
!b_.. _ .. _PrestekM
+tate of Itinnegota, t
County of ..... .W..( LGIf.T........................
The foregoing Instrument was acknowledged before me
this.. 147 day of ................ '.`^L......l9.7L........
Lawr+«ac F/�Ke
��iNar.Iam ;«Ap«.TIu•«aanA««Y
and by ..................5'13-06)1-:—
INa«..1 OCA—«.«wa, mu. et 010—« ..—k
of................................................ h%.Q.N..T..f.G..Q.4.R•.4..../r's.!t.4..............................................................
I N.wM ./ a«r«.ww A•WoNk.Nei
a...........................corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
�Nw.. i ISIOAu... •I r•r.• T.YI« Ac••e.MAp•.w.Y
t • c c• /T/W er IIuAY
I �.. RYGlIAeD
�Y•T OLFG LXM
� = «IICOYNTT
2 L� NOTANT ry A�IC.NINMefaTA
M GO«ey«Ow lan.c� N.t 11. 1M � ,
tNiE INSTRUMENT MAII
ETATe ales TAM DUI J
On Ae TEo bv:
b
11
t
�a
Lw
LAJ
■
�{
yi s
a
►
Z
a a � g
.e
,�l
• W
V 4 •
•
.� y I }l
c y �'
.D
V .
b
PUBLIC RESOURCE
t
GROUP, INC.
Marked% Development & Finance Specialists
November 22, 1994 5 C e R. G —
C
Ms. 011ie Kompchalt
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
P.O. Box 1147
Monticello, MN 55362
STATEMMAT
Consulting Services --October 16, 1994 through November 15, 1994
10-19-94
LPK—H-Window closing documents, follow-up with 011ie and Steve Lemme .50
10.21-94
LAK—Memo regarding H -window loan guidelim ri1
TOTAL CHARGEABLE HOURS 1.23
Net Chargeable Hours 0 S90/Hour S112.50
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE IU=
C1ME= QffaA OVIER OVER
$112.50
TERMS: NET DUE UPON RECEIPT, 1.33% PER MONTH SERVICE CHARGE ON
PAST DUB ACCOUNTS
4205 Lancaster Lone North* Suite 1100 • Minrumpolls, Minnesota 55441 • (611) 550.77979 • (611) 5549111 Fax
r
November 29, 1994
Ms. 011ie Koropdrak
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
P.O. Box 1147
Mondedlo, MN 55362
It
PUBLIC RESOURCE
t
GROUP, INC.
t
Marketing, Development & Finance Specialists
STATE UM
Modificatron or TIF District M. 1.9 for te
Initial project strucnrring with business; preparation of TIF
data; determination of project flraue values and Preliminary
TEF financial analysis; review and confumadon of TIF Plan;
distribution of documents to County and School Districts;
and certification of district
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
CURR a OVER OVER 60 OVER.4�
$2,000.00
TERMS: NET DUE UPON RECEIPT, 1.33% PER MONTH SERVICE CHARGE ON
PAST DUE ACCOUNTS
4205 Lancaster lane North Suite 1100 0 Minnrapolis. Minnesota 55441 6 (612) 55047979 ♦ (612) 550.9221 Fax
HOLMES & GBAYP
November
fNVOIdE 6 47621-1
MlNiQO 4�1
Ci re u -F -MGNTI'CE,-W,'
F Cl sox I.I47,
MCWICIELt6 kN 5153E2=3445 C3 9
F;,jv LegaI Servucis From
Octabor 4. i9M, tpro Oi icber 31, 1994 As 'Pol'farzai-
10/aV94 S48 Genvr4l TIF questions pr 20
Name
C Stephen J Subul
now
sir
d Oman
Tjapm 3 Ze.2-
Hour* get e A m 0 j r. i
.,o 12000 24 C.0
Total Ssr-icos Ana Disburfamp-is 00
HOLKW &GSAVEN
CRAwfum
NoV.vmber 1'6, lc?.+A
!NvOi6e 0 '47634
K4j-40:4b - - '
crry OF M4*TICELLd. TIF
P 0 BOX 1147
MGNTICELLd PIN
For All tragal Aarmic,es Froas
October -L,
•1994 Thru Cc-cuber 21,, 1994 As Followv=
10. Z
A.a-search ,jnn4&4tiom .4 002m rvtiow
V, v
00, 4,0
p,rol-lininar-I agra'aintnt
io,/04194 ejB
Phoni call with 0, Korop,ch'sk re TIF
0 10
t4-30
iiiJis
1-0/471/174''Sis
phatie Call with 0. Korop,chak
JO CIO
�-I 4 / 9 4 SA
-0121
Q&*t-4w 00"Icoelr 04ter-isl,9-1 oAq,rn Term
0:10
36 Cc,
Sheet
10/26/9-4 SJB
phani Call wvth, 0. Koropchdk re
0 ;0
24 CO
TIPIAnnet,ALiCn quostlio-n
total s*rvLcm 41"b8 ilo
Nems "a we I Rate Aaduit,
Stephen J Qybul 1.35 1 00 162.'00
Total Ssprvic9-3 And DiAburommsn,ts; sx.az do
-"
,d`!W%Wftw
- Now
C*Qpdw&w
stapnqv 4 aubul