Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
EDA Agenda 05-12-2021
AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) Wednesday, May 12th, 2021—6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Participants can choose to attend in-person or remotely via Go-To: Web: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/949013725 Phone: (571) 317-3112 1 Access Code: 949-013-725 Commissioners: President Steve Johnson, Vice President Bill Tapper, Treasurer Jon Morphew, Tracy Hinz, 011ie Koropchak-White and Councilmembers Lloyd Hilgart and Jim Davidson Staff: Executive Director Jim Thares, Angela Schumann, Sarah Rathlisberger and Jacob Thunander 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Consideration of additional agenda items 4. Consent Agenda a. Consideration of Approving Regular Meeting Minutes —April 14, 2021 b. Consideration of Approving Payment of Bills c. Consideration of Authorizing Staff to proceed with documentation to extend Lease Agreement between the City of Monticello Parks Department and the City of Monticello EDA for 349 West Broadway Regular Agenda 5. Consideration of Duffy Development's TIF Pre-Application and Development Concept Review of 59-unit Low Income Housing Tax Credit Affordable Housing Proposal 6. Consideration of EDA Recommendation to City Council regarding participating in Wright County Economic Development Authority (EDA) 7. Consideration of Expanding Fagade Improvement Program Target Area 8. Consideration of Update regarding Otter Creek Business Park Stormwater Drainage Flows and Ponds 9. Consideration of Update regarding EDA Meeting Stipend for Non-Council Members 10. Economic Development Director's Report 11. Closed Session - Consideration of Recessing to Closed Session to Develop or Consider Offers or Counter-Offers for the Purchase or Sale of Real or Personal Property Pursuant to Minnesota Statute 13D.05, Subdivision 3(c)(3). Property Parcel Identification Number: A. PID: #155223000010 B. PID: #155191000020 C. PID: #155194000010 12. Adjourn MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) Wednesday, April 14th, 2021—6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Participants attended in-person or remotely. Commissioners Present: Steve Johnson, Bill Tapper, Jon Morphew, Tracy Hinz, 011ie Koropchak-White, Lloyd Hilgart, and Jim Davidson Staff Present: Jim Thares, Angela Schumann, Sarah Rathlisberger and Jacob Thunander 1. Call to Order Steve Johnson called the Regular Meeting of the EDA to order at 6:05 p.m. 2. Roll Call 3. Consideration of additional agenda items 4. Consent Agenda OLLIE KOROPCHAK-WHITE MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. BILL TAPPER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 7-0. a. Consideration of Approving Joint Workshop Meeting Minutes— March 10, 2021 Recommendation: Approving Joint Workshop Meeting Minutes— March 10, 2021. b. Consideration of Approving Regular Meeting Minutes— March 10, 2021 Recommendation: Approve Regular Meeting Minutes— March 10, 2021. c. Consideration of Approving Special Meeting Minutes— March 19, 2021 Recommendation: Approve Special Meeting Minutes— March 19, 2021. d. Consideration of Approving Regular Meeting Minutes— March 24, 2021 Recommendation: Approve Regular Meeting Minutes— March 24, 2021. e. Consideration of Approving Payment of Bills Recommendation: Approve Payment of Bills through March 2021. f. Consideration of Adopting Resolution #2021-04 Ratifying Approval and Execution of a Collateral Assignment of TIF Note by GCRE-Rivertown, LLC to Bellwether Enterprise Mortgage Investments, LLC Recommendation: Adopt EDA Resolution #2021-04 ratifying the Collateral Assignment of TIF Revenue Note by GCRE-Rivertown, LLC to Bellwether Enterprise Mortgage Investments, LLC Regular Agenda 5. Consideration of adopting Resolution #2021-05 approving a GMEF Loan Guidelines Economic Development Authority Minutes—April 14t", 2021 Page 1 13 Subsidy Agreement Extension for Rustech Brewing Company, LLC related to Job and Wage Compliance Jim Thares noted that Rustech Brewing has been in business for almost three years. They received a $75,000 GMEF loan through the EDA in July 2017. As part of the funding, Rustech agreed to create four full time equivalent jobs. Two of the jobs were to occur by July 2018 and two additional jobs in July 2019. Through submittals of annual business subsidy reports, they have fallen short on new job creation. The pandemic and regulations have hit the business hard, however Rustech Brewing showed that they were able to maintain their job numbers throughout 2020. Overall, they have created 2.9 full time equivalent jobs. Staff recommended an extension of agreement for fifteen additional months (July 2022). Bill Tapper asked if fifteen months was enough time for the extension. Thares noted that he received an email from Bill Burt, the owner of Rustech Brewing, noting a positive outlook for the future and achieving that requirement within fifteen months. Davidson further asked if Rustwch would be expanding their seating area. Thares noted that Rustech Brewing is in discussion with the landlord and looking to expand into the space where the hair salon is currently located. No specific timeframe was noted, but they have inquired about another EDA GMEF Loan. No application has been submitted at this time. Tracy Hinz asked how the fifteen-month timeframe was chosen. Thares noted that fifteen months would match up with the benefit date established in the loan document. BILL TAPPER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 92021-05 APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF RUSTECH BREWING'S GMEF LOAN SUBSIDY AGREEMENT TIMELINE RELATED TO JOB CREATION GOAL PERFORMANCE. LLOYD HILGART SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0-2 WITH JON MORPHEW AND TRACY HINZ ABSTAINING FROM THE VOTE. 6. Consideration of Development Process Related to Block 52 Jim Thares provided an update regarding the current status of development process for Block 52. Thares noted that in November 2020, a summary status update information packet was provided to past developers who indicated interest as well as an additional firm that is familiar with and currently involved downtown redevelopment. In follow up phone calls with these development companies, they all indicated some degree of interest in redevelopment of Block 52. Staff asked the EDA to provide further direction on continuing forward with redevelopment efforts. The EDA discussed the four possible developers for the block in detail. It was agreed that staff should send out the questionnaire to developers and move ahead as expeditiously as possible. Economic Development Authority Minutes—April 141h,2021 Page 2 13 Jon Morphew asked if the questionnaire would be sent to more developers than the four noted on the staff report. Thares explained that staff have a list of developers from the first cycle that the questionnaire could be sent to. It was agreed by the EDA that staff should send it to the entire list of developers from the list and keep the return response time short. Bill Tapper noted concern with moving too quickly and having a similar situation happen with the Beard Group proposal. It was noted that any potential developer may want to take on any additional acquisition of property. Thares also noted that dialogue is still occurring with property owners in the Block. No action on this item was taken. 7. Economic Development Director's Report Jim Thares and Angela Schumann provided the Economic Development Director's Report as noted in the agenda. 8. Adiourn TRACY HINZ MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 6:55 P.M. JON MORPHEW SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 7-0. Recorder: Jacob Thunander Approved: May 12th, 2021 Attest: Jim Thares, Economic Development Director Economic Development Authority Minutes—April 14t", 2021 Page 3 3 EDA Agenda: 05/12/21 4b. Consideration of Approving Payment of Bills (JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Accounts Payable summary statements listing bills submitted during the previous month are included for review. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to approve payment of bills through April 2021. 2. Motion to approve payment of bills through April 2021 with changes as directed by the EDA. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Alternative #1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A. Accounts Payable Summary Statements 2 � \ 2 \ & , / ) } { 2 } « « 00 0 - - \ L j � r / r r § § \ U � 2 o c 8 � \ / 10 ± t & ± /t \ \\ \ \ \ \ ( \ \ \ \ \ » ) \ \ - k ® K \ 3 / � § a \ \ / u u u u z X z z u u \ \ ) ) ) ) \ j * * * * u cn z z z z 4 4 j z z z z 9 $ cn ƒ 0 7 2( _ 7 \ \ § \ } CD0 / d � 2 9999 \ \ } $ $ $ $ r r $ § U § g ) \ S } 7 7 7 7 } 7 4 H 2 \ A k § § § § \ \ § ) Page: 1 Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 700 Minneapolis, MN 55402 City of Monticello DU 2�21 February 28, 2021 MN190-00156 TIF District No. 40 (Briggs Housing) Through February 28, 2021 For All Legal Services As Follows: Hours Amount 2/5/2021 MNI Call with T Omdal and S Rathensberger regarding Briggs 0.30 63.00 TIF note status and first payment of increment. Total Services: $ 63.00 Total Services and Disbursements: $ 63.00 From: Jim Thares To: Julie Cheney Subject: RE: Kennedy&Graven(4) Date: Wednesday, March 31,2021 6:43:33 PM Attachments: imaae001.pna Julie, these are all okay to pay. Please code to: 213-46301-430400 From:Julie Cheney<Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us> Sent:Tuesday, March 23, 2021 1:43 PM To:Jim Thares <Jim.Thares@ci.monticello.mn.us> Subject: Kennedy& Graven (4) Jim Attached are the following invoices from Kennedy& Graven: Inv# MN325-00042 -$542.60 Inv# MN325-00045 -$798.00 Inv# MN190-00156-$63.00 Inv# MN190-00101 -$619.00 Okay to pay? Please provide coding. Thanks, Julie Cheney Finance Assistant City of Monticello 763-271-3205 Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us AP@ci.monticello.mn.us CITY OF /1 0 Monticello Email correspondence to and from the City of Monticello government offices is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and may be disclosed to third parties. Page: 2 Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 700 Minneapolis, MN 55402 D Monticello EDA U February 28, 2021 MN325-00045 113 West Broadway Through February 28, 2021 For All Legal Services As Follows: Hours Amount 2/15/2021 MNI Review term sheet; email questions to EDA staff; office 0.50 105.00 conference with T Reichert regarding terms; begin draft PA 2/16/2021 MNI Draft purchase agreement for 113 W Broadway 0.50 105.00 2/22/2021 MNI Review vesting deed and legal description of property; 0.70 147.00 draft purchase agreement 2/26/2021 MNI Draft and finalize initial draft of PA for 113 W Broadway 2.10 441.00 per term sheet. Total Services: $ 798.00 Total Services and Disbursements: $ 798.00 From: Jim Thares To: Julie Cheney Subject: RE: Kennedy&Graven(4) Date: Wednesday, March 31,2021 6:43:33 PM Attachments: imaae001.pna Julie, these are all okay to pay. Please code to: 213-46301-430400 From:Julie Cheney<Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us> Sent:Tuesday, March 23, 2021 1:43 PM To:Jim Thares <Jim.Thares@ci.monticello.mn.us> Subject: Kennedy& Graven (4) Jim Attached are the following invoices from Kennedy& Graven: Inv# MN325-00042 -$542.60 Inv# MN325-00045 -$798.00 Inv# MN190-00156-$63.00 Inv# MN190-00101 -$619.00 Okay to pay? Please provide coding. Thanks, Julie Cheney Finance Assistant City of Monticello 763-271-3205 Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us AP@ci.monticello.mn.us CITY OF /1 0 Monticello Email correspondence to and from the City of Monticello government offices is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and may be disclosed to third parties. Page: 1 Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 700 Minneapolis, MN 55402 a V I Monticello EDA D L U 21 February 28, 2021 MN325-00042 101, 107, and 121 Broadway Through February 28, 2021 For All Legal Services As Follows: Hours Amount 2/2/2021 TMR Email exchange with Martha Ingram regarding Lease 0.80 101.60 Resolution; draft Lease Resolution and submit to Martha Ingram for review and approval 2/16/2021 MNI Review proposed changes to lease; begin draft revisions 0.50 105.00 2/18/2021 MNI Monticello questions on ALC lease to J Thares; revise 0.80 168.00 lease 2/22/2021 MNI Finalize lease with ALC. 0.80 168.00 Total Services: $ 542.60 Total Services and Disbursements: $ 542.60 From: Jim Thares To: Julie Cheney Subject: RE: Kennedy&Graven(4) Date: Wednesday, March 31,2021 6:43:33 PM Attachments: imaae001.pna Julie, these are all okay to pay. Please code to: 213-46301-430400 From:Julie Cheney<Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us> Sent:Tuesday, March 23, 2021 1:43 PM To:Jim Thares <Jim.Thares@ci.monticello.mn.us> Subject: Kennedy& Graven (4) Jim Attached are the following invoices from Kennedy& Graven: Inv# MN325-00042 -$542.60 Inv# MN325-00045 -$798.00 Inv# MN190-00156-$63.00 Inv# MN190-00101 -$619.00 Okay to pay? Please provide coding. Thanks, Julie Cheney Finance Assistant City of Monticello 763-271-3205 Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us AP@ci.monticello.mn.us CITY OF /1 0 Monticello Email correspondence to and from the City of Monticello government offices is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and may be disclosed to third parties. Page: 2 Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 700 Q� n Minneapolis, MN 55402 City of Monticello n February 28, 2021 MN190-00101 General EDA Matters Through February 28, 2021 For All Legal Services As Follows: Hours Amount 2/2/2021 MNI Questions from J Thares regarding Block 52 and EDA 0.60 120.00 stipend, Briggs assignment; review EDA bylaws and enabling resolution language 2/3/2021 MNI Review and revise EDA resolution approving lease; review 0.40 80.00 staff report language and propose language for same 2/15/2021 MNI Review agenda for monthly finance call for 2/16/21 0.30 63.00 2/16/2021 MNI Email to EDA staff regarding property tax exemption term 0.10 21.00 for EDA property 2/16/2021 MRM Attend monthly EDA call 1.10 209.00 2/17/2021 MNI Draft letter to City auditors for 2020 matters 0.40 84.00 2/18/2021 MNI Finalize and send audit letter to S Rathensberger. 0.20 42.00 Total Services: $ 619.00 Total Services and Disbursements: $ 619.00 From: Jim Thares To: Julie Cheney Subject: RE: Kennedy&Graven(4) Date: Wednesday, March 31,2021 6:43:33 PM Attachments: imaae001.pna Julie, these are all okay to pay. Please code to: 213-46301-430400 From:Julie Cheney<Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us> Sent:Tuesday, March 23, 2021 1:43 PM To:Jim Thares <Jim.Thares@ci.monticello.mn.us> Subject: Kennedy& Graven (4) Jim Attached are the following invoices from Kennedy& Graven: Inv# MN325-00042 -$542.60 Inv# MN325-00045 -$798.00 Inv# MN190-00156-$63.00 Inv# MN190-00101 -$619.00 Okay to pay? Please provide coding. Thanks, Julie Cheney Finance Assistant City of Monticello 763-271-3205 Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us AP@ci.monticello.mn.us CITY OF /1 0 Monticello Email correspondence to and from the City of Monticello government offices is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and may be disclosed to third parties. 701 XENIA AVENUE 5 _q SUITE 300 MINNEAPOLI5, MN 55416 wsb City of Monticello March 17, 2021 Attn: Sarah Rathlisberger, CPFO Finance Manager Project/Invoice: R-017641-000 - 2 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Reviewed by: Bret Weiss Monticello, MN 55362-8831 Project Manager: James Gromberg 2021 Economic Development Services City Staff Reviewer- Jim Thares GL Acct#213.46301.431990 Professional Services from February 1 2021 to February 28 2021 Phase 001 2021 Economic Development Services Monthly Retainer Monthly Retainer$850/Lump Sum Fee $10 200 for this task Fee Total Fee 10,200.00 Percent Complete 16.6667 Total Earned 1,700.00 Previous Fee Billing 850.00 Current Fee Billing 850.00 Total Fee 850.00 r Total this Task 850.00 Special Projects 0 - u to a), " u 0 3 Hours Rate Amount Gromberg, James 2/3/2021 .75 152.00 114.00 Call with benson Orth on Gia-Saurus Update Gromberg, James 2/23/2021 1.00 152.00 152.00 Meeting with Benson Orth - Project Gia-Saurus Gromberg, James 2/25/2021 1.00 152.00 152.00 Information for CET Grant Totals 2.75 418.00 Total Labor 418.00 Total this Task $418.00 Total this Phase $1,268.00 Total this Invoice $1,268.00 Billings to Date Current Prior Total Fee 850.00 850.00 1,700.00 Labor 418.00 380.00 798.00 Add-on 0.00 -93.00 -93.00 Totals 1,268.00 1,137.00 2,405.00 Project R-017641-000 MONT-2021 Economic Development Service Invoice 2 Page 2 From: Jim Thares To: Julie Cheney Subject: RE:WSB$1,268.00 Date: Wednesday, March 31,2021 6:35:56 PM Attachments: imaae001.ona Hi Julie, this invoice is okay to pay. Please code as noted on the invoice (new coding). From:Julie Cheney<Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us> Sent:Thursday, March 25, 2021 3:29 PM To:Jim Thares <Jim.Thares@ci.monticello.mn.us> Subject: WSB $1,268.00 Jim Attached is WSB Inv# R017641-000 2—for 2021 Economic Development Services. Okay to pay$1,268.00 as coded? Thanks, Julie Cheney Finance Assistant City of Monticello 763-271-3205 Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us AP@ci.monticello.mn.us CITY OF Monticello Email correspondence to and from the City of Monticello government offices is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and may be disclosed to third parties. Julie Cheney ry-\V I From: Bullseye Property Management & Realty <mail@managebuilding.com> Sent: Monday, March 22, 2021 3:04 AM To: AP Subject: Lease statement for Broadway Parking Easement - COMMERCIAL - 2 as of 3/22/2021 Bullseye Property Management & Realty Lease statement as of 2021-03-22 City of Monticello Economic Development Authority Account #: 00405914 35 Lake St Suite 500 Big Lake, MN 55309 Date Memo Amount Balance Prior balance $24.48 1/1/2021 Common Area Maintenance $198.02 $222.50 1/5/2021 Payment ($162.13) $60.37 2/1/2021 Common Area Maintenance $198.02 $258.39 2/11/2021 Payment ($186.61) $71.78 3/1/2021 Common Area Maintenance $198.02 $269.80 3/11/2021 Payment ($269.80) $0.00 4/1/2021 Common Area Maintenance $198.02 $198.02 i3 3a I,�- 4'� ") � Balance due: $198.02 Payment is due on the 28th of the month. If payment isn't received, a one-time fee equal to 8%of recurring charges will be charged on the 29th of each month. Manage your account online: http://bullseyeproperties.managebuilding.com Bullseye Property Management & Realty 763-295-6566 Buildium@bullseye411.com Stay connected with the Resident Center app i 2 & \ _ � j r r > >00 \ U � 8 2 % ) ) ) ) ) ) � \ } ) _ ) ) 2 ) ) ) 2 \ 2 § 4 R w r % > \ \ ± t & / 6 / z \ ) \ \ \ \ \ \ ( / 4 ] ) / / / ) & } \ \ ; / ® I § \ ( k - 2 7 / / ) ) ) ) ) ) \ \ = o \ § § \ / \ \ \ \ � § § � ƒ / cq y § � d u ) ) ] — � / f / ) / � 2 9 9 9 9 9 e \ \ \ \ \ \ § U § g ) \ S } 7 7 7 7 } 4 Page: 1 Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 700 Minneapolis, MN 55402 City of Monticello , March 31, 2021 MN190-00101 General EDA Matters Through March 31, 2021 For All Legal Services As Follows: Hours Amount 3/3/2021 MNI Research question on record retention of TIF district 0.30 63.00 materials from J Thare; email regarding same 3/15/2021 MNI Review agenda for 3/15 monthly finance meeting; attend 1.30 273.00 meeting 3/31/2021 MNI Phone conversation with J Thares regarding extension of 0.70 147.00 job and wage goals for Bondhus and Rustek loans; review statutory requirements; review proposed EDA agenda; draft notice of public hearing on extension of goals 3/31/2021 MNI Review Rustek and Bondhus loan agreement language 0.20 42.00 (business subsidy provisions); begin draft resolutions approving extensions. Total Services: $ 525.00 Total Services and Disbursements: $ 525.00 From: Jim Thares To: Julie Cheney Subject: RE: Kennedy&Graven(2) Date: Tuesday,April 20,2021 11:07:21 AM Attachments: imaae001.pna Julie, these are okay to pay. Please see coding. From:Julie Cheney<Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 10:37 AM To:Jim Thares <Jim.Thares@ci.monticello.mn.us> Subject: Kennedy& Graven (2) Jim Attached are the following invoices from Kennedy& Graven: Inv# MN190-00101—General FDA-$525.00 - 213-46301-430400 Inv# M N 190-00160—2019 U M C TI F -$375.00 -213-46301-430400 Okay to pay? Please provide coding. Thanks, Julie Cheney Finance Assistant City of Monticello 763-271-3205 Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us AP@ci.monticello.mn.us CITY OF Monticello Email correspondence to and from the City of Monticello government offices is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and may be disclosed to third parties. Page: 2 Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 700 Minneapolis, MN 55402 City of Monticello March 31, 2021 MN190-00160 2019 UMC Economic Development TIF Through March 31, 2021 For All Legal Services As Follows: Hours Amount 3/17/2021 MNI Review Subordination of Mortgage 0.70 175.00 3/17/2021 MNI Draft EDA resolution approving Subordination 0.60 150.00 3/18/2021 MNI Review proposed loan sources and uses; email 0.20 50.00 correspondence with J Thares regarding same. Total Services: $ 375.00 Total Services and Disbursements: $ 375.00 From: Jim Thares To: Julie Cheney Subject: RE: Kennedy&Graven(2) Date: Tuesday,April 20,2021 11:07:21 AM Attachments: imaae001.pna Julie, these are okay to pay. Please see coding. From:Julie Cheney<Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 10:37 AM To:Jim Thares <Jim.Thares@ci.monticello.mn.us> Subject: Kennedy& Graven (2) Jim Attached are the following invoices from Kennedy& Graven: Inv# MN190-00101—General FDA-$525.00 - 213-46301-430400 Inv# M N 190-00160—2019 U M C TI F -$375.00 -213-46301-430400 Okay to pay? Please provide coding. Thanks, Julie Cheney Finance Assistant City of Monticello 763-271-3205 Julie.Cheney@ci.monticello.mn.us AP@ci.monticello.mn.us CITY OF Monticello Email correspondence to and from the City of Monticello government offices is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and may be disclosed to third parties. 2021 Z WRIGHT COUNTY �iatues for Tl�(es. rs ,,-.l,l� ;t, t 10 SECOND STREET 2 N.W.ROOM 230 s VALUES AND CLASSIFICATION Sent.flarch?(1'0 c BUFFALO,MN 55313-1194 Taxes Payable Year: 2020 2021 +s a'" 763-682-7572 or 763-682-7584 Estimated Market Value: 326,000 330,000 ?Ems Homestead Exclusion: www.co.wright.mn.us Taxable Market Value: 32G,000 330.000 New Improvements: Expired Exclusions: Property ID#: R155-010-052031 Property Classification: COMM COMM Taxpayer ID Number:248203 00045668 , CITY OF MONTICELLO EDA PROPOSED TAX .S'<nrin:'�tcnlr+r_!1_0 % EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR .- Proposed Tax: 7.8220.00 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 MONTICELLO MN 55362-8831 [III--I IIIM-�tl����lt� ��l�l PROPERTY TAX STATEMENT First-half Taxes: 3,909,00 Second-half Taxes: 3,909.00 Total Taxes Due in 2020: 7,818.00 REFUN DS? $ $ $ You mm he eligible Jor one or even tivo refunds to reduce rota•property tar. Reuel the back of this statement to find out hox'to apply. Proper",Tax Taxes Payable Year: 2020 2021 Statement 1.Use this amount on Form M I PR to see if you are eligible for a homestead credit refund. File by August 15.If this box is checked.you owe delinquent taxes and are not eligible. 2.Use these amounts on Form M IPR to see if you are eligible for a special refund. Property Address: 121 BROADW AY W 3.Your property taxes before credits 7,864.00 7,818.00 MONTICELLO MN 55362 V 4-Credits that reduce your property taxes y A.Agricultural and rural land credits Property Description: t0 B.Other Credits Sect-I I Twp-12I Range-025 ORIGINAL.PLAT 5.Property tares after credits 7,864.00 7,818.00 MONTICELLO Lot-003 Block-052 F20FT OF LOT 3 ALSO LOT 4&LOT a° 6.County 2,563.65 2,557.30 u 5 EX El8FTI01NCHES OF LOT 5 BLK 52 v ^ 7.City or Town (CITY OF MONTICELLO) 2,O17.60 2,086.05 8.State General Tax 1,658.72 1,565.04 9.School District (0882) A-Voter approved levies 588.20 578.16 B.Other local levies 967.28 962.36 � 10 Special Taxing Districts A. MONTI HRA 68.55 69.09 Special Assessment Breakdown: C 11.Non-school voter approved referenda levies a` 12.Total property tax before special assessments 7,864.00 7,818.00 13.Special.Assessments on Your Property See Left for Breakdown of Special Assessments Special Assessments Totals 14.YOUR TOTAL PROPERTY TAX AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 7,864.00 7,818.00 LA�I-k a 13. yt,v3a i. W37 i<Yb S v► PAYABLE 2021 2nd HALF PAYMENT STUB PLEASE READ THE BACK OF THE STATEMENT FOR IMPORTANT INFORMATION. TO AVOID PENALTY PAY ON OR BEFORE: OCTOBER 15, 2021 Total Property Tax for 2021 $ 7,818.00 Property ID Number: R155-010-052031 � Bill Number: 20816 2nd Half Tax Amount $ 3,909.00 Zn ID Number: 248203 Penalty z� 2nd Half Total Amount Due n� Fir S;•_ MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE&MAIL TO: >zv hr WRIGH"I'COUS'IY"I':L\P:11 ER SERNTCES 10 SECO:AD STREET V'.1V.ROOM 230 ❑ ❑ tr y�y"'� BUFFALO.WN;5313.119 I CITY OF MONTICELLO EDA a % EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR If your address has changed please check this box ,. 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 and show the change on the back of this stub. MCA MONTICELLO MN 55362-8831 Z�-I No Tompt"nt unless roquestod.Yow C celed Check u your receipt-This receipt is ao44 the Check Is not honoled. ;�C �NTY o„ 2020 'slues for Taxes Payable in ,x Statement 2021L WRIGHT COUNTY Ga �, 10 SECOND STREET N.W.ROOM 230 VALUES AND CLASSIFICATION sL,jirN1arch2020 a BUFFALO,MN 5 531 3-1 194 Taxes Payable Year: 2020 2021 6i a 763 G82-7572 or 763 682-7584 Estimated Market Value: 55,300 60,000 'rsss Flontestead Exclusion: 55,300 60.000 www.co.wright.mn.us Taxable Market Value: New Improvements: Expired Exclusions: Comm COMM Property C:lassificadon: Property ID#: R155-010-052070 Taxpayer ID Number: 248203 00045668 PROPOSED TAX Sear in.\'orember 2020 CITY OF MONTICELLO EDA 1,700.00 %EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Proposed Tax: 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 MONTICELLO MN 55362-8831 'I'IIII'I'lilylllll'II'��IIII��IIII"Illlllltl'Illlll'Ill'llllll PROPERTY TAX STATEMENT First-half Taxes: 850.00 Second-half Taxes: 0.00 Total Taxes Due in 2020: �'701,700.00 REFUNDS? You nrm be ell' Bible far•one or even two r•efirnds ro reduce yorrr•Pr-opegy lar. Reatftlre hack o this.statement to find out how to Up) . 2020 2021 Property Tax Taxes Payable Year: Statement I.Use this amount on Form M IPR to see if you are eligible for a homestead credit refund. File by August 15.If this box is checked,you owe delinquent taxes and are not eligible. _ 2,Use these amounts on Form MI PR to see if you are eligible for a special refund. Property.Address: w 107 BROADWAY W d 3.Your property taxes before credits 1,6Q4.OQ 1,700.00 MONTICELLO MN 55362 V 4.Credits that reduce your property tares o A.Agricultural and rural land credits B.Other Credits Property Description: 10 1,604.00 1,700.00 Sect-I 1 Twp-121 Range-025 ORIGINAL PLAT F 5.Property taxes after credits MONTICELLO Block-052 SELY16.5OFT OF SWLY90FT OF e 490.43 525.10 LTKBLK52 — 6.County u v 386.74 42791 H 7.City or Town (CITY OF MONTICELLO) 429.64 q3].74 8.State General Tax a 9.School District (0882) 107.14 112.76 A.Voter approved levies B.Other local le,, 176.41 188.32 v r � 10.Specral Taxing Districts 1314 14.17 A. MONTI HRA Special Assessment Breakdown: c 11.Non-school voter approved referenda levies 1,604.00 1,700.00 CL 12.Total property tax before special assessments 13.Special.Assessments on Your Property See Left for Breakdown of Special Assessments Special Assessments'Iolals 00 1,700.004. 14.YOUR TOTAL PROPERTY TAX AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT'S 1,60 4t,3 0 I. 1-{-3-7 tW PLEASE READ THE BACK OF THE STATEMENT FOR IMPORTANT INFORMATION, PAYABLE 2021 2nd HALF PAYMENT STUB TO AVOID PENALTY PAY ON OR BEFORE: OCTOBER 15,2021 Total Property Tax for 2021 $ 1,700.00 � Property ID Number: R155-010-052070 �> 2nd Half Tax Amount $ 850.00 xy MP#: R155-010-052090 Penalty p C� Bill Number: 20818 z;0 ID Number: 248203 2nd Half Total Amount Due OOrrIy n MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE&MAIL TO: izu ViR1(;1f1'COUNTY•I',-VXPaYER SERI'I(TS MIME] • tom,�� 10 SECOM)STREET VA'.ROOM 23 ��C BUFF:ILO,,11N 55313-1191 �Z 2 „ a- CITY OF MONTICELLO EDA z % EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR If your address has changed please check this box .. 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 and show the change on the back of this stub. rrs v z_ MONTICELLO MN 55362-8831 No receipe se��uNfMs reyueated.Vour canceled check is your receipt.TMreceipt s void H Me check a no,honeied. .r G Tax Statement NTY WRIGHT COUNTY 2020 Values for Taxes Payable in 2021 1 10 SECOND STREET N.W.ROOM 230 a � � VALUES AND CLASSIFICATION se,v 1"t,,,•c r,2n2a a BUFFALO,MN 55 3 13-1 1 94 Taxes Payable Year: 2020 2021 dYo 763-682-7572 or 763-682-7584 Estimated Market Value: 19 .nuo 201.000 lw-rst.mn.us www.co.wri h Homestead Exclusion: $ 1 Taxable Market Value: 197,000 201.000 New Improvements: Expired Exclusions: Property ID#: R155-010-052090 Property Classification: CONIM COMM Taxpayer ID Number:248203 00045668 CITY OF MONTICELLO EDA PROPOSED TAX Seut ut Notember 2Y-'o %EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Proposed Tax: 4.166.00 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 MONTICELLO MN 55362-8831 PROPERTY TAX STATEMENT First-half Taxes: 2,082.00 J Second-half Taxes: 2,082.00 Total Taxes Due in 2020: 4,164.00 REFUNDS? ►$ $ You may he eligible for one or even two refunds to reduce your property tax. Reuel the back of this statement to find out how to apply. ZRPropertyTaX 1' Taxes Payable Year: 2020 2021 Statement L 1.Use this amount on Form M 1 PR to see if you are eligible for a homestead credit refund. - File by August 15.If this box is checked,you owe delinquent taxes and are not eligible. L 2.Use these amounts on Fonn MI PR to see if you are eligible for a special refund. Property Address: yg 101 BROADWAY W d 3.Your property taxes before credits 4,120.00 4,164.00 MONTICELLO MN 55362 t j 4.Credits that reduce your property taxes v A.Agricultural and aural land credits Property Description: B.Other Credits Sect-11 Twp-121 Range-025 ORIGINAL PLAT H 5.Property taxes after credits 4,120.00 4,164.00 MONTICELLO Lot-009 Block-052 LTS9&IOBLK52EX BEG NELY COR 6.County 1,417.27 1,429.33 OF LT10TH SLY ALG SELY LN36FT TH WLY y TO PT ON NWLY LN OF 7.City or Town (CITY OF MONTICELLO) 1,115.45 1,166.05 LT 10 36FT OF NWLY COR TH NLY TO 8.State General Tax 656.50 636.81 NWLY CDR TH ELY TO POD 9.School District (0882) A.Voter approved levies 338.29 335.72 F B.Other local levies 554.59 557.47 a 10.Special Taxing Districts Special Assessment Breakdown: a A. MONTI HRA 37.90 38.62 C 11.Non-school voter approved referenda levies a` 12.Total property tax before special assessments 4,120.00 4,164.00 13.Special Assessments on Your Property See Left for Breakdown of Special Assessments Special Assessments Totals 14.YOUR TOTAL PROPERTY TAX AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 4,120.00 4,164.00 �3 At P301. 4--3-71 oU PAYABLE 2021 2nd HALF PAYMENT STUB PLEASE READ THE BACK OF THE STATEMENT FOR IMPORTANT INFORMATION. TO AVOID PENALTY PAY ON OR BEFORE: OCTOBER 15, 2021 Property ID Number: R155-010-052090 Total Property Tax for 2021 S 4,164.00 Im MP#: R155-010-052090 2nd Half Tax Amount $ 2,082.00 mn Bill Number: 20820 Penalty Os ID Number: 248203 2nd Half Total Amount true zper�1' MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE& MAIL TO: =y 6tn zd�y `� t WRIGHT COI STY"TAXPAYER SERVICES 'A r 10 SECOND STREET'0V ROOM 230 0 tr1 3 Bi1FFALO,MN�i313-1191 CITY OF MONTICELLO EDA a EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR If your address has changed please check this box , 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 and show the change on the back of this stub. M MONTICELLO MN 55362-8831 Z__ No 10CQ D(,e l unless uquested Aber canceled check Is yout r 1pt This eC pf i9 Vo d it M,check.not honored. Al Julie Cheney From: Bullseye Property Management & Realty <mail@managebuilding.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2021 3:04 AM To: AP Subject: Lease statement for Broadway Parking Easement - COMMERCIAL - 2 as of 4/21/2021 1 Bullseye Property Management & Realty Lease statement as of 2021-04-21 City of Monticello Economic Development Authority Account #: 00405914 35 Lake St Suite 500 Big Lake, MN 55309 Date Memo Amount Balance Prior balance $60.37 2/1/2021 Common Area Maintenance $198.02 $258.39 2/11/2021 Payment ($186.61) $71.78 3/1/2021 Common Area Maintenance $198.02 $269.80 3/11/2021 Payment ($269.80) $0.00 4/1/2021 Common Area Maintenance $198.02 $198.02 4/15/2021 Payment ($198.02) $0.00 5/1/2021 Common Area Maintenance $198.02 $198.02 Balance due: $198.02 Payment is due on the 28th of the month. If payment isn't received, a one-time fee equal to 8%of recurring charges will be charged on the 29th of each month. Manage your account online: http://builseyeproperties.managebuilding.com Bullseye Property Management& Realty 763-295-6566 Buildium@bullseye411.com Stay connected with the Resident Center app 1 0 O 01 m M m M M M C --� M M M LL i O O O O O z u u U M_ N A N N O O O O N N N N w :d M � � O O .O LL Q � N W id O Q � C O O O O u y vi vi v� vi O O O O W W W W U U U O O O O w w w w c 0 0 0 0 > U U U U a N v N F4 N O cd N O V C� U Ll o O O Q' �y ,Q O O CD CD O O '0 ONO ONO ONO ONO t' ^� z M m m m o o000 o u Debbie Davidson From: noreply@merchanttransact.com Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 9:12 AM To: AP Subject: Your bill from City of Monticello, MN is ready. Attachments: 3121 INSERT.pdf City of Monticello, MN 505 Walnut St, Ste 1 Monticello, MN 55362 763.271.3228 8AMto4:30PM Account Information Account: 007256-004 Name: MONTICELLO EDA(213-46301) Service Address: 130 BROADWAY E Service Period: 2/1/2021 to 2/28/2021 (28 days) Billing Date: 3/3/2021 Due Date: 4/1/2021 Meter Reading Previous Reading Current Reading Serial Date Reading Date Reading Cons Current Charges Water:ACH CREDIT-AUTO PAY ($1.25) Water: EBILL CREDIT ($0.50) Stormwater: STORMWATER/NON-RESIDENTIAL $21.00 Total Current Charges: $19.25 Bill Summary Previous Balance: $19.25 Payments Received: $19.25 Adjustments: $0.00 Current Charges: $19.25 * Total Amount Due by:4/1/2021 $19.25 * This was the amount due at the time of billing. To view your amount due at the current time and make a payment click here. Auto payment is setup for this customer account, do not pay. 1 Debbie Davidson From: noreply@merchanttransact.com Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 9:12 AM To: AP Subject: Your bill from City of Monticello, MN is ready. Attachments: 3121 INSERT.pdf City of Monticello, MN 505 Walnut St, Ste 1 Monticello, MN 55362 763.271.3228 8AMto4:30PM Account Information Account: 007256-007 Name: MONTICELLO EDA(213-46301) Service Address: 103 PINE ST Service Period: 2/1/2021 to 2/28/2021 (28 days) Billing Date: 3/3/2021 Due Date: 4/1/2021 Meter Reading Previous Reading Current Reading Serial Date Reading Date Reading Cons Current Charges Water: $0.00 Water: CITY WATER-NON-TAXABLE $7.81 Water:ACH CREDIT-AUTO PAY ($1.25) Water: EBILL CREDIT ($0.50) Water:WATER-STATE CONNECTION FEE $0.81 Sewer: SEWER-COMMERCIAL $10.10 Stormwater: STORMWATER/NON-RESIDENTIAL $21.00 Total Current Charges: $37.97 Bill Summary Previous Balance: $37.97 Payments Received: $37.97 Adjustments: $0.00 Current Charges: $37.97 * Total Amount Due by:4/1/2021 $37.97 * This was the amount due at the time of billing. To view your amount due at the current time and make a payment click here. Auto payment is setup for this customer account, do not pay. 1 Debbie Davidson From: noreply@merchanttransact.com Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 9:12 AM To: AP Subject: Your bill from City of Monticello, MN is ready. Attachments: 3121 INSERT.pdf City of Monticello, MN 505 Walnut St, Ste 1 Monticello, MN 55362 763.271.3228 8AMto4:30PM Account Information Account: 007256-008 Name: MONTICELLO EDA(213-46301) Service Address: 112 RIVER ST W Service Period: 2/1/2021 to 2/28/2021 (28 days) Billing Date: 3/3/2021 Due Date: 4/1/2021 Meter Reading Previous Reading Current Reading Serial Date Reading Date Reading Cons 68621907 2/1/2021 43861 3/1/2021 43863 2 Current Charges Water: $0.00 Water: CITY WATER-NON-TAXABLE Consumption $0.00 Water: CITY WATER-NON-TAXABLE $7.81 Water:ACH CREDIT-AUTO PAY ($1.25) Water: EBILL CREDIT ($0.50) Water:WATER-STATE CONNECTION FEE $0.81 Sewer: SEWER-COMMERCIAL Consumption $0.00 Sewer: SEWER-COMMERCIAL $10.10 Stormwater: STORMWATER/NON-RESIDENTIAL $21.00 Total Current Charges: $37.97 Bill Summary Previous Balance: $37.97 Payments Received: $37.97 Adjustments: $0.00 Current Charges: $37.97 * Total Amount Due by:4/1/2021 $37.97 * This was the amount due at the time of billing. To view your amount due at the current time and make a payment click here. 1 Auto payment is setup for this customer account, do not pay. z Debbie Davidson From: noreply@merchanttransact.com Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 9:13 AM To: AP Subject: Your bill from City of Monticello, MN is ready. Attachments: 3121 INSERT.pdf City of Monticello, MN 505 Walnut St, Ste 1 Monticello, MN 55362 763.271.3228 8AMto4:30PM Account Information Account: 007256-012 Name: MONTICELLO EDA(213-46301) Service Address: 121 BROADWAY W Service Period: 2/1/2021 to 2/28/2021 (28 days) Billing Date: 3/3/2021 Due Date: 4/1/2021 Meter Reading Previous Reading Current Reading Serial Date Reading Date Reading Cons 38576653 2/1/2021 371008 3/1/2021 371756 748 Current Charges Water: $0.00 Water:WATER-STATE CONNECTION FEE $0.81 Water: CITY WATER-NON-TAXABLE Consumption $0.00 Water: CITY WATER-NON-TAXABLE $7.81 Water: EBILL CREDIT ($0.50) Water:ACH CREDIT-AUTO PAY ($1.25) Sewer: SEWER-COMMERCIAL Consumption $0.00 Sewer: SEWER-COMMERCIAL $10.10 Stormwater: STORMWATER/NON-RESIDENTIAL $21.00 Total Current Charges: $37.97 Bill Summary Previous Balance: $73.73 Payments Received: $69.58 Adjustments: ($4.15) Current Charges: $37.97 * Total Amount Due by:4/1/2021 $37.97 * This was the amount due at the time of billing. To view your amount due at the current time and make a payment click here. 1 Auto payment is setup for this customer account, do not pay. z \ c \ 2 � & LL U � 2 ° . � \ § \ \ \ ƒ \ & ) Id \ � & » 2 \ cd § / / @ \ \ \ § * cq / t § ) k \ - � § \ / d � 2 \ U § g ) \ S } 4 k § ) NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY Page 1 of 4 MAILING ADDRESS ACCOUNT NUMBER XCei Energy® CITYA MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEV AUTH 51 0013295413 8 ;$;12574; 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 MONTICELLO MN 55362-8831 STATEMENT NUMBER STATEMENT DATE RESPONSIBLE BY NATURE® 722934211 03/08/2021 QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR BILL? ACCOUNT BALANCE (Balance de su cuenta) See our website: xcelenergy.com Previous Balance As of 02/03 $117.26 Email us at: Customerservice@xcelenergy.com Payment Received Auto Pay 03/08 -$117.26 CR Please Call: 1-800-481-4700 Balance Forward $0.00 Hearing Impaired: 1-800-895-4949 Current Charges $125.74 Fax: 1-800-311-0050 Amount Due (Cantidad a pagar) $125.74 Orwrite us at: XCEL ENERGY PO BOX 8 EAU CLAIRE WI 54702-0008 N V tf1 PREMISES SUMMARY PREMISES NUMBER PREMISES IDENTIFIER PREMISES DESCRIPTOR CURRENT BILL 302923602 103 PINE ST EDA $43.63 303409149 112 W RIVER ST PW $82.11 Total $125.74 f . F INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR BILL } XceI Energy works hard to keep bills low and that's why we are lowering the processing fees for the credit/debit card payment option for residential customers. Beginning February 21, 2021,the fee decreases to$1.50 for residential customers, and changes to a 2.2% fee for all other customers. See xcelenergy.com/MyAccount for more details. Thank you for your payment. RETURN BOTTOM PORTION WITH YOUR PAYMENT•PLEASE DO NOT USE STAPLES,TAPE OR PAPER CLIPS Xcel Energy® ACCOUNT NUMBER DUE DATE I I I ENCLOSED 51 0013295413 8 04/02/2021 $125.74 Automated Bank Payment APRIL Your bill is paid through an automated bank payment plan. 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ------manifest line--------- 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 I"I�III" 'I' '�I'lllllll�ll�l'II�'lll�l��ll�lll�l�l'I�IIII'I��' 25 26 27 28 29 30 CITY MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEV AUTH 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 MONTICELLO MN 55362-8831 I..I�III"�'I'�'�I'IIIIIII�II�I'II�'lll�l��ll�lll�l�l'I�IIII'I��' XCEL ENERGY P.O. BOX 9477 MPLS MN 55484-9477 32 51040221 00132954138 0000001257400000012574 Page 2 of 4 MAILING ADDRESS ACCOUNT NUMBER ;$7125.74 XCel Energy® CITYA MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEV AUTH 51 0013295413 8 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 MONTICELLO MN 55362-8831 STATEMENT NUMBER STATEMENT DATE 722934211 03/08/2021 SERVICE ADDRESS: 103 PINE ST MONTICELLO,MN 55362-8564 NEXT READ DATE: 04/07/21 ELECTRICITY SERVICE DETAILS PREMISES NUMBER: 302923602 INVOICE NUMBER: 0889754482 READINGMETER i i METER 3632365-Multiplier x 40 Read Dates:02/03/21 03/07/21(32 Days) MEASURED BILLED DESCRIPTION CURRENT READING PREVIOUS READING USAGE USAGE Total Energy 21400 Actual 21396 Actual 4 160 kWh Demand Actual 0.4 kW Billable Demand 0 kW ELECTRICITY CHARGES RATE:Sm Gen Svc(Metered) DESCRIPTION USAGE UNITS RATE CHARGE Basic Service Chg $10.00 Energy Charge Winter 160 kWh $0.077570 $12.41 Fuel Cost Charge 160 kWh $0.026688 $4.27 Decoupling Adj 160 kWh $0.002849 $0.46 Affordability Chrg $1.27 Resource Adjustment $1.11 Subtotal $29.52 City Fees $5.50 Total $35.02 OTHER RECURRING CHARGES DETAILS INVOICE NUMBER: 889754452 ADDRESS: 103 PINE ST MONTICELLO,MN 55362-8564 UNIT DESCRIPTION USAGE UNITS CHARGE OTY CHARGE I' Install Number 157123 02/03/21 to 03/06/21 100 WATT HPS AREA CO OWN Auto Protective Lgt 49 kWh $7.41 1 $7.41 I L , i! ` I r VFDs CAN HELP DRIVE SAVINGS Variable frequency drives (VFDs)are used across industries to increase the efficiency of HVAC and motor-driven systems, If you're looking far ways to save money and reduce energy use, consider adding VFDs anti earn rebates from$400 to$8,000 per unit, depending on horsepower. Connect with an energy advisor al;855-839-8862 or visit xcelenergy.com/HVACR to learn more. Page 3 of g MAILING ADDRESS ACCOUNT NUMBER XCel Energy® CITY A MONTICELLO ST S ECONOMIC DEV AUTH 51 0013295413 8 ;$;125.74 1 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 MONTICELLO MN 55362-8831 STATEMENT NUMBER STATEMENT DATE 722934211 03/08/2021 OTHER RECURRING CHARGES DETAILS INVOICE NUMBER: 889754452 ADDRESS: 103 PINE ST MONTICELLO,MN 55362-8564 UNIT DESCRIPTION USAGE UNITS CHARGE OTY CHARGE Fuel Cost Charge $1.02 Resource Adjustment $0.18 Total $8.61 Premises Total $43.63 N 7 DAILY AVERAGES Last Year Temperature 18'F Electricity kWh 4.0 Electricity Cost $1.08 INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR BILL f . For a n average non-demand customer,68% of your bill refers to power plant costs, 15%to high voltage line costs,and 17%to the cost of local wires connected to your }F business. For a n average demand-billed customer,78% of your total bill refers to — power plant costs, 15%to high voltage lines,and 7%to the cost of local wires connected to your business. N O i° COOL YOUR REFRIGERATION COSTS t Upgrading to energy-efficient refrigeration equipment and systems can save energy and lower operating costs. We have rebates available on qualifying display cases,doors, IRS defrost controls for walk-in coolers and more. To get started,go to xcelenergy.comlrefrigeration to complete M the digital application for a free,vnsite energy assessment. r The assessmentwill help identify energy-saving opportunities o at your facility- For more, inforrl atiorl call an energy specialist at 855-839-8862 M � or errrdil us dt energyefficaeencyCR7xcelenergy.com. Page g of g MAILING ADDRESS ACCOUNT NUMBER XCel Energy® CITY A MONTICELLO ST S ECONOMIC DEV AUTH 51 0013295413 8 ;$;125.74 1 505 WALNUT ST STE 1 MONTICELLO MN 55362-8831 STATEMENT NUMBER STATEMENT DATE 722934211 03/08/2021 SERVICE ADDRESS: 112 W RIVER ST MONTICELLO,MN 55362-8766 DAILY ES Last Year NEXT READ DATE: 04/07/21 Temperaatureture 18°F Electricity kWh 6.0 ELECTRICITY SERVICE DETAILS Electricity Cost $3.41 PREMISES NUMBER: 303409149 INVOICE NUMBER: 0889753816 METER READING INFORMATION METER 15062258 Read Dates:02/03/21-03/07/21(32 Days) DESCRIPTION CURRENT READING PREVIOUS READING USAGE Total Energy 69174 Actual 69017 Actual 157 kWh Demand Actual 2.57 kW Billable Demand 1 kW ELECTRICITY CHARGES RATE:General Service DESCRIPTION USAGE UNITS RATE CHARGE Basic Service Chg $25.64 Energy Charge 157 kWh $0.034070 $5.35 Fuel Cost Charge 157 kWh $0.025924 $4.07 Sales True Up 157 kWh $0.001950 $0.31 Demand Charge Winter 1 kW $10.490000 $10.49 Affordability Chrg $3.60 Resource Adjustment $1.65 Subtotal $51.11 City Fees $31.00 Total $82.11 Premises Total $82.11 INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR BILL For a n average non-demand customer,68% of your bill refers to power plant costs, 15%to high voltage line costs,and 17%to the cost of local wires connected to your , business. For an average demand-billed customer,78% of your total bill refers to power plant costs, 15%to high voltage lines,and 7%to the cost of local wires connected to your business. COOL YOUR REFRIGERATION COSTS Upgrading to energy-efficient refrigeration equipment and systems can save energy and lower operating costs. We have rebates available on qualifying display cases,doors, defrost controls for walk-in coolers and more. To get started,go to xcelenergy.com/refrigeration to complete the digital application for a free,vnsite energy assessment. The assessmentwill help identify energy-saving opportunities at your facility- For more, information call an energy specialist at 855-839-8862 "i � or email us at energyefficencyCR7xcelenergy.corn, EDA: 05/12/21 4c. Consideration of Authorizing Staff to proceed with documentation to extend Lease Agreement between the City of Monticello Parks Department and the City of Monticello EDA for 349 West Broadway (JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This item is to ask the EDA to consider authorizing staff to proceed with documentation steps extending the existing Lease Agreement between the City of Monticello Parks Department and the City of Monticello EDA for property located at 349 West Broadway. The Parks Department has been using the former Fred's Gas Station as a multi-purpose arts programing craft shop and storage area since September 2018. The original lease agreement was approved for two years with the option to extend the lease for two more years. The lease is attached to the staff report. There have been no other inquiries about the property in the past 32 months. The Parks Department has been able to use the facility for arts projects and as a gathering place for artistic themed activities and expression in that time. No provisions in the Lease Agreement are proposed to be changed with the extension. As a reminder, the Parks Department is responsible for all operating and maintenance costs at the property as spelled out in the lease. These include building and system maintenance and repair costs, all utility expenses, i.e. water, sewer, garbage, heat, electrical and internet. Further, the EDA will note that item #13 of the Lease Agreement provides for EDA approval on other improvements to the building on the part of the lessee, such as exterior alterations or major repairs in the interior of the building and its systems. Storage is not allowed in the CCD zone without a CUP. Outdoor Sales & Display is a permitted accessory use subject to the specific requirements of the ordinance. Since the original term of the lease has already passed, the extension time frame would an additional 16 months, through August 31, 2022. Since late fall of 2020, the Parks Department/MontiArts has also been using two more EDA-owned properties in Block 52 on a temporary basis to provide more visibility for arts related projects. At this time, no leases are applicable for those sites as they are temporary installations without active use. Al. STAFF IMPACT: The impact of extending the lease is modest. In-house staff have been involved in the lease extension discussion and no additional staff are required to complete this task. A2. BUDGET IMPACT: The expenses related to extending the lease agreement are minimal and are budgeted in the EDA General fund. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1 EDA: 05/12/21 1. Motion to authorize staff to prepare the Lease Agreement addendum between the Parks Department and the EDA for property located at 349 West Broadway extending the term for 16 months and/or a resolution for same and presenting to the EDA for consideration at a future meeting. 2. Motion to deny authorizing staff to prepare the Lease Agreement addendum between the Parks Department and the EDA for property located at 349 West Broadway extending the term for 16 months and/or a resolution for same and presenting to the EDA for consideration at a future meeting. 3. Motion to table consideration of extending the Lease Agreement between the Parks Department and the EDA for further research and/or discussion. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1. The Parks Department is using the former vacant gas station in a creative manner for arts related activities and projects. There have not been any other private sector inquiries regarding the building since the Parks Department (Monti Arts programming) began operating at the property in September 2018. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a. Lease Agreement b. EDA Staff Report 08/08/18 2 EDA: 05/12/21 4c. Consideration of Authorizing Staff to proceed with documentation to extend Lease Agreement between the City of Monticello Parks Department and the City of Monticello EDA for 349 West Broadway (JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This item is to ask the EDA to consider authorizing staff to proceed with documentation steps extending the existing Lease Agreement between the City of Monticello Parks Department and the City of Monticello EDA for property located at 349 West Broadway. The Parks Department has been using the former Fred's Gas Station as a multi-purpose arts programing craft shop and storage area since September 2018. The original lease agreement was approved for two years with the option to extend the lease for two more years. The lease is attached to the staff report. There have been no other inquiries about the property in the past 32 months. The Parks Department has been able to use the facility for arts projects and as a gathering place for artistic themed activities and expression in that time. No provisions in the Lease Agreement are proposed to be changed with the extension. As a reminder, the Parks Department is responsible for all operating and maintenance costs at the property as spelled out in the lease. These include building and system maintenance and repair costs, all utility expenses, i.e. water, sewer, garbage, heat, electrical and internet. Further, the EDA will note that item #13 of the Lease Agreement provides for EDA approval on other improvements to the building on the part of the lessee, such as exterior alterations or major repairs in the interior of the building and its systems. Storage is not allowed in the CCD zone without a CUP. Outdoor Sales & Display is a permitted accessory use subject to the specific requirements of the ordinance. Since the original term of the lease has already passed, the extension time frame would an additional 16 months, through August 31, 2022. Since late fall of 2020, the Parks Department/MontiArts has also been using two more EDA-owned properties in Block 52 on a temporary basis to provide more visibility for arts related projects. At this time, no leases are applicable for those sites as they are temporary installations without active use. Al. STAFF IMPACT: The impact of extending the lease is modest. In-house staff have been involved in the lease extension discussion and no additional staff are required to complete this task. A2. BUDGET IMPACT: The expenses related to extending the lease agreement are minimal and are budgeted in the EDA General fund. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1 EDA: 05/12/21 1. Motion to authorize staff to prepare the Lease Agreement addendum between the Parks Department and the EDA for property located at 349 West Broadway extending the term for 16 months and/or a resolution for same and presenting to the EDA for consideration at a future meeting. 2. Motion to deny authorizing staff to prepare the Lease Agreement addendum between the Parks Department and the EDA for property located at 349 West Broadway extending the term for 16 months and/or a resolution for same and presenting to the EDA for consideration at a future meeting. 3. Motion to table consideration of extending the Lease Agreement between the Parks Department and the EDA for further research and/or discussion. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1. The Parks Department is using the former vacant gas station in a creative manner for arts related activities and projects. There have not been any other private sector inquiries regarding the building since the Parks Department (Monti Arts programming) began operating at the property in September 2018. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a. Lease Agreement b. EDA Staff Report 08/08/18 2 LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LEASE AGREEMENT("Lease")is made as of December La,2018,by and between the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority, a Minnesota public body corporate and politic("Landlord") and the City of Monticello Parks Department ("Tenant"). 1. Premises. In consideration of the rents and covenants contained herein, and subject to the terms of this Lease, Landlord hereby leases to Tenant and Tenant hereby leases from Landlord that real property which is described on the attached Exhibit A(the"Premises"). 2. Acceptance of Premises. Tenant accepts the Premises in its present "as is" condition, but subject to the terms and conditions of this Lease. 3. Term of Lease. This Lease shall be in force from September 1, 2018 through August 31, 2020, and may be terminated by the Landlord or the Tenant with 45 days' written notice. The parties agree that the Lease may be extended by one additional period of 24 months upon mutual agreement of the parties. 4. Rent. No rent shall by payable by Tenant to Landlord. 5. Quiet Enjoyment. If Tenant complies with all terms of this Lease, Tenant may use the Premises for the term of this Lease. 6. Use of Premises. The Premises shall be used and occupied only for the purpose of a multi- purpose arts programming craft shop and storage facility,in conformity with applicable ordinances and governmental regulations. 7. Right of Entry. Landlord and Landlord's agents may enter the Premises at reasonable hours to repair or inspect the Premises and perform any work that Landlord decides is necessary. 8. Assignment and Subletting by Tenant. Tenant may not assign this Lease, sublease the Premises to any other party or permit any other party to use the Premises or any part of the Premises without the prior written consent of Landlord. Any assignment or sublease without Landlord's written consent will not be effective. Any such consent by Landlord shall not be a waiver of Landlord's rights under this Section as to any subsequent similar action. If Tenant is a corporation, company, partnership or otherwise is not a natural person, and there shall occur any change in the identity of the parties who are the owners of such entity, or who have the power to participate in the management of the affairs of such entity, then Tenant shall so notify Landlord in writing, and Landlord may terminate this Lease by reason of any such event by written notice to Tenant given at any time within sixty(60) days after receipt of the notice of change in identity from Tenant. 9. Sale of Premises by Landlord. Upon any sale of the Premises, and provided the purchaser shall assume all obligations of Landlord under this Lease, Landlord shall thereupon be entirely freed of all obligations of Landlord under this Lease arising from any act, omission or event occurring after such conveyance. Upon such sale and the transfer of Landlord's interest under this 1 532501v1 Lease,Tenant agrees to recognize and attorn to such transferee, and Tenant agrees upon request to execute and deliver documentation setting forth the provisions of this Section. 10. Utilities. Tenant shall timely pay for all utilities provided to the Premises during the term of this Lease. 11. Maintenance and Repair. Tenant shall keep the Premises, including the parking area and grounds, in reasonable repair during the term of this Lease and shall maintain the Premises in compliance with applicable health and safety laws, all at Tenant's sole expense, including without limitation repair or replacement of plumbing fixtures, water heater, furnace, and garage or entry doors. 12. Real Estate Taxes and Assessments. Landlord shall pay all real estate taxes, including installments of special assessments, which become payable during the term of this Lease. 13. Alterations. Tenant shall not change the heating, electrical, plumbing, ventilation or air conditioning or make any other changes of or alterations to the Premises without the prior written consent of Landlord. Any alterations made by Tenant must comply with applicable codes and ordinances. Tenant may install its usual trade fixtures provided that they do not interfere with or damage the structural, mechanical or electrical systems of the Premises. At the expiration or termination of this Lease, Tenant shall promptly remove Tenant's trade fixtures and repair at its own expense any damage to the Premises resulting from their installation or removal. 14. Surrender of Premises. Tenant shall vacate the Premises at the expiration or termination of this Lease and all alterations, additions, improvements and fixtures (other than Tenant's trade fixtures and signs) which have been made or installed by Tenant shall remain as part of the Premises and shall be the sole property of Landlord. When Tenant vacates the Premises, Tenant shall leave the Premises in as good condition as it was when the Lease started, with the exception of reasonable wear and tear. If the Premises are not so surrendered, Tenant shall indemnify Landlord against loss, liability or expense resulting from delay by Tenant in so surrendering the Premises or failure to leave the Premises in the condition required under this Lease including,but not limited to, claims made by any succeeding tenant founded on such delay. Tenant shall surrender all keys to Landlord at the time Tenant vacates the Premises. 15. Damage to Premises. If the Premises are destroyed or damaged not due to the fault of Tenant or Tenant's guests,invitees or customers, and the Premises is unfit for use as a commercial establishment, Tenant shall not be required to pay rent for the time the Premises cannot be used. If part of the Premises cannot be used, Tenant shall only pay rent for the usable part. If the Premises are damaged or destroyed and the cost of repairing the Premises would exceed 30% of their pre-casualty value(exclusive of land),then Landlord may terminate this Lease within 30 days of the casualty by written notice to Tenant and may elect not to rebuild or repair the Premises, and the rent and other obligations of Tenant under this Lease shall be prorated up to the time of the casualty. If this Lease is not terminated pursuant to this Section, then Landlord shall proceed with reasonable diligence to repair and restore the Premises. 16. Insurance. 2 532501v1 A. Tenant shall purchase, in advance, and carry in full force and affect the following insurance: (1) "All risk" property insurance covering the full replacement value of all of Tenant's leasehold improvements, trade fixtures, inventory and personal property within or about the Premises, covering damage from any cause whatsoever; and (2) Comprehensive general public liability insurance naming both Landlord and Tenant as insureds, covering all acts of Tenant, its employees, agents, representatives and guests on or about the Premises, containing a contractual liability endorsement, in a combined single limit amount of not less than $1,000,000, and written on an "occurrence"basis. B. Landlord shall purchase, in advance, and carry in full force and effect commercial property insurance for the full insurable value of the Premises. 17. Risk of Loss: Premises Liability. Landlord shall have no liability to Tenant for any claim relating to injury to or loss of life of persons,or for any damage to,theft of or other loss of property of Tenant on the Premises, by whatever cause. All personal property kept, maintained, or stored on the Premises shall be kept, stored, or maintained at the sole risk of the Tenant. Tenant shall indemnify Landlord from and against all claims of other parties arising from or relating to injury or loss of life of persons, or damage to or loss of property, to the extent occurring in or about the Premises,or arising from Tenant's negligence or intentional misconduct. The said indemnification shall include the duty to pay all reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred by Landlord and shall survive the termination or expiration of this Lease. 18. Waiver of Claims and Subrogation. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Lease to the contrary, Landlord and Tenant hereby release one another from any and all liability or responsibility (to the other or anyone claiming through or under them by way of subrogation or otherwise) for any loss or damage covered by the insurance required by the Lease, even if such loss or damage shall have been caused by the fault or negligence of the other party, or anyone for whom such party may be responsible. 19. Condemnation. If any part of the Premises is taken or condemned for a public or quasi- public use,or any transfer made in lieu of condemnation,and a part of the Premises remains which is suitable for the use contemplated by this Lease, this Lease shall terminate only as to the part so taken and shall continue in full force as to the remaining part. The date of termination as to a part so taken shall be the date on which the condemnor takes title. The rent payable after that date shall be adjusted so that Tenant shall pay only such portion of the rent as the value of the part remaining bears to the total value of the Premises on the date of the taking. If all of the Premises is taken or condemned,or so much is taken that the use by Tenant shall be substantially impaired,Tenant may terminate this Lease by written notice to Landlord, and all obligations of Tenant shall be prorated as of the notice of termination. All compensation awarded upon any condemnation or taking shall go to Landlord. 3 532501v1 20. Default. If Tenant shall violate any covenant made by Tenant in this Lease and shall fail to comply or begin and diligently prosecute compliance within 15 days after being sent written notice of such violation by Landlord, then Landlord may, at Landlord's option, terminate this Lease by giving Tenant a written notice of termination,and in such event Tenant shall immediately vacate and surrender the Premises. A termination of this Lease by Landlord as a result of a default by Tenant shall not,however,extinguish the liability of Tenant for all rents and covenants provided for in this Lease for the balance of the term of this Lease. After any such termination,Tenant shall pay to Landlord on demand all expenses incurred by Landlord in performing any of Tenant's obligations under this Lease,re-entering or terminating the Lease,reletting the Premises,collecting sums due and payable by Tenant, and the expense of placing and keeping the Premises in good order and repair. 21. Heirs and Assigns. The terms of this Lease apply to Tenant and Landlord, and also to any heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns of Tenant or Landlord. 22. Notices. All notices, demands and requests by either party to the other shall be in writing and shall be deemed given when sent by United States Certified Mail, postage prepaid (a) if for Tenant,addressed to Tenant at the address of the Premises,or such other place as Tenant may from time to time designate by written notice to Landlord; or (b) If for Landlord, addressed to Landlord at such place as Landlord may from time to time designate by written notice to Tenant.Notices shall also be deemed given if and when delivered to the other party in person. 23. Environmental Requirements. Tenant shall comply with all laws, governmental standards and regulations applicable to Tenant or the Premises in respect to occupational health and safety, hazardous waste and substances and environmental matters. Tenant shall promptly notify Landlord of its receipt of any notice of a violation of any such law, standard or regulation. Tenant agrees to indemnify and hold Landlord harmless from all loss, costs, damage, claim and expense incurred by Landlord on account of Tenant's failure to perform the obligations of this provision. The obligations of Tenant under this provision shall survive the expiration or termination of this Lease as to any such loss,cost,damage,claim and expense attributable to or arising out of activities or misfeasance of Tenant during the term of this Lease or its extension or renewal. 24. Landlord's Disclaimer of Warranty. Landlord disclaims any warranty that the Premises are suitable for the Tenant's use. 25. Relationship of Landlord and Tenant. The Lease does not create the relationship of principal and agent or of partnership or of joint venture or of any association between Landlord and Tenant, the sole relationships between the parties hereto being that of Landlord and Tenant under this Lease. 26. Waiver. No waiver of Landlord's remedies upon the occurrence of an Event of Default shall be implied from any omission by Landlord to take any action on account of such Event of Default, and no express waiver shall affect any Event of Default other than the Event of Default specified in the express waiver and such an express waiver shall be effective only for the time and 4 532501v1 to the extent expressly stated. One or more waivers by Landlord shall not then be construed as a waiver of a subsequent Event of Default. 27. Choice of Law. The laws of Minnesota shall govern the validity, performance and enforcement of this Lease. 28. Time. Time is of the essence in the performance of all obligations under this Lease. [Remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.] 5 532501v1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Lease in the manner sufficient to bind them as of the day and year first above written. LANDLORD CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY B Its: President By: Its Exe utive Director TENANT CITY OF ONTICELLO PARKS DEPARTMENT By: Its: 17,1Z S-1 532501v1 MNI MN325-31 EXHIBIT A PREMISES The South '/2 of Lots 1, 2, and 3, in Block 50, Townsite of Monticello, according to the plat on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Wright County, Minnesota; Said South '/2 of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 50, can also be described as follows: Beginning at the mid-point on the common line between Lots 3 and 4, in said Block; thence Southerly along said common line 82.5 feet to the Southerly line of said Block (being the Southeast corner of said Lot 3); thence Westerly along the Southerly line of Lots 3, 2 and 1 for a distance of 99 feet to the Southwest corner of Lot 1; thence Northerly along the Westerly line of Lot 1 for a distance of 82.5 feet; thence straight Easterly 99 feet to the point of beginning and there terminating. Subject to existing easements, restrictions and reservations of record, if any. A-1 532501v1 MNI MN325-31 EDA: 5/12/21 5. Consideration of Duffy Development's TIF Pre-Application and Development Concept Review of 59-unit Low Income Housing Tax Credit Affordable Housing Proposal (JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Duffy Development, Minnetonka, MN, has submitted an affordable housing TIF pre- application to support development of a 53-unit apartment building and three sets of 4- bedroom duplex structures that would utilize the Section 42 (Federal) Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program as the major source of funding. Using LIHTC requires the developer to enter into a long-term contract with Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) to provide units at a set rental rate and also use household income criteria in determining occupancy eligibility. All (100 %) of the units would be rented to households with qualifying income levels. Duffy is seeking pooled TIF dollars and/or City fee waivers to fill a funding gap of approximately $500,000 for the nearly $15,250,000 investment. Although not initially preferred by the developer, another option for project financing would be the creation of a tax increment financing district. The proposed development site is at the far west end of the Riverwood Bank parcel on 7" Street West. Duffy has entered into a purchase agreement with Riverwood Bank for a 4.18- acre site. The site is located just east of Elm Street and adjacent to 1-94 which is on the south property line of the parcel. The presentation and discussion for the May 12, 2021 EDA meeting is an opportunity to review the proposal and ask questions regarding the global development concept, the development lay-out and the proposed financing structure. The EDA will also be able to learn more information about Duffy Development and similar projects that they have completed in the region. The 2020 Housing Study (completed in September 2020) identified a local demand range of 145 to 181 affordable units over the next 5 years. The most recent qualified affordable housing development was the 47-unit Rivertown Residential Suites. The EDA approved a TIF District for the project in July 2018. A Certificate of Occupancy (CO) for the building was issued in early May 2020. Under the TIF Development Contract, 10 units in this building are required to be rented to households at 50 percent of the area (Wright County) median income (ami). The 2020 Housing Study factored Rivertown in its findings, meaning the local affordable housing demand prior to it opening was between 155 to 191 units. Further supporting the demand for affordable housing were specific findings within the 2020 Housing Study: Page 32: • "Rental stress in Monticello exists almost entirely within low-income City households." • "There are significant gaps at both the top and bottom of the rental housing market, with an undersupply of. . . affordable units with rents below $800 monthly." 1 EDA: 5/12/21 Page 33: • " . . . Renters who are cost burdened are much more likely to be severely cost burdened (spending more than 50% income toward rental costs). Of those experiencing cost burdened, 73% are severely cost burdened. This rate is significantly higher than in regional peer communities." • "This also indicates a lack of appropriately priced units for the lowest income households already living in the community and indicates opportunity to better serve low-income households through income-restricted and subsidized units that ensure affordability levels not currently provided within the market." Page 35: • "In Monticello, this would be a goal to add 265 units of rental housing affordable to the lowest income earners in the community." Excerpts from the 2020 Housing Study on the rental market demand are included for more detailed review. There are currently six (6) affordable housing TIF Districts on the EDA's books (and included within the demand calculations). Of those, four are active and scheduled to receive increment payments in 2021. Three of them will receive increment beyond 2021. Two of the Districts are in an inactive status (no obligations) allowing the EDA to continue to collect pooling increment. Staff is asking the EDA to discuss and offer guidance on next steps in relation to the potential use of affordable housing TIF for the proposed project, preferably using a portion of the pooled TIF dollars. Duffy has submitted TIF pre-application materials which are attached to the staff report. A company representative plans to attend the EDA meeting to review a power point slide show and answer questions during the proposal discussion. As a pre- application review, this consideration by the EDA will not include a detailed review of the financing proposal nor a final "but-for" determination. Those TIF related discussions will be conducted at a later date if the EDA is supportive of the Duffy proposal. Duffy would have a lengthy application submittal process for the LIHTC funding through MHFA as is outlined in the written summary narrative. The deadline for applications is July 17, 2021 with awards notices expected in December 2021. If Duffy receives approval of its tax credit application, they expect to present a formal request for pooled TIF dollars and possibly a new TIF District to the EDA in the spring of 2022. Construction on the project would begin in late August or be completed in approximately 12 months. Duffy will be previewing its concept stage planned unit development proposal for comment by the City Council and Planning Commission in a joint meeting on May 10, 2021 at 4:30 p.m. Al. STAFF IMPACT: There is a limited staff impact in considering the TIF application from Duffy Development. The review and organization of the application materials that occurs during the creation of the staff report is part of in-house staff duties. 2 EDA: 5/12/21 A2. BUDGET IMPACT: This is a pre-application concept review by the EDA. There is a very modest budget impact (normal duty staff time) due to the consideration of the TIF pre- application for EDA direction on next steps. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. No motion needed for pre-application concept discussion-feedback to the developer. 2. Motion as determined by the EDA. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff will defer to the EDA in the consideration of the next steps in the Duffy Development affordable housing TIF proposal, though it is supportive of meeting the adopted 2020 Housing Study goal of providing affordable housing. Monticello's adopted 2040 Community Vision is to create a friendly and safe community which is inclusive and fosters a sense of belonging. The city has adopted a strategy for housing which includes retaining and developing a range of housing choice and opportunity. As residents move through their career paths and family status, their housing needs change. As an actively developing community, Monticello seeks to provide opportunities for a full range of"life cycle" housing options allowing them to stay and grow with our community. This is an initial pre-application and concept review by the EDA. If there is a consensus of support for Duffy's proposal that will help guide Duffy in its next steps in seeking funding through the LIHTC program. The deadline for Duffy to submit its funding request to MHFA is in mid-July 2021. LIHTC funding is very competitive and involves a long review and decision schedule. The MHFA funding award decision would occur in December 2021. If Duffy is successful in obtaining the LIHTC funding, they will continue with the TIF consideration steps with the EDA in early 2022. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a. TIF Pre-Application Submittal b. EDA TIF Guidelines c. Development Concept Plans - 59-unit Affordable Housing d. Development Proposal Summary Narrative e. 2020 Housing Study Excerpts f. TIF Model Projections—53-unit MF LIHTC g. Updated TIF District Summaries— 12-31-20 h. Joint CC and PC Workshop Staff Report prepared by NAC 3 CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TAX INCREMENT FINANCING(TIF)APPLICATION BUSINESS SUBSIDY APPLICATION BUSINESS ASSISTANCE FINANCING Legal name of applicant: Duffy Development Company,Inc. Address: 12708 Wayzata Blvd.,Suite 400,Minnetonka,MN 55305 952-544-6769 Telephone number: Jeff Von Feldt Name of contact person: REQUESTED INFORMATION Addendum shall be attached hereto addressing in detail the following: 1. A map showing the exact boundaries of proposed development. 2. Give a general description of the project including size and location of building(s); business type or use; traffic information including parking, projected vehicle counts and traffic flow; timing of the project; estimated market value following completion. 3. The existing Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use designation and zoning of the property. Include a statement as to how the proposed development will conform to the land use designation and how the property will be zoned. 4. A statement identifying how the increment assistance will be used and why it is necessary to undertake the project. 5. A statement identifying the public benefits of the proposal including estimated increase in property valuation,new jobs to be created,hourly wages and other community assets. 6. A written description of the developer's business,principals,history and past projects I understand that the application fee will be used for EDA staff and consultant costs and may be partially refundable if the request for assistance is withdrawn. Refunds will be made at the discretion of the EDA Board and be based on the costs incurred by the EDA prior to withdraw of the request for assistance. If the initial application fee is insufficient, I will be responsible for additional deposits. SIGNATURE Oil Applicant's signature: J vJ J ' vJ J• UovL' r Date: May 7,2021 1 CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Application for Tax Increment Financing(TIF)Assistance GENERAL INFORMATION: Business Name: Duffy Development Company,Inc. Date: May 7,2021 Address: 12708 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 400,Minnetonka,MN 55305 Type (Partnership, etc.): Corporation Jeff Von Feldt 952-544-6769 Authorized Representative: Phone: Description of Business: Real estate developer of affordable/workforce rental housing Legal Counsel: Faegre Drinker Biddle&Reath Address: 2200 Wells Fargo Center,90 S 7'h St.,Mpls Phone: 612-766-7000 FINANCIAL BACKGROUND: No 1. Have you ever filed for bankruptcy? No 2. Have you ever defaulted on any loan commitment? Yes 3. Have you applied for conventional financing for the project? 4. List financial references: Bridgewater Bank,Adam Benjamin,4450 Excelsior Blvd.,St.Louis Park,MN 55416 a. b. Platinum Bank,605 N.HYW 169,Plymouth,MN 55441 Minnesota Housing Finance Agency,400 Wabasha,Suite 400,St.Paul,MN 55102 C. 2 5. Have you ever used Business Assistance Financing before? If yes,what,where and when? PROJECT INFORMATION: 1. Location of Proposed Project: 2. Amount of Business Assistance requested? 3. Need for Business Assistance: 4. Present ownership of site: 5. Number of permanent jobs created as a result of project? 6. Estimated annual sales: Present: Future: 7. Market value of project following completion: 8. Anticipated start date: Completion Date: FINANCIAL INFORMATION: 1. Estimated project related costs: a. Land acquisition $ b. Site development c. Building cost d. Equipment e. Architectural/engineering fee f Legal fees g. Off-site development costs 3 2. Source of financing: a. Private financing institution $ b. Tax increment funds c. Other public funds d. Developer equity 4 PLEASE INCLUDE: 1. Preliminary financial commitment from bank. 2. Plans and drawing of project. 3. Background material of company. 4. Pro Forma analysis. 5. Financial statements. 6. Statement of property ownership or control. 7. Payment of application fee of$10,000 5 EDA-TIF Criteria CITY OF nticeflo CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TAX INCREMENT FINANCING 1. PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA 1:01 Tax increment financing proposals must meet a public purpose in addition to increasing tax base; which can include but are not limited to, the creation of livable wage jobs, removal of blight, and environmental clean up. 1:02 The EDA will utilize Tax Increment financing (TIF) to support the community's long-term economic, redevelopment, and housing goals stipulated in the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. TIF proposals will be considered under the Comprehensive Plan and City Code in effect at the time the TIF proposal is received. 1:03 The EDA shall use the following guidelines when evaluating a TIF request. A. All TIF requests shall meet the "but for"test. The "but for"test means that the project would not develop solely on private investment in the reasonable future. The developer shall provide findings for the "but for"test. B. TIF will not be provided to projects that have the financial feasibility to proceed without the benefit of the subsidy. In effect, TIF will not be provided solely to broaden a developer's profit margins on a project. C. TIF requests should create the highest feasible number of jobs on site from date of occupancy where deemed appropriate. D. For manufacturing and warehousing TIF requests, at least 90% of the jobs created must pay at least 160% of the federal minimum wage requirements for individuals over the age of 20 during the term of the assistance. In the case of a recipient with existing jobs, the EDA may determine that the wage goal is satisfied if wages are increased to at least the minimum specified in this paragraph. Annual written reports are required until termination date. Failure to meet the job and wage level goals require partial or full repayment of the assistance with interest. E. In the case of a recipient with existing jobs, the EDA may determine that the wage goal is satisfied if wages are increased by a specified amount over the federal minimum wage. Annual written reports are required until termination date. Failure to 1 EDA-TIF Criteria meet the job and wage level goals require partial or full repayment of the assistance with interest. F. TIF requests should result in a substantial increase in property value and/or property taxes. F. TIF requests should facilitate redevelopment or elimination of "substandard" or "blighted" areas where deemed appropriate. G. TIF requests should facilitate the "clean-up" of environmentally unsound property where deemed appropriate. H. TIF requests should increase housing options for area residents where deemed appropriate. 2. TIF APPROVAL CRITERIA 2:01 All new projects considered by the EDA should meet the following minimum approval criteria. However, it should not be presumed that a project meeting these criteria will automatically be approved. Meeting these criteria creates no contractual right on the part of any potential developer or the EDA. 2:02 Prior to approval by the EDA, the developer shall provide any and all applicable and required market and financial documentation, appraisals, soil boring, information provided to private lenders for the project, and other information or data as requested. 2:03 A recipient of TIF must make a commitment to continue operations at the site where the subsidy is used for at least five years after the benefit date. 2:04 The EDA may determine job creation or retention is not a goal of the subsidy. In those cases, the recipient must instead meet at least one of the following minimum requirements (in addition to all other criteria in this document other than those relating to jobs and minimum wages): A. To remove blight and encourage redevelopment in the commercial and industrial areas of the City in order to encourage high levels of property maintenance and private reinvestment in those areas; or B. The proposed subsidy must result in improvements to public infrastructure or public facilities, including without limitations, sewers, storm sewers, streets, parks, recreational facilities, and other City facilities; or C. The proposed subsidy must remove physical impediments to development of land, including without limitations poor soils, bedrock conditions, steep slopes, or similar geotechnical problems. 3. PROCEDURES 2 EDA-TIF Criteria 3:01 Meet with appropriate Staff to discuss the scope of the project, define public assistance requested, identify public participation eligibility, and other information as may be necessary. 3:02 The request shall be reviewed by Staff on a preliminary basis as to the feasibility of the project. 3:03 The project concept shall be placed on the EDA agenda for concept review. The applicant will make a presentation of the project. Staff will present its findings. 3:04 If EDA concept review is positive, Staff will provide the City Council with an informational concept review. 3:05 The City will hold all required public hearings. 3:06 The applicant will execute and submit the Preliminary Development Agreement accompanied by a deposit per approved fee schedule. 3:07 Building and site plans will be required to be submitted to the Community Development Department. 3:08 If Planning and Zoning Commission action is required, it will be necessary for the applicant, at this time, to make application to the Commission. 3:09 Staff will authorize the following steps: A. Preparation for establishment of the Tax Increment Finance District and the Tax Increment Financing Plan if required. B. Preparation of the Purchase and Development Contract or Private Redevelopment Contract(Subsidy Agreement)based upon agreed terms. 3:10 When action is required for the Tax Increment Finance District and Plan, Purchase and Development Contract or Private Redevelopment Contract, or Zoning/Ordinance; the EDA, Planning Commission and City Council shall take appropriate action such as public hearings and consideration of approvals. 3:11 Building permit will be issued after the Tax Increment Finance District and Plan is approved by the City Council, the Purchase and Development Contract or Private Redevelopment Contract is executed by the developer and EDA, and the Building Permit Fees are paid. 3:12 Generally Tax Increment Financing projects take between six to eight weeks from time of authorization to begin drafting plan and contract. History: Public Hearing and Adoption the 8 b of September 1999 Public Haring and Adoption of Amendments the 4"'day of October 2000 Public Hearing and Adoption of Amendments the 5 th of May 2004 Public Hearing and Adoption of Amendments the 31d day of May 2006 Public Hearing and Adoption the 12`b day of November 2008 3 EDA-TIF Criteria Public Hearing and Adoption the 23`d day of March 2009. 4 ■ 11■ i,iiiUNI'm iiiiiiiiiiiiiii©SO®© Q�CWW iiiG TD waiR�iiiiiiiii iSIiii� IiiiiYlYiYliilf.�if6Fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii\iY1Nu'IfiNWYIiYIfi711iiiiiGl+."IIEfe'dj9E1EiY1Y9aiiiiiiiAllillitlAiAiitltliiAiiiiiiiiliiiliiiiiiiiliiiiiiiiiiiiia ! I1471'�'I;CiIlY11111471iiiiiiiiliiiliiiiliiiiiii�ii Ii ii ii ii i-iiiiiiiiiii4^CC 119L•IWCiDa�13NLY a-iiiiiiiiiiiiilHU iiii'19 ifiiiY'i1Siiiiiiiiiiili-.iMOMMi-i--'i Iiiiiiiiiiiiii6iiiiiiiiiiR21,mm3^.SQ9111\QT'IDQ!L�'9i-iiiiiiiiiiiiP.iiaiiiiJG�TiiTii GiG\ifiiiiGjiT.ii-iiiiiiliiiliiiiiiiili- ilaiGlFii-i�a IiiEMENEEMMMECCiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii,\1�\i11ii1N1111111i1:IN,\IlI Y�\iiiiiiiliiiliiiiiiiiliillidiildiii►ii NilliiIN,1,�YliII k,1 iYiiiiiiiiliiiliiiiiiiiliid€JiiliMiionam Iii!fiii7�!ERIIE:Idt i�i iiiiiiiiifliGYY:iiiNlliiiaa3'I'&i{317ailliiiii a ii\i ■IiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiEMOWNEWYiiiiiii i - l U wwv v v �n wa psi in�a - 3 d ^0 8rc `V m 'I/ ICI I � �w TYP- O � O O H�® � ❑ rc w� � Nm Q V O _ � z Q a Q ry J � LL F- z W W ry(1) A m Q O LU „O 9 LU 1 a m ma I mrc rca aN o� mi ao I m I �a ARANEW -0000041 In I I I —ME psi ieoavT-1 oll 11 o AU M hi FEE St o _j L�E fool n/ El Tm 1 rj I Fxli XXI Y� LL LE ix] LID -- ° r� _ � 8 �p o` LL o O Ll o 1.9 L i—P all El Ix F7 o xxi PE 0 D LN El _T77=1 Lj El I L 00 IE Vl � A E I ME-MEOW ffl psi n�a - fl dId wwgrc „A" Q �o oo ° X ® AS " c ° X „��UNS gO �X X X ` O i 1 rm O _ O O o wo z r� ma a o I JI �m XF�]X D mxxxl=1 L_J z" _ � o 1 77Dz - F F_ Q CxlI1�Cx��p u❑ 0. - - - - '° ��i � LLLLLL o ermm LL a o oI FqE:l 13 m o n u m Ltl a w LL aQ u � " o u m I�LJ �m � � �s J Cx7'[T 0 r ucpi < o 7�ix L— W w J ? N C7�C���x l�� LCx7 L Ix �.C ° ° J � For I� JJ~ ° o Do o00o -� El - m [: 0 a a +v w a m ioa v ■ �e ,o a�a MMEEE ■ psi iH�a - 8 d °o tlrc ROOF ROOF x AE:- o N F ROOF S.p � G :l 10O O O r 3s i lY x J _m ROOF m rc ❑ IEl UO m w� LL El E cp =o �, �� CIIorILx LL zr o I o ITr �� ry nrx m 8 m m mm mm LL. zn o mm m �. n„ ryryo o - O W 1 _ ° 4L UmJIM o L—I 00 `❑ o �O o � 1 rocs p fA LIAO' --------------- --------------- i W OOI z i ly < 100. jyo ----------- ly ------------- LL O -------------- ----------- G� c i •O ------------ ------------ ,fnUz 1 < QO -3 1< i ------ lm , or al ------------- ----------- 1 W 6 , Ev i<n- 11 O ----------- -------- ly -In w ---------- Q ------------ Jr i -------------- Wf Ow --------- IL--- -------------- <n ----------- "I fn ------------- -3 Ha O t]ZL j ------------- W : L��i 7,7 6 V:D ------------------- !I _J -------------- LtE nfv w 1 --- IF II II L O -------------- --- --------- WO O�j ---------- il: _1M4MMMMM 11-111111 TiPF' J a aI L I ME-MENEV MEMEEF 1111111IN I I 1 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 z �lx '(I� IL ------------ LL _46i Lipwl tO KE i fn ------------- ------------ w III L .1-111 10 M IL b -------- ------ LL ------------ Z" --------- -- > -3 -------------- ------T T-, iz oto TO 12 yo: ------------ z ------------- ----------- ----------- ------------- (L (V o fo I N I m ------- LL oo Lw PI 1 0 0 J a a ■ l V �fii nfiJi 1141 HJa - i -;OH U IS u F m ==_ � ❑ I m k-i z L a ow oa U w U F - JO z w •wL_ L 11W" �, _T— J � _ Q F Oa �tF Jew pg•_� IL b m ,- ty 0 m vfi eoavf El NJ A IVIVN I — i d d d a ix as k a QO ----------- --------------- OE ------------ i r Q� I 0 OE --------------- r , ®I J, Q --,-- J fQ = Q �ro 0 0 Q� w �m e II1�� fe_ Illlilu(�Iljll -_ --_� ■■L�■1111■ ' IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII , ,_ �■ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ■ 0.6 Lai M — '° IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII MEN LU Qf TW Ul ee■ :e■ e=_■ :_■ ._■, ■■ice - y - IIIII;6i P ii� -i onnnnl_i k. ■ _■ � uaoa ■ ■ � 0 TGI III'aiil� ,,r 0 :_■, ■ E III — y IiIIi011111111 Ilil Illlllllllllllln IIII!!IIII!!III! Q Rf IIIII�III�II�I �! 0 I,ofllllllllllllllllllllllllliil'�i!!Illiillllllllllllllllllll �Q(„� I lIKIIA1,11 IIIIIIIIIIIIII El �z4, qzeo 14 1 111 111111 jIlIj ---------- 1.0 10 op L—Jr- 04m -01 dNTI 0-6 iw ills OL [ill A, Ilk\ t Ill All, rd --------------------- Iq ----------------------------- 7th Street h i a Lv -, 1� t� CA * - e4 E 110 l a _ _� �NTERSTgT m r� 1 in = 188ft Storm x Storm Fittings Manholes Storm Gravity Storm Inlets IN. Mains Catchbasin N Standard Inlet n Storm Discharge /V Points April 28, 2020 AMo nticello CiTv of Map Powered By DataLink ■ Standard Outlet wsb ` IOS3NNIW`O113O11NOW S1N3W3AOUdWl '•' 311S ONtl 133211S`Xlllllfl u,00a,wa..«.n rn 94V99 NW'aiptleauuiW NOISN31X31332115 H1L 1S3M o9e uos•uv'os a° =,Y' 0 Q< O M Y < M M N N U� Of m m W A A r Y v`Vi h 00 N ® 0.W al nI WI WI 0. . . O 2 Q c �NMMM �p F Z V w w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1SS 133 m J N w /•.. � blg KHS 33s m o� \. 9B'LS6 m m a. . o x == .LiL 6}rLse--aL . . . . . . a n /•.. o s a . . s.y. . .r . . . . 3 w S O OQ 09'L56 + wo p / m ^ H N OU /. W UZ I. . af�Lss / z N p1 Z'9£6 /g of I. . . _ 90'l56 + g ce£6 .I. . . . . .:: N3 I'. (0 Z6) - 9t ass 9'OS6 w o I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I$ S V)2 9Z'OS6 . . . . . . . . . s'9£6 I. 1 I Q xo;o . . . . . . 9S'fib6 C o O L- O LB'946 - 9 O f0'06 6z:Vu I dddttt i'gam oLU N W Z N $L $ 2 O � OL546 o . . . . . . . . n a a W I.r _ . . . . . . . . . 1 '11 69'Lb6 LU I.1. 1 �I O . . . .(0. I/ 3 _ . . . .. . . . . . . . . . � � m= 6'946 4 ) 1O 99'946 t � 1 0 rn�Nrn rce. L'OS6 m W . . . 0.'00+9Z. s. . . � Q �. i �.in.. . i 1 9' ZO II IA I . . . . Z p . . . . .I . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I z 1� S9'bb6 g I r . . . . 9'OS. a l:. I 1 q S65L�' W Fr0 /'�' 0 BS'Z 9Z'V1S ��' rco 69'£46 Q F Woo . . �. . W y o 0 0 / �. . s N m K aNT 8 /' da /8 =a W> W Q / W \ r ZL'£b6 0�w W > m N N / CC W O 9'Sb6 n Y�Q / 01 Q ZS'Z46(0•be z v3i W O .. w o 0 0 Z / N H 08'LY6� $ ~ W Q p 1009E 00'£46 �a 135 z rim�� '. Jx S�Yx Y 3oci . . Mo . . . . . . Ww Pox N / w � F N £'£b6 n i U 0 Lq . . L00-LOL ZZ.'d'V.'s ••z0 O U a . . . . . Hl 3 . . . 103f0 d N1039 . . . . u .13jlds HLL 153M Q 82 y M o �g 1S3 13S� /�y h z w ZL'Zb6 w O Q O T O O N O Z i o m oz 0 4 May 7, 2021 City of Monticello Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing(TIF)Application Addendum Duffy Development Company, Inc. is proposing the development of a 59-unit multifamily housing development in Monticello. The site, located at the southern corner of 7th Street West and Elm Street, will encompass approximately 4.0 acres and is proposed to have driveway access off of 7th Street West. The housing proposal will provide 59 units of workforce housing with rents that will serve households with incomes at or below 50%of the area median income. This housing is primarily meant to serve families, and on average,a family of four will have a household income of less than approximately$62,940. Rents are proposed to range from $875 for a one-bedroom to $1,300 for a four-bedroom home. As proposed currently,the building will have 9 one-bedroom units,24 two-bedroom units and 20 three-bedroom units. Additionally, we are proposing six 4-bedroom units in three duplexes on the south side of the site. Property amenities include an on-site playground,underground and attached parking,a community room, a fitness room, on-site management and a secured entrance. Unit amenities include a full appliance package with in-unit washer and dryer, walk-in closets and balconies/patios. The building will be constructed using the guidelines of the Enterprise Green Communities program which provides for healthy, efficient and environmentally responsible homes. The site is currently owned by Riverwood Bank, here in Monticello,and is a small portion of 20 acres they own along the freeway. The land is currently zoned B-3,Highway Business District. The zoning is described to "...provide for limited commercial and service activities..." and could have uses such as automobile dealerships or hotels. Because of the current zoning, we are requesting a change in the zoning of this parcel and asking for a Planned Unit Development under the R-4 zoning. The current zoning of B-3 does not have density requirements as it is not meant for residential housing. The R-4 zone does have a density requirement of 10—25 units per acre. In this case, with 4.0 acres, the density is proposed at approximately 15 units per acre. The existing Comprehensive Guide Plan Use is Commercial and Residential Flex which is defined as providing limited locations where commercial and residential uses may be allowed and located in close proximity to each other. The development introduces residential uses directly next to future commercial development south of 1-94. The timing of this development is as follows: July, 2021 — submittal of funding application to Minnesota Housing. The main funding source is the Housing Tax Credit program. December,2021—Minnesota Housing funding awards are announced. If funded,the development moves on to design and City approvals. If not funded,the project either waits to apply in the summer of 2022 or does not move forward at all. March—May,2022—City entitlement process. Official City review and approval of development plan and possibly TIF support. August, 2022 — Close on financing and begin construction. Approximately 12-month construction schedule. August, 2023—Construction complete and leasing begins. December, 2073—Affordability requirements expire. The zoning code allows for PUD Options for Multi-Family Buildings and we would like to suggest we can provide improved landscaping,all garage parking underground,increase use of brick and a very attractive building. Workforce and affordable housing development is a complicated and competitive process. It requires the developer to complete a very thorough application to Minnesota Housing, the State's housing finance agency. Multiple steps must be achieved before an application can be submitted and applications can only be submitted once per year. It is vital that all aspects of the application are accounted for. A City's support for the development is critical and the City has taken a helpful step. In 2017 and again in 2020, housing studies were performed by third-party consultants. The study from 2017 suggested the need for approximately 220 units of rental housing by 2021 and is states Monticello should make efforts to increase affordable rental housing inventory. The study from 2020 echoes the need for additional rental housing, especially affordable housing. One of the only ways to increase affordable housing is by the use of the Low-income Housing Tax Credit program. The program funds are awarded by score. The higher the score, the better the chance of receiving the funding. We do our best to create the most competitive housing development without promising more than we can deliver,just to score points. We are asking the City EDA to consider awarding the Pooled Tax Increment Financing funds to help fill a gap in our financing caused primarily by the restriction on allowed rent levels. Although it is very early in the process,we are asking the EDA to consider a TIF award in the amount of approximately$500,000. Not only does this fill a funding gap, it will also fill a need in the"Readiness to Proceed" scoring category. Duffy Development is a real estate development company located in the Twin Cities Metro area focusing primarily on affordable and workforce rental housing. To see more information on our past developments,please go to www.duffydevelopment.com. Duffy Development has been in existence since 1985 and has been developing affordable housing since the early 1990's. We are a long-term owner of our rental communities and continue to have an ownership interest in every one of our developed properties. John Duffy is the President and Principal owner of the company and Jeff Von Feldt serves as the Chief Executive Officer. Jeff has been with Duffy Development since the year 2000. 32 RENTAL STRESS BY I NCOM E RENTAL STRESS in Monticello exists almost rents below$800 monthly. Although there is a entirely within low-income City households. While high market gap, there is an upwards limit to there are renter households over 80%AMI that income that can realistically be spent on housing. experience cost burden, higher-income cost Many higher income households also value burdened households often have the option to affordability (spending less than 30%), so this does spend more than 30% of income toward housing not display true unit for unit demand for high cost while still maintaining the ability to cover fixed housing. It does create some additional market costs -cost burden by choice. Due to the structure tension, where some high income households of the rental market in the City, there are gaps in rent significantly below what they could afford, unit availability at appropriate price points to serve using units otherwise affordable to lower-income specific incomes in the market. households. RENTAL UNIT Overall, there is a general oversupply of low-cost MISMATCH units that serve households between 31% and 80% AMI (approx. $800- $1,300 monthly rent). These units represent natural appreciation of units within the market- they do not have subsidies that allow them to alleviate cost burden for the lowest- 0%-307.AMI 480 215 -265 income households, while also not filling demand for the highest-income users in the market. 31%-50%AMI 200 650 450 There are significant housing gaps at both the top and bottom of the rental housing market, 51%-80%AMI 405 460 55 with an undersupply of market-rate units for households earning over 80%AMI (rental housing > 81%AMI 285 45* -240 cost $1,500+) as well as affordable units with *most recent available data-does not include Monticello Crossings Source:American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 250 200 150 100 50 0 m Less than$20,000 $20,000-$34,999 $35,000-$49,999 $50,000-$74,999 >$75,000 0 Cost Burdened Severely Cost Burdened 33 RENTAL HOUSING STRESS RATES OF RENTER COST BURDEN may COST BURDENED be low in Monticello overall, but those renters RENTER HOUSEHOLDS who are cost burdened are much more likely to be severely cost burdened (spending more than 50%income toward rental costs). Of those experiencing cost burden in the City, 73% are severely cost burdened. This rate is significantly higher than in regional peer communities, 21.7 points higher than the next Monticello 174 459 72.5% closest community. Buffalo 519 420 44.7% While rates of cost burden are low overall, higher income households "renting down", as well as increased demand in the market Becker 72 38 34.5% overall increases competition for units in the moderate- and middle- market segments. Big Lake 289 29 9.1% This also indicates a lack of appropriately- St. Michael 165 159 48.6% priced units for the lowest income households already living in the community, and indicates Wright County 1,889 1,95c 50.8% opportunity to better serve low-income households through income-restricted and Source:American Community Surveys-Year Estimates subsidized units that ensure affordability levels not currently provided within the market. LEVELS OF COST BURDEN (2018) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Monticello Buffalo Becker Big Lake St.Michael Wright County ■Cost Burden(30%-50%Income Toward Rent) Severe Cost Burden(>50%Income Toward Rent) Source:HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy Rental Market 35 RENTAL UNIT CONSUMPTION WHILE UNIT CHOICE is important to the The survey also identified specific building types freedom and desirability of the local housing they would like to see within the market- and market, more options at appropriate price points in addition to amenity-rich market rate options can help guide consumers into more appropriately for renters who may choose to telecommute, priced units that ease burden at all levels. attached unit and townhome development were commonly listed as options to help fill the mid-level Comments received in the Community Survey market, whether ownership or rental. largely called out this need for housing across In looking to directly address rental costs for low- multiple price points - even when not directly income households, one method commonly used asked. While a few respondents were hesitant is to aim to add the undersu I In Monticello, this toward new development, themes largely pp y' would be a goal to add 265 units of rental housing arose that clearly identified both affordable and executive level housing options as needs affordable to the lowest-income earners in the within the community. This included a significant community (0% - 30%AMI households).This would response for increased housing support directed allow options for these households to eliminate toward households at risk of homelessness - or severely reduce their housing costs, decrease which per HUD guidance is considered severely rates of rental cost burden, and open up units cost burdened, extremely low-income renter they were occupying to other households in the households (approx. 225 of these households community or moving to the community at price- currently live in the City). points appropriate to their own income. RENTAL UNIT HOUSEHOLD OCCUPANCY Affordable at 30% 175 40 0 0 0 Affordable 31%-50% 195 85 210 105 60 Affordable 51%-80% 95 60 180 50 70 Affordable at >80% 15 15 15 0 0 100 RENTAL DEMAND - LOW ESTIMATE Within the rental market, projections are based on projected household growth, current rates of household tenure for demographics likely to be seeking rental housing, and then focused based on rates of affordability to current residents who rent within the housing market. This demand analysis indicates a slow shift from ownership to renter markets, consistent with changes in rates of tenure over the past decade. Gradual and thoughtful demand-driven outcomes will likely see more a higher percentage of rental units created in an average year than the current overall percentage of renters in the community. The low estimate for rental housing in the next 5 years assumes fewer new units than have been created in the past 5-year period, and should be treated as a baseline for unit development, not a target that should preclude development when the baseline has been met. RentalNew Construction D- - Demand from Household Growth Within the City Household Growth in Rental Demographics 329 additional households Demographic Renter Rate 37% Demand from New Construction 122 rental units Demand from Existing Resident Households Current Renters in Market 1,162 households Percent of Renters Seeking New Housing 28% Increased Demand from Existing Renters 325 rental units Renters with Preference for New Construction 20% Existing Renter Demand for New Construction 65 rental units Total Demand for New Construction Rental Units = 187 units Affordable Units 50% Mid-Level Units 40% High Market Units 10% New Affordable New Mid-Level New High Market Demand 93 units Demand 75 units Demand 19 units Additional Need for Additional Need for Additional Need for Vacancy 52 units Vacancy 32 units Vacancy 19 units Total Affordable Need 145 units Total Mid-Level Need 107 units Total High Market 38 units Need Total Unit Need = 290 units City of Monticello Housing Needs and Demand 101 RENTAL DEMAND HIGH ESTIMATE High estimates for rental demand assume continued, strong demand within the market- and matches approximately the same number of units that have been created over the past 5-year period. This suggests continued demand for development types that have been coming forward in the City, and planning for the trend to continue will allow the City to identify sites and areas through downtown and key corridors. The City can balance market demand for more rental housing with small town character through smart siting and design regulations. This estimate of demand may come to be met if growth pressures increase further than current projections indicate, and developments should be considered based on their own merits and demonstrated need on an annual basis. RentalNew Construction D- - Demand from Household Growth Within the City Household Growth in Rental Demographics 510 additional households Demographic Renter Rate 37% Demand from New Construction 189 rental units Demand from Existing Resident Households Current Renters in Market 1,162 households Percent of Renters Seeking New Housing 28% Increased Demand from Existing Renters 325 rental units Renters with Preference for New Construction 20% Existing Renter Demand for New Construction 65 rental units Total Demand for New Construction Rental Units =254 units Affordable Units 50% Mid-Level Units 40% High Market Units 10% New Affordable New Mid-Level New High Market Demand 127 units Demand 102 units Demand 25 units Additional Need for Additional Need for Additional Need for Vacancy 54 units Vacancy 34 units Vacancy 20 units Total Affordable Need 181 units Total Mid-Level Need 136 units Total High Market 45 units Need Total Unit Need = 362 units Unit Demand&Recommendations N O N M O O r lD lD N V1 r O �D vl Vl V r W M O �o �/1 V O �o C O V N ao O N 'o W 'o rYl �O r V Ol N m V V m m m M Vl Ol 7 m ao lD r al al y of LL r O N N W V m N Vi l0 to Vi m O to Vi o0 to V V m N O U i 3 Z m a0 N lD O m r O V r a m lD m N V r m V to 0o O N V 'o C N m m m v v v c �n w �D ko �o r r r rr m LL - Q N O O O O V ai Vl O M r N a) o0 ai O V O r r r 0 rn O c 00 V Dl V Dl V O l0 N ao 'V O r m O r Vl N O r Vl m N 0 Ol r d o0 V L r aD O N M L lD o0 O Ni Vl lD o0 c N m Vl r a! N V V C y !0 LL o0 �o to �o to r r, n r� r r, oo o0 oO o0 W o0 ai Oi ai Oi m Oi O O O oo O Z •a F m N 't O O O r m O oo V1 N O oo lD 7 N c) m oo r r �o to �o r r W 01 r V C w N 'D r 01 N V 'D o0 a, m vl r Dl O N 'V lD co O N V' lD W O c N M r- r- N N N N N N m m M m M 'I v v V v Ln Lr Ln Lr Ln to r 0 FV a V V vi vi vi vi vi Sri vi vi vi �n vi vi vi vi vi vi vi vi vi vi vi vi oo N C O r V V1 to Dl V O al Dl V1 O o0 co o0 to V m m r N Dl r �o O a/ c O1 O O o m O r V N O r V V N Ol ao r r o D o O D r r ao �o V y c N l0 r-I a N V lD o0 a m L r o0 O N V l0 0o O N V �D a0 c 0 1p x V M N N N N N N M m tYl m M V V V �7 V Vi Vi Vi �(i Vi lD r O r6 C V Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl vl Vl ill Vl Vl oo ~ V C O m Q C {L O E N N N Q Vl 00 00 00 00 02 Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol O) Ol Ol Ol Ol Dl 01 Dl Ol Dl O O O O O Y 0 J N LL Q N T O c = 3 NN a o N 7 o �o r V N m V m V O 7 00 V m m V 0o V N N m r m O 0o p \ d. a: y c O1 Vl 0o Vl N m to m Ol r Vl m O m 0o r �o to to to �o to r W m r N 00 N a ` y c m r Dl N V lD ao Ol M Lr r a O N V �D cD O N V lD 0o O N m O V (i tYl r- N N N N N N ro rn ro to ro V V V V V Vi Vi Vi Vi Vi l0 l0 N A HLLIof d O Z v V V C = r Y a _ » m �z/1 LL 0 V V N LL a O T 'O �+ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o II O -a O o : m y r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r rn rn rn rn rn of rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn o, rn rn rn rn rn rn a v @ a; > is ai c v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v m o = = o� a� rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn a s o �F/ L� o m 00 r H 9 m (p ii T yd. ko O v o o r o0 Vl N O m r m m r m m 0o v m 4 °i , -a / c v o r D m — o �o v m O m ao r D �o � w �o o r w m O m s ro a; = m v a eo c l v V r rn m a r c m Lr r C r v I m rn c m al O 'p = x •V Vi T V V V tY V Vi Vi �(i vi vi Vi to l0 to to to r r rl r 0o oo W oo m al E a 2 1pa ~ 1op s w a V V V a X Q C O C E m II m ~ � m m x a7 r r r n r r r n r n r r r n r r r r r r r r r n r n r c w F m P co 0o ao 0o eo 0o ao 0o eo 0o eo 0o eo 0o eo 0o eo 0o ao 0o eo 0o ao 0o eo 0o O m 0 c _0 O m 0 o vEm m s o -a N m r r O c 0 0o ao O v o ao 0o O O �a v .'^ as �o rn o � c ' V cal r m o w r �D w V V w w r rn o cal V a m m O O x r m m v w ao O l v rr c m Ln r rn m LQ r c c � 0o c L a m a �o r I, I- r r 0 w w w w w w m m m m m o 0 0 0 c . m CD �o w �o lD �o to lO to m Q v m `^ @ s m _m c � V -a O N a 0 o m V N m V m m N to Vl V m r to r 00 ID m O N m N �o m Y V _. U N m S O O o0 r to V r o0 m V V N lD r r lD V V r O ao Dl r ?� V N c:' m N t+ O 01 c� r r V W O W V W 01 W V o0 O O a0 V co O ao V Ol al +-a 7 (a .0 Y Vi 00 o0 0o Oi rvl r O �(i O to to Oi ai Oi Di rn r l6 co Vi O 'V v .'� V A .s V 1p V N a, lD V co to m co lD V o, r Vl V N O O) r �O 'V m > x rp V O m V l O O N m L D D ao O Ol O N V V V1 lD c m ' g 3 rn r- I- r- r- I- r- r- r- I- r- oo�or r r r r ro m ro ro r 0o = oo oo a6 co a6 co v Q v V �`a m u m a a X > 0 w a m e n �o r 0o a) 0 � N m v n ko r cc) a) o N m �t n �o rr cc) " a o m m T } c) O c) O c) O c) O O O c) Cl O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O m V mo > p Xm F 1p N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N - m al g o a � H O w m n. H H a N m v n �o r N F N W N m V Vl lD r ao Ol O N m V Vl lD r 00 9l O N N N N N N Y Q Z_ J W cL a N d' LL_ F 0 ar V 0 c G \ \ ® ( \ \ \ & \ \ » ° \ § ° 2 I ƒ + .r] .\. z . . ) � - \ / \ / i / / \ \ o / / f / ± § / 00 00 § � 1 r- \ _ w \_ 17 � m ° 0- ) ! .o \ } ) 20 £ / 00 z \ @ \ k \ '\ - \ 0 ` 2 § G ; m � /\ \ - U. } \ � 2 % \ y y ® m a cl ƒ\ \ L6 - - - - &0 m § 0 2 2 - % - / ) \ § 0 a � \ U � ) m m u ? 2 D2 � Qi - . 0 qj 4,5 \ /\ »/ » cj k2 / f \ / '/ �E2 2 [ gym - & a2 k \ - -o E � � CD 0 R ƒ E 2- I _ ! o = 7 � � � ° > 0 / k Kkwj /\ % W - /E Q \ - 2 ) ': - $ 4 Cd - .2 o / 2 / 9 m \ » \ [ � \ a / m e \ { o \ / , , / \ % { / / o \ \ § -0j / \ 3 : j 0 y e w 0, o / z _ -0 ( \ e e e e e e e e e e e e \ \ waiaa & AGENDA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, May 10, 2021—4:30 p.m. Monticello Community Center North Mississippi AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Duffy Development Multi-Family Concept PUD Proposal 3. Adjournment NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS,, INC, 4150 Olson Memorial Highway, Ste. 320, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 763.957.1100 Website: www.nacplanning.com MEMORANDUM TO: Angela Schumann Mayor Hilgart and Monticello City Council Monticello Planning Commission FROM: Stephen Grittman DATE: May 5, 2021 RE: Monticello — Duffy Development Multi Family Project— Concept PUD Review NAC FILE NO: 191.07 — 21.09 PLANNING CASE NO: 2021-018 PROPERTY ID: 155-226-000020 Application and Project Description. This memorandum reviews the elements of a proposed concept plan for a Planned Unit Development on the parcel bound by 7th Street to the north, Elm Street to the west, vacant commercially zoned property to the east, and I-94 to the south. The development parcel consists of approximately 4.18 acres out of a total of 20 acres, all of which is currently zoned and guided for commercial use. The property was subject to a concept review in 2020, at the time as a multi-family building and a reserved parcel for future commercial adjacent to the interstate highway. At that time, there were a number of comments relating to land use transition, and an interest in understanding the recommendations of the Housing Study as to affordability, then in progress. In addition, the Council noted that a number of multi-family projects were making their way through the land use process, resulting in an interest in understanding how supply and demand would be impacted. The comments also included concerns over the viability of the small amount of residual commercial land. The full 20 acre parcel is currently vacant. The eastern boundary of the site abuts the Runnings retail property. North of 7t" Street is a mix of medium density residential development and other vacant land zoned and guided for residential use. West of Elm, the vacant land owned by the EDA is also guided and zoned for residential use. The applicants have proposed the conversion of the westerly portion of the property to residential use. The project has been updated from the prior site plan to include the multi-family building in essentially the same location as the prior plan, but with a series of three two-unit buildings (total of six units) to add a number of 4-bedroom units to the project which take the place of the reserved commercial land from the first concept. Originally, the project would have required a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, under the prior land use designation of "Places to Shop", a commercial category. As a part of the City's adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the property has been guided as Commercial-Residential Flex, in which multi-family residential is supported, based on design and location considerations and recommended PUD designation. The property is currently zoned B-3, Highway Business District. However, the developers are asking for the parcel to be rezoned to PUD, Planned Unit Development District, utilizing the R-4, Medium-High Residence District as the baseline zoning for comparative purposes. The concept proposal comes from Duffy Development, and is designed to provide affordable "workforce" housing for families making generally less than about $62,940 (family of four). There is a sliding scale of income qualification, dependent on family size. The income limitations are set by the State of Minnesota's tax credit program, from which the applicants will seek to qualify for financing that infuses equity into the project, facilitating feasibility. The applicant's narrative describes the tax credit program, and the timing. At this stage, the applicants are seeking comments from the City, and some confidence that the City will support the plan, after which the applicants will seek the tax credits in a competitive process. In support of their tax credit application, the applicant's narrative describes three primary PUD flexibility areas for which they are seeking specific direction from the city. These areas of flexibility are: 1. Reduction in front setback 2. Reduction in parking count 3. Relaxation in minimum unit square footage size. These are discussed in more detail below. The applicants also state that the addition of the four-bedroom units are an important part of the scoring of their tax credit application. If the Commission and Council find these areas of flexibility to be acceptable, these items would be considered the same as a monetary contribution commitment by the city and will allow the applicant to score additional points in their application to MHFA. If 1 successful in procuring the credits, the applicants will return for more formal zoning approvals. The current proposed project consists of a 53-unit multi-family building, and the six two- family units noted above, a total of 59 units. The site plan shows one access point from 71" Street, extending through the site to the twin-homes, and continuing west to Elm Street. The commercial parcel has been removed from the proposal. The proposed concept is designed to include 9 one-bedroom units, 24 two-bedroom units, 20 three- bedroom units, and the six four-bedroom units in the twin-home structures. The remainder of the site consists of parking and open space. The city's zoning ordinance states a density for the R-4 district of 10-25 units per acre. With the parcel size of 4.18 acres, the residential density is approximately 14.1 units per acre. Notably, the project proposal includes underground parking below the principal multi- family building area, a design feature the City has typically required of multi-family projects. The multi-family housing project would provide 46 uncovered, on grade parking stalls, with an additional 38 stalls of parking underground. The underground parking would be accessible from an easterly entrance off 71" Street. The twin-home design provides garage parking and driveway parking areas — it is noted that the current garage design shows a single car garage, whereas the zoning ordinance, via the R-2 zoning district, would require at least a two-car garage for each unit. This should be modified as a part of subsequent plans and would be particularly important for four-bedroom units. To facilitate this layout, and to retain as much buffer land along 1-94 as possible, the applicants are seeking flexibility from the extensive setbacks that would otherwise apply to R-4 development. The typical requirements would be 100 feet for building front setbacks, and 40 feet on a corner side yard. The proposed site plan anticipates moving toward 7t" Street to a setback of approximately 50 feet. It is important to note that no parking or other hard surfaced areas would be located in this setback, consistent with the R-4 standard. For the project to proceed, there are a series of City approvals that will be required: o Preliminary and Final Plats incorporating the residential and remaining commercial parcels, and re-subdividing the property for the proposed commercial and residential uses; o Development and Final Stage Planned Unit Development o Rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development District The current proposal is for a PUD Concept Plan review, which is not a formal zoning application, but is intended to provide the applicant an opportunity to get City feedback on a potential development proposal prior to more formal zoning review and the extensive supporting materials that such reviews require. The Planning Commission and City Council will have the opportunity to review the project, ask questions of the proposer, and provide comment as to the issues and elements raised by the project. 2 Again, the applicant is also looking for specific feedback in the areas of PUD flexibility noted in their narrative. The neighboring property owners have been notified of the meeting, but it is not a formal public hearing. This memorandum provides an overview of the project and will serve as an outline for the discussion. No formal approval or denial is offered for a Concept Review. However, it is vital that Planning Commission and City Council members engage in a frank and open discussion of the project benefits and potential issues. The Concept Review process is most valuable when the applicants have the opportunity to understand how the City is likely to look at the project and the potential issues it presents. In this way, the subsequent land use and development details can be more finely tuned to address City policy elements. PUD Concept Review Criteria. The first stage consists of an informal Concept Plan review which is separate from the formal PUD application which will follow the Concept Review step. The Ordinance identifies the purpose of Planned Unit Development as follows.. (1) Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district is to provide greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and non- residential areas in order to maximize public values and achieve more creative development outcomes while remaining economically viable and marketable. This is achieved by undertaking a process that results in a development outcome exceeding that which is typically achievable through the conventional zoning district. The City reserves the right to deny the PUD rezoning and direct the developer to re-apply under the standard applicable zoning district. PUD Concept reviews are to proceed as follows.- (a) PUD Concept Proposal Prior to submitting formal development stage PUD, preliminary plat (as applicable) and rezoning applications for the proposed development, the applicant may, at its option, prepare an informal concept plan and present it to the Planning Commission and City Council at a concurrent work session, as scheduled by the Community Development Department. The purpose of the Concept Proposal is to. 1. Provide preliminary feedback on the concept plan in collaboration between the applicant, general public, Planning Commission, and City Council; 3 2. Provide a forum for public comment on the PUD prior to a requirement for extensive engineering and other plans. 3. Provide a forum to identify potential issues and benefits of the proposal which can be addressed at succeeding stages of PUD design and review. The intent of Concept Proposal review is to consider the general acceptability of the proposed land use, and identify potential issues that may guide the City's later consideration of a full PUD application. The City Council and Planning Commission meet in joint session to provide feedback to the developer, and may include an opportunity for informal public comment as they deem appropriate. Staff Preliminary Comments and Issues. For this proposal, the primary considerations evident at this point in the process include the following elements: i. Land Use. As stated above, the proposed land use is currently zoned B-3 Highway Business District, and guided "Commercial-Residential Flex". The property has long been expected to develop primarily as commercial property, given the high levels of commercial use along 7t" Street to the east, and the I- 94 exposure. Monticello's code states that B-3 property can be rezoned for multiple family residential uses if it is not in a prime commercial area. The support text for this land use category in the Comprehensive Plan states: This designation is also applied to parcels located between Interstate 94 and 7th Street West. These properties may be developed as commercial, residential, or mixed land uses under the city's PUD zoning, subject to review and approval of the City. Given that the site abuts the 1-94 corridor, the City will need to consider whether this 4.18 acre site is an important component of its commercial land inventory. If not, multiple family residential may be considered a reasonable use given the mix of other uses in the immediate area, including townhomes to the north, and other multi-residential to the northeast. In evaluating past requests for rezoning of commercial property to PUD with a higher-density residential use, the city has looked to its policy discussions held at the time of the adoption of the R-4 district, which suggest that rezoning be considered when factors such as access, surrounding land use, commercial property inventory, etc. support the conversion. While the real estate market had significantly slowed during the last several years, commercial development continued in some measure, occurring almost exclusively in more easily accessible areas. The proposed site would appear to be a reasonable candidate for non-commercial uses. City officials need to determine if they consider this property non-prime commercial area in order to be considered as a residential site. 4 As a part of this consideration, the City's new Community Vision document, and the companion Future Land Use Strategies document, both speak to the opportunities for additional multiple family housing, as well as the importance for options available to workforce families. It is noted throughout both documents that housing choice is changing, driven by both generational changes and lifestyle choices. Rental options — particularly those available to young families in transition, and those seeking proximity to walkable, mixed use areas, are important components of the City's makeup. Trends in other areas support the continued increasing demand for Monticello as well. In addition, a 2020 Housing Study adopted by the City's EDA has specifically cited and quantified the need for affordable housing. ii. Parking and Circulation. The plan relies on underground parking for a significant portion of the parking supply. The applicant has taken advantage of the site topography to locate the underground parking. Because underground parking is expensive, its inclusion in a project that will be affordable to workforce families is an important factor. In past multi-family housing proposals, the city has been consistent in looking for under-building or underground parking as a requirement supporting rezoning to R-4. The total parking provided for the multiple family portion of the project in the concept is 84 stalls, or 1.6 stalls per unit, which is less than the 2.25 required by ordinance. Flexibility from this standard is sought by the applicant in conjunction with their tax credit application. The plan proposes .87 stalls per unit uncovered. The uncovered calculation meets the maximum requirement of 1.1 spaces uncovered. One of the objectives of the R-4 district is to reduce the visual impact of large multi-family parking lots along the main access road. As noted, the applicants have located all surface parking away from the exposure from adjacent roadways. This design, coupled with the underground parking supply, mitigates the loss of setback area along 7t" Street. Building Height and Architecture. The applicants have provided preliminary details relating to building design at this stage. Staff would note that the R-4 zoning district encourages certain specific elements related to roof line, building materials, and overall design. The supplied concept drawings show a varied roof line and wall fagade facing 7t" Street. The applicant is seeking some flexibility with the roof line, as they are proposing a mix of roof slopes, between 4.12 (the dominant roof slope) and 6.12 present in the gable ends. The R-4 District specifies a minimum 5.12 5 roof slope, and as such, the PUD component would be necessary to facilitate the proposed design. The proposed building is 3 stories of residential use (just 2 stories on the lower west end), which would be expected to rise to approximately 50 feet in height over the lowest grade. On the west side of the building, the at-grade floor includes parking garage, consistent with the intent of the R-4 District standards. Building materials are illustrated in this submission and include a mixture of masonry and vinyl siding. PUD design is expected to exceed the basic district standards in exchange for the flexibility offered under the PUD process. The applicants have worked toward this aspect with a secondary roofline above the 2nd story, enhancing the design with an articulated building wall and balconies, all of which add interest and shadowing to the building. The developer is also proposing the introduction of PUD flexibility with regard to the minimum unit size for units, with some units proposed as under the 900 square foot minimum. It is noted that the building does include a number of 3 bedroom units. With regard to the twin-home units, the applicants show four bedroom units (one bedroom on the main floor, and three upstairs, with a total of 2 '/2 baths. Exterior elevations have not been provided for the twin-home structures. iv. Site Planning. A preliminary site plan is provided as a part of the PUD Concept plan. Staff notes that specific requirements for open space and extensive setback regulations apply in the R-4 District. If the applicants propose to vary from the base zoning standards, they should provide rationale that supports the variation, and note the additional amenities or elements of the site plan that balance the proposed flexibility. Civil plans are yet to be developed, and these are likely to result in modifications to the site plan as the project proceeds through PUD review. a. The zoning requirements for the setback standards need to be taken into consideration. As noted above, the applicants are hoping to utilize PUD to flex the front setback requirement but will meet the other required setbacks. The R-4 setback standards are as follows: i. 100 feet, front side ii. 40 feet, corner side iii. 40 feet, rear iv. Clear open space from ROW - 60 feet, v. Clear open space from property line - 40 feet. b. For the twin home areas, proposed setbacks from the interstate property line are shown as approximately 99 feet, including a screening berm along the highway boundary. The depth of the driveway from the private access 6 roadway is not dimensioned but should be designed to be at least 25 feet in depth to ensure adequate parking and maneuvering area. Staff would suggest that the twin-homes be shifted to the east side of the development, backing up to what is presumed to be a boundary with future commercial. This would increase distance from the freeway and provide a greater buffer. Staff would also note that townhouse-style units in greater clusters, rather than separated as twin homes, would lessen exterior wall and window exposure to freeway noise, which can have a significant impact on livability. A shift in location and consolidation of the units would result in relocating the pond area to the freeway frontage portion of the property, rather than the central "courtyard" area adjacent to the playground and main parking. This could have the effect of integrating the twin-home units into the complex, and potentially minimizing pavement areas and reducing impervious surface. V. Connectivity and Open Space. Based on the site plan and concept narrative provided by the applicant, the amount of open space was not detailed, although the plan shows open common space in the courtyard on the south side of the building. A significant amount of buffer space fromt eh interstate would also be provided with a shift of the twin home units, mitigated that exposure. Stormwater management requirements will impact usable open space. To meet the zoning standards, the applicant must propose at least 500 square feet of common open space per dwelling unit. The high amount of impervious surface (driveways, parking, sidewalks and principal buildings) appears to limit usable green space available to future residents of the project. Maximizing the utility and attractiveness of the open space on the site would be an important design consideration as the project moves forward, both as a component of residential environment and to meet the City's intended amenities requirement under a PUD option. a. Trails. As a residential project, it would be important to provide connections for residents to nearby amenities, such as schools, shopping and the downtown. 7t" Street was constructed with a pathway on the north side of the roadway, extending to Elm Street east to Minnesota Street. Residents of this development would have to cross 7t" Street, walk east, and re-cross 7t" Street. More current trail planning has incorporated a policy of sidewalk and/or pathway on both sides of major (collector and arterial) roadways. The applicant will therefore be required as part of platting to include pathway along the frontage on the south side of 7tn Street and along Elm. 7 b. Parks. The property would require platting and is therefore subject to park dedication requirements. Country Club Park is approximately '/4 mile from the site, within the 1/2 mile distance standard identified in the Park and Pathway Plan. However, it is noted that this park may have some limitations for this development due to current lack of trail connections and that it is interior to the Country Club neighborhood, vi. Landscaping and Buffering. The project will be subject to a buffer requirement between the commercial and residential properties, requiring specific additional setbacks and landscaping to screen and buffer the differing land uses. It would be expected that the development provide enhanced landscaping features as part of any PUD flexibility. vi. Civil Site Design. The City Engineer has provided a separate comment letter regarding utility, access and stormwater issues. vii. Board Review. The EDA will consider a preliminary assistance request from the developer in anticipation of the developer's tax credit application. Similar to the prior review, it is likely that the City Council will also be asked to consider a resolution of support for the requested financial assistance, as well as a letter or resolution of support for the flexibilities noted in this report. If the project is successful in its tax credit application, the EDA and City would have a series of required formal considerations and applications in relationship to the TIF District and the land use proposals. The PARC will review a future subdivision request for recommendation on park dedication requirements. Summary. As noted, the Planning Commission and City Council provide comment and feedback to the developer at the Concept Review level. City officials should identify any areas of concern that would require amendment to avoid the potential for eventual denial, as well as any elements of the concept that the City would find essential for eventual approval. Specific comment should address the following potential issues, with the notation that the applicant is looking for specific direction with regard to the Commission and Council's support of PUD flexibility for parking, unit size and front setback. Those items are listed in bold below. 1. Overall Land Use — Is the change from commercial to residential appropriate for this site. Updated Comprehensive Planning elements encourage the additional introduction of new housing styles and affordability levels to meet the increased diversity of housing demand. The current zoning code also encourages R-4 zoning in non-prime commercial areas. Further, the 2020 Housing Study makes specific findings regarding the need for affordable housing units of this type. These are highlighted in the supporting data, Exhibit H. The project proposes 8 PUD flexibility to moderate setbacks, open space, and other features such as roofline and minimum unit size for single bedroom units. 2. Density — The density is below the City's maximum R-4 threshold. 3. Site Planning — The applicant is encouraged to shift the twin-home buildings to the east and/or closer to the multi-family portion of the project to integrate those units with the other building. In addition, the applicant is encouraged to combine those units into a row-house-style townhome building, limiting external window and wall exposure to freeway sound, and increasing the building massing to be more consistent with the multi-family structure. 4. Setback— The site plan demonstrates compliance with minimum setbacks with the exception of the front setback. Again, the 50' setback proposed is moderated by parking located behind/central to the site. 5. Unit Size - The applicant proposed flexibility in the minimum unit size for its single bedroom units, below the threshold 900 square feet noted in the R-4 District. 6. Building Design and Materials —The building architecture and materials appear to be consistent with the intent of the R-4 District standards, with the consideration of a variable mix of roof slopes and enhanced materials. As noted, exterior materials and elevation drawings for the twin-home buildings have not yet been provided but would be expected to be similar to the multi-family building. 7. Parking Supply- The applicant has requested specific direction related to the proposed parking supply and configuration. For the twin homes, garages should be expanded to two cars per unit, and driveways should be designed to be 25 feet in depth to provide adequate and safe parking. 8. Landscaping, Green space & Trails— How adequately does the plan provide access to trails and open space. 9. Circulation and Access — Consider conceptual changes to the entry drives to accommodate internal emergency vehicle circulation. 10.Engineering - Per comments and recommendations. The notes listed above acknowledge that a significant amount of detail will be added as the project proceeds to a more advanced stage of review. SUPPORTING DATA A. Aerial Site Image B. Applicant Narrative C. Site Plan D. Building Elevations E. City Engineer's Comment Letter F. R-4 Zoning Standards G. 2020 Housing Report, Excerpts H. Monticello 2040 Plan, Excerpts 9 / o G ` 2 4-j \ © � ' E / 1■ � � 2 S @ � > � 2 L g M N# Se IF ST 2 m k £ ® iz- Q) QE � � 2 2 2 bz � - o b o k R R 2 U 2 2 k � ® � O 0 O o \ � kk C� — m U � / 0 O � 6 U « In Q) o E O U g / � � ® 0 � k � 0 « April 19, 2021 City of Monticello Community Development PUD—Concept Proposal Narrative Duffy Development Company, Inc. is proposing the development of a 59-unit multifamily housing development in Monticello. The site, located at the southern corner of 7t"Street West and Elm Street, will encompass approximately 4.0 acres and is proposed to have driveway access off of 7t"Street West. The housing proposal will provide 59 units of workforce housing with rents that will serve households with incomes at or below 50%of the area median income. This housing is primarily meant to serve families, and on average, a family of four will have a household income of less than approximately $62,940. Rents are proposed to range from $875 for a one-bedroom to $1,300 for a four-bedroom home. As proposed currently,the building will have 9 one-bedroom units, 24 two-bedroom units and 20 three-bedroom units. Additionally,we are proposing six 4-bedroom units in three duplexes on the south side of the site. Property amenities include an on-site playground, underground and attached parking, a community room, a fitness room, on-site management and a secured entrance. Unit amenities include a full appliance package with in-unit washer and dryer,walk-in closets and balconies/patios. The building will be constructed using the guidelines of the Enterprise Green Communities program which provides for healthy, efficient and environmentally responsible homes. The site is currently owned by Riverwood Bank, here in Monticello, and is a small portion of 20 acres they own along the freeway. The land is currently zoned B-3, Highway Business District. The zoning is described to "...provide for limited commercial and service activities..." and could have uses such as automobile dealerships or hotels. Because of the current zoning,we are requesting a change in the zoning of this parcel and asking for a Planned Unit Development under the R-4 zoning. The current zoning of B-3 does not have density requirements as it is not meant for residential housing. The R-4 zone does have a density requirement of 10—25 units per acre. In this case, with 4.0 acres,the density is proposed at approximately 15 units per acre. The timing of this development is as follows: July, 2021—submittal of funding application to Minnesota Housing. The main funding source is the Housing Tax Credit program. December, 2021—Minnesota Housing funding awards are announced. If funded,the development moves on to design and City approvals. If not funded,the project either waits to apply in the summer of 2022 or does not move forward at all. March—May, 2022—City entitlement process. Official City review and approval of development plan and possibly TIF support. August, 2022—Close on financing and begin construction. Approximately 12-month construction schedule. August, 2023—Construction complete and leasing begins. December, 2073—Affordability requirements expire. The Concept Plan is presented as a site plan and a building elevation. Regarding the flexibility requested. We would like to request flexibility to the R-4 zoning in the following ways: 1. Request a reduced front yard setback. The current requirement for front yard setback is 100 feet and we request that be reduced to 40 feet which is consistent with the R3 Multi-Family District. As a comparison,The B-3 zoning only requires a 30-foot setback. As an example, a three-story hotel could be constructed (conditional use)within 30 feet of the property line at 7tn Street West and 20 feet of the property line at Elm Street. Allowing the reduction of setback provides the ability to tuck the surface parking behind the building and creating more inviting curb appeal. 2. Request a waiver of the parking requirements. We request the City allow 1:1 parking in the covered parking garage. The code requires 1.15 covered parking stalls per unit. For a 53-unit building, it would require an additional eight covered parking stalls. In our properties,each unit receives an underground parking stall included in their rent. Our experience in this type of i housing confirms our request that no more than two stalls per unit(1 covered and 1 surface) overall,are required. 3. Request a waiver of the 900 square foot minimum. We have 9 one-bedroom units proposed in this building. The typical one-bedroom unit in our designs is closer to 750 square feet and we would ask that this be allowed in this design. A quick review of similar properties shows Monticello Crossing one-bedrooms at 761 square feet and Rivertown Residential Suites from 710 to 806 square feet. We request flexibility in the minimum per code. The zoning code allows for PUD Options for Multi-Family Buildings and we would like to suggest we can provide improved landscaping, all garage parking underground, increase use of brick and a very attractive building as you can see by the color elevation. Workforce and affordable housing development is a complicated and competitive process. It requires the developer to complete a very thorough application to Minnesota Housing,the State's housing finance agency. Multiple steps must be achieved before an application can be submitted and applications can only be submitted once per year. It is vital that all aspects of the application are accounted for. A City's support for the development is critical. If nothing else,a support resolution by the City Council goes a long way in the eyes of the State. The City has taken a helpful step. In 2017 and again in 2020, housing studies were performed by third-party consultants. The study from 2017 suggested the need for approximately 220 units of rental housing by 2021 and is states Monticello should make efforts to increase affordable rental housing inventory. The study from 2020 echoes the need for additional rental housing, especially affordable housing. One of the only ways to increase affordable housing is by the use of the Low-income Housing Tax Credit program. The program funds are awarded by score. The higher the score, the better the chance of receiving the funding. We do our best to create the most competitive housing development without promising more than we can deliver,just to score points. Other than a resolution of support noted above, we are asking the City for two other levels of support that will help with the scoring process. A. We are asking the City EDA to consider awarding the Pooled Tax Increment Financing funds to help fill a gap in our financing. Although it is very early in the process,we are asking the EDA to consider a TIF award in the amount of approximately$500,000. This will fill a need in the "Readiness to Proceed" scoring category. B. We would like to ask the City to consider the waiver of fees or the waiver of development requirements that will save costs to the overall development process. Items 1, 2 and 3 above, if approved would provide cost savings. Item 1 allows an increase in density from 13.25/acre to 14.75/acre. That, in turn, reduces the per-unit cost of all land associated expenses. Item 2 will allow the savings of eight underground parking stalls at about$25,000 per stall. This totals $200,000. Item 3 will provide construction savings of approximately 150 square feet by nine units. A Total of about 1,350 square feet. Construction costs assume approximately$75/foot. Therefore, a total savings in this category of just over$100,000. All together the proposed waivers will net savings of approximately$300,000. This, in and of itself,would be very helpful and would score 2 points in the "Other Contributions" scoring category. We would be happy to describe the financing in more detail if requested. i i i l i ■ 11■ i,iiiUNI'm iiiiiiiiiiiiiii©SO®© Q�CWW iiiG TD waiR�iiiiiiiii iSIiii� IiiiiYlYiYliilf.�if6Fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii\iY1Nu'IfiNWYIiYIfi711iiiiiGl+."IIEfe'dj9E1EiY1Y9aiiiiiiiAllillitlAiAiitltliiAiiiiiiiiliiiliiiiiiiiliiiiiiiiiiiiia ! I1471'�'I;CiIlY11111471iiiiiiiiliiiliiiiliiiiiii�ii Ii ii ii ii i-iiiiiiiiiii4^CC 119L•IWCiDa�13NLY a-iiiiiiiiiiiiilHU iiii'19 ifiiiY'i1Siiiiiiiiiiili-.iMOMMi-i--'i Iiiiiiiiiiiiii6iiiiiiiiiiR21,mm3^.SQ9111\QT'IDQ!L�'9i-iiiiiiiiiiiiP.iiaiiiiJG�TiiTii GiG\ifiiiiGjiT.ii-iiiiiiliiiliiiiiiiili- ilaiGlFii-i�a IiiEMENEEMMMECCiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii,\1�\i11ii1N1111111i1:IN,\IlI Y�\iiiiiiiliiiliiiiiiiiliillidiildiii►ii NilliiIN,1,�YliII k,1 iYiiiiiiiiliiiliiiiiiiiliid€JiiliMiionam Iii!fiii7�!ERIIE:Idt i�i iiiiiiiiifliGYY:iiiNlliiiaa3'I'&i{317ailliiiii a ii\i ■IiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiEMOWNEWYiiiiiii i - l U wwv v v �n wa psi in�a - 3 d ^0 8rc `V m 'I/ ICI I � �w TYP- O � O O H�® � ❑ rc w� � Nm Q V O _ � z Q a Q ry J � LL F- z W W ry(1) A m Q O LU „O 9 LU 1 a m ma I mrc rca aN o� mi ao I m I �a ARANEW -0000041 In I I I —ME psi ieoavT-1 oll 11 o AU M hi FEE St o _j L�E fool n/ El Tm 1 rj I Fxli XXI Y� LL LE ix] LID -- ° r� _ � 8 �p o` LL o O Ll o 1.9 L i—P all El Ix F7 o xxi PE 0 D LN El _T77=1 Lj El I L 00 IE Vl � A E I ME-MEOW ffl psi n�a - fl dId wwgrc „A" Q �o oo ° X ® AS " c ° X „��UNS gO �X X X ` O i 1 rm O _ O O o wo z r� ma a o I JI �m XF�]X D mxxxl=1 L_J z" _ � o 1 77Dz - F F_ Q CxlI1�Cx��p u❑ 0. - - - - '° ��i � LLLLLL o ermm LL a o oI FqE:l 13 m o n u m Ltl a w LL aQ u � " o u m I�LJ �m � � �s J Cx7'[T 0 r ucpi < o 7�ix L— W w J ? N C7�C���x l�� LCx7 L Ix �.C ° ° J � For I� JJ~ ° o Do o00o -� El - m [: 0 a a +v w a m ioa v ■ �e ,o a�a MMEEE ■ psi iH�a - 8 d °o tlrc ROOF ROOF x AE:- o N F ROOF S.p � G :l 10O O O r 3s i lY x J _m ROOF m rc ❑ IEl UO m w� LL El E cp =o �, �� CIIorILx LL zr o I o ITr �� ry nrx m 8 m m mm mm LL. zn o mm m �. n„ ryryo o - O W 1 _ ° 4L UmJIM o L—I 00 `❑ o �O o � 1 rocs p fA LIAO' --------------- --------------- i W OOI z i ly < 100. jyo ----------- ly ------------- LL O -------------- ----------- G� c i •O ------------ ------------ ,fnUz 1 < QO -3 1< i ------ lm , or al ------------- ----------- 1 W 6 , Ev i<n- 11 O ----------- -------- ly -In w ---------- Q ------------ Jr i -------------- Wf Ow --------- IL--- -------------- <n ----------- "I fn ------------- -3 Ha O t]ZL j ------------- W : L��i 7,7 6 V:D ------------------- !I _J -------------- LtE nfv w 1 --- IF II II L O -------------- --- --------- WO O�j ---------- il: _1M4MMMMM 11-111111 TiPF' J a aI L I ME-MENEV MEMEEF 1111111IN I I 1 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 z �lx '(I� IL ------------ LL _46i Lipwl tO KE i fn ------------- ------------ w III L .1-111 10 M IL b -------- ------ LL ------------ Z" --------- -- > -3 -------------- ------T T-, iz oto TO 12 yo: ------------ z ------------- ----------- ----------- ------------- (L (V o fo I N I m ------- LL oo Lw PI 1 0 0 J a a ■ l V �fii nfiJi 1141 HJa - i -;OH U IS u F m ==_ � ❑ I m k-i z L a ow oa U w U F - JO z w •wL_ L 11W" �, _T— J � _ Q F Oa �tF Jew pg•_� IL b m ,- ty 0 m vfi eoavf El NJ A IVIVN I — i d d d a ix as k a QO ----------- --------------- OE ------------ i r Q� I 0 OE --------------- r , ®I J, Q --,-- J fQ = Q �ro 0 0 Q� w �m e II1�� fe_ Illlilu(�Iljll -_ --_� ■■L�■1111■ ' IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII , ,_ �■ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ■ 0.6 Lai M — '° IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII MEN LU Qf TW Ul ee■ :e■ e=_■ :_■ ._■, ■■ice - y - IIIII;6i P ii� -i onnnnl_i k. ■ _■ � uaoa ■ ■ � 0 TGI III'aiil� ,,r 0 :_■, ■ E III — y IiIIi011111111 Ilil Illlllllllllllln IIII!!IIII!!III! Q Rf IIIII�III�II�I �! 0 I,ofllllllllllllllllllllllllliil'�i!!Illiillllllllllllllllllll �Q(„� N c � � U O � - Q = N Q � O �; U Q O > a � � o � Q O U � � � O � O � V L � O - -- N O� •V) Q •� � Q ° U _ � o °o V, a� N -C O �- "' O � LO Q � O ry 4� Lo w ED o O (D) .c c V-) 0 E V) D U Uo � F � Q 4� � U > O O O Q � U � J -0 c /) 4 11 M ,rr Jr 1 • r �t uu z U / O ; 000-0011000.0�, Cc rX �- rd O P4 O O r� r e M_.J `L J J -44 wit : ► —r �r —cr TE iii A AN a � f ;yam l • • c • K f_ Cd -110-1 0 Ln • = q. a i • I ,I,ni11•'� a HIM n Ij ; e ' J it I 1� a �- R ow r, :a r~ A* q� ter' s -� � .. .. NIA .. B i n■ a. ox \ Y■ a■ .■ e■ e. s■ • .. .. .. .. .. .. 5E■ Ee■ � � pt IV- EE■ EE■ aw oa Q O E O Q _ N Q _V) 4 _N °o E O O °o O o O Q ° -0 0co p N m °° O m O O v 0 U C>1 o 1 pQ Q LO N N -O Q -Q L� 1 O �o N -F— 00 V) } } V) V _ _ Q .> > > O Q k O Q o Q Q Q O D- O � L o LO � o LO O N N U CDc? co - b i Q E E o E 0 0 0 0 o o O a 0 O 0 m 0 m m 0 m Q O Q) °QL 0 3 ° O n 1 W N N O N cM Np Q O O N N N O O O N U E o Q U � O O U `r' N U ~ U.� O O — QO C cn p -I--- c Q UNu O LL 7C) (1) > U O n N _ L Q � O N U � m Q, U O U 1 O O W O CoN O W O O N O � O O a-� V1 V1 to O M M M O &D O O O O rl 00 N 00 O M 111 O Oct M N t0 m C M t0 r j Ql Q O .--4 M w Q1 � � 1-1 O M" 1--1 1--1 eM p tD C' Ln zl" m V1 M M .--4 to Vl M E r-1 r-1 t!1 M .--1 V1 Q .--� e-4 r4 rl l� V1 IL! i!} ih i!) A/l A^ th iA VIF Vl Ul iA i+ L � � C a a a� c c L fC C = V O u Q 3 m vuw `n o a� .°�' tic a }1 Ql N C L W N rL W c 0 61 y c x IAC L C C � GJ aN+ N N W 41 i N 7 C v d Cu O d L LL Q V O WC O LL O m r U W N C d> 'O Uw OC N L C. dO a W C 0 .� � c N +� N C E m o Y c M w a E E Q c `a J = Q. U O LL U 0 c Q J V' W d 0 41 0 > O EDA: 05/12/21 6. Consideration of EDA Recommendation to City Council regarding participating in Wright County Economic Development Authority (EDA) (JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The EDA is being asked to consider providing a recommendation to the City Council regarding the City's option of participating in the Wright County Economic Development Authority (EDA). Wright County recently established an EDA with the primary purpose of facilitating and guiding the redevelopment of County owned properties. The County EDA will also be able to partner with local cities and townships to support broader economic development efforts and specific projects as requested or needed. If a City chooses to not participate in the County EDA, it can not ask for additional help for a general effort or a specific project. In its information flyer, Wright County indicated that it does not intend to utilize the statutory EDA tax levy as a funding source at the current time. It has stated that it will use its general property tax funding resources and seek grant opportunities, as appropriate, to support the activities of its EDA. If the City chooses to participate in the County EDA, there are provisions in state statute that allow the City to withdraw from it in periodic time frames (5-year review). If the County EDA chooses to levy a property tax in the future, the City retains the option to immediately opt out of the EDA prior to the final approval of the levy. Staff is asking the EDA Commissioners to discuss the opt in and offer a recommendation to the City Council for consideration at the regular May 24, 2021 meeting. The resolution (prepared by the County) that will be considered as part of the City decision process is also attached to this report. Al. STAFF IMPACT: The impact of reviewing the Wright County EDA information and presenting it to the EDA is minimal. The EDA attorney was consulted to ensure that the EDA has accurate information regarding any potential conflicts between the County EDA and the City EDA. A2: BUDGET IMPACT: There is expected to be a modest cost related to consulting with the EDA attorney regarding the review of the state statutes and any potential conflicts between the County EDA and the City EDA. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to recommend opting into (participating in) the Wright County EDA for a period of five years with subsequent review at the conclusion of that time frame. 2. Motion to recommend opting out (not participating in) of the Wright County EDA. 1 EDA: 05/12/21 3. Motion to table consideration of recommending that the City Council opt into (participate in) the Wright County EDA for further research and/or discussion. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1. The Wright County EDA does not intend to levy a property tax and will mainly focus on facilitating redevelopment of County owned facilities and property. With this understanding, there should not be any conflicts with the City of Monticello EDA's mission. Wright County's EDA may also provide additional broader support for local economic development efforts and specific projects which may be beneficial to the City and City EDA. Staff has consulted with the EDA's attorney, who concurs with the information in this report. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a. Letter regarding Wright County EDA formation and invitation to Opt In b. Wright County EDA fact sheet c. Resolution form (provided by Wright County) for City Council consideration 2 dN'0JhPqk April 12, 2021 witRachel Leonard City Administrator City of Monticello WRIGHT COUNTY 505 Walnut St Economic Monticello, MN 55362 Development Authority Board Members Dear Rachel Leonard, Darek vetsch,President In November 2020,the Wright County Board established the Wright County Christine Husom,vice-President Economic Development Authority(EDA). Under state law,county EDAs may Mark Daleiden,Board Member operate only in cities and townships that have adopted resolutions electing to Mary wetter,Board Member participate in the EDA. The attached factsheet provides information on what the Michael Koczmarek,Board Member Teri lachermeler,Board Member Wright County EDA is,what it expects to do and not do,and what local participation Phil Kern,Board Member means. Information is also available online: www.co.wright.mn.us/1012/Economic- Lee Kelly,Executive Director Development-Authority 10 2nd St.NW,Room 235 The EDA is requesting that each city and township in Wright County elect to Buffalo,MN 55313 participate but understands that some entities may not see a need for development activities and resources in their communities. Ph:(763) 682-7378 Fax:(763) 682-6178 The EDA has prepared the attached sample resolution that your governing body can www.co.wright.mn.us edit and consider for adoption. If your entity elects to opt into the EDA's area of operation,please send the fully executed resolution to the contact below. If your entity decides to opt out of the EDA's area of operation,please notify the contact below: Elizabeth Karels Wright County Project Administrator Direct: (763)684-8604 Elizabeth.Karels@co.wright.mn.us EDA board members and staff are available to attend city council and township board meetings upon request for additional discussion. Please reach out to Elizabeth Karels to schedule. The EDA would appreciate receiving notice of all city and township participation decisions no later than June 30,2021. Sincerely, The Wright County Economic Development Authority An Equal Opportunity Employer 01da ',a 1 WR1GHT COUNTY &Air ECONWIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY What is the Wright County Economic Development Authority? The Wright County Economic Development Authority (EDA) is a local authority, a subdivision of Wright County with the primary objective of shepherding economic growth within Wright County. The EDA operates under the authority of Minnesota Statutes,Sections 469.090 through 469.1082. How was the EDA established? The formation of the EDA was recommended by an Advisory Committee which included city and township representatives. The committee met in August and October 2020 and provided a report in November 2020. In November 2020, The Wright County Board passed a resolution establishing the Wright County EDA. What will the EDA do? Facilitate and guide redevelopment of county owned properties. County EDAs have much more legal authority to pursue the repurposing of public assets than do counties themselves. The EDA will facilitate and guide the redevelopment of the current Government Center and Health & Human Services Building located in Buffalo. These two properties are anticipated to be vacated by Wright County staff at the end of 2021. Partner with local communities. The EDA will partner with local cities and townships as well as the Wright County Economic Development Partnership (WCEDP) and support their efforts to achieve specific projects and advance broader initiatives. Access state and federal resources. The EDA will seek to access state and federal resources that are available mainly to larger public development agencies. EDA Board Members & Staff Dorek Vetsch, President Christine Husom,Vice-President Mark Daleiden, Board Member Ph: (763) 682-7687 Ph: (763) 682-7697 Ph: (763) 682-7686 Darek.Vetsch@co.wrighi.mn.us Christine.Husom@co.wright.mn.us Mark.Daleiden@co.wright.mn.us Mary Wetter, Board Member Michael Kaczmarek, Board Member Teri lachermeier, Board Member Ph: (763) 682-7696 Ph: (763) 682-7685 Ph: (763) 464-4732 Mary.Wetter@co.wright.mn.us Mike.Kaczmorek@co.wrighi.mn.us tori.lachermeier@ci.buffalo.mn.us Phil Kern, Board Member lee Kelly, Executive Director Elizabeth Korels, Project Administrator Ph: (763) 972-0565 Ph: (763) 682-7377 Ph: (763) 684-8604 pkern@delano.mn.us Lee.Kelly@co.wright.mn.us Elizabeth.karels@co.wright.mn.us What will the EDA NOT do? The EDA does not intend to enact its own levy. In establishing the EDA, the Wright County Board was clear that it has no intent for the EDA to levy its own dedicated property tax. EDA activities will be funded with Wright County resources. The EDA will be limited to economic development. Although some county EDAs also exercise powers available to housing and redevelopment authorities (HRAs), the Wright County EDA's powers are limited to economic development. The EDA does not intend to lead any development projects except for the development of county owned properties. With its focus on partnering with local communities and the WCEDP to achieve their objectives, the EDA does not expect to lead any projects other than the redevelopment of the Government Center and Health and Human Services Building. The EDA's role will be to augment the resources that other entities are bringing to advance projects throughout Wright County. What does local participation mean? Under state law,county EDAs may operate only in cities and townships that have adopted resolutions electing to participate in the EDA. Opting into the EDA If a city or township chooses to opt into the EDA's area of operation, the entity will be included in the EDA's area of operation. Opting in does not impose any obligation, financial or otherwise on the participating city or township. Opting in allows the participating city or township to take advantage of tools offered by the EDA,which may include tax increment financing (TIF), tax abatement,business loan programs and grant programs. Every five years,cities and townships having opted into the EDA may elect to withdraw, per Minnesota Statute, Section 469.1082 Subdivision 5. Opting out of the EDA If a city or township chooses to opt out of the EDA's area of operation,the EDA is not allowed to assist any development project in that community, even if requested by the city or township. Future EDA levies If the EDA ever decides to levy an EDA tax, all participating entities will have the option to withdraw from the EDA and not be subject to the EDA levy. Updated March 12,2021 [CITY OF ,MINNESOTA] [TOWN OF ,MINNESOTA] RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OPTING TO PARTICIPATE IN THE WRIGHT COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the [City of Minnesota] [the Town of Minnesota] (the "Municipality") is located within Wright County,Minnesota(the"County"); and WHEREAS,pursuant to a resolution adopted by the Board of Commissioners of the County on November 24,2020, the County established the Wright County Economic Development Authority(the "EDA") in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 through 469.1082,as amended(the"EDA Act"); and WHEREAS, Section 469.1082, subdivision 5 of the EDA Act provides that the area of operation of the EDA shall include all cities and townships within the County that have adopted resolutions electing to participate in the EDA; and WHEREAS,the governing body of the Municipality has determined that it is in the best interests of the Municipality to elect to participate in the EDA; and WHEREAS, the Municipality may make an election to withdraw from participation in the EDA every fifth year following the adoption of the resolution electing to participate, all in accordance with the terms of Section 469,1082, subdivision 5 of the EDA Act; and WHEREAS,notwithstanding Section 469,1082,subdivision 5,if the EDA enacts an EDA levy,the EDA will notify the Municipality of the enactment of such levy and the Municipality shall have the opportunity to withdraw its participation in the EDA prior to the levy going into effect; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the [City Council of the City of , Minnesota] [Board of Supervisors of the Town of ,Minnesota]as follows: 1. The Municipality hereby elects to participate in the EDA. 2. The election to participate in the EDA shall take effect on the date of adoption of this approval and may only be withdrawn in accordance with Section 469.1082, subdivision 5 of the EDA Act. Adopted by the[City Council of the City of ,Minnesota] [Board of Supervisors of the Town of Minnesota] on this day of ,20_ [Mayor] [Chair] ATTEST: [City Clerk] [Town Clerk] WR140-15(JAE) 705533v1 EDA: 05/12/21 7. Consideration of Expanding Facade Improvement Program Target Area (JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Staff recently received an inquiry from a property owner in Block 36 asking if the Facade Improvement Grant Program (FIGP) funding could be made available to help improve their building fagade and make it more conducive to potential retail tenants. The EDA is asked to discuss this prospective adjustment which would be a policy change from the current exclusive focus on Block 35 as a pilot project area. As a reminder, the EDA established the FIGP at its August 8, 2018 meeting and allocated a budget of$200,000 for projects solely in Block 35. The program was structured as a $50,000 grant with a required minimum 5 percent owner contribution. The grant guidelines require projects to be completed within a six-month time frame. The EDA then added another $50,000 to the program in a special meeting on May 29, 2019 in order to provide sufficient funding for expected applications over the ensuing months. Since that time, one property owner, Jill Agosto, 142 West Broadway, received a $50,000 grant and completed a fagade improvement project. The project started in September 2020 and was completed in mid-December 2020. The total investment into the property was $103,000 +/-. Also, on May 29, 2019, the EDA approved a $100,000 grant to Cornerstone Cafe (two front facades). After the restaurant owners informed staff in the fall of 2019 that they would not be able to fund the full private sector portion of the project, the EDA took action to terminate the grant agreement on April 8, 2020. While there have been recent brief discussions with other property owners in Block 35, no additional applications have been received as of this date. Staff have made follow-up calls to Block 35 owners and early in 2021 sent letters reminding them of the program's availability. Staff provided the FIGP Guidelines to the property owner in Block 36 for review and specifically informed them about the architectural rendering step and review process and the required five percent equity funding match. The property owner responded back to staff that they understood the requirements of the grant program and remain interested in participating if available. Some factors for consideration in any discussion of expanding the fagade improvement target area would include the following: 1. Current program budget within the context of overall available resources 2. Geographic area in relation to Small Area Study goals and the approved target block 3. Potential impact on the Small Area Study goals and the downtown core area 4. Timeline of the overall program 1 EDA: 05/12/21 Notable points in support of expanding the boundary are that Block 36 is not envisioned as, nor has the EDA discussed it as a primary "redevelopment" focus area. Also, the Downtown Small Area Plan suggests that the City shift the "center" of Downtown to the Walnut and Broadway area. In addition, the Downtown Small Area Plan suggests that the success of the downtown relies on a mix of small, medium and large investments. Staff is asking the EDA Commissioners to discuss potential changes to the FIGP geographic boundary and provide feedback and/or direction to staff on next steps. These steps may include further research and/or discussion or consideration of action items at a future meeting. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: No action; discussion only. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no staff recommendation at this time as this item is primarily for discussion and feedback regarding next steps related to potential changes to the FIGP and/or the target area. Staff reports regarding the establishment of the FIGP and funding allocation are included as supporting data. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a. FIGP Guidelines b. August 8, 2018 EDA Staff Report - Establishing the FIGP c. December 12, 2018 EDA Workshop Staff Report Regarding FIGP d. May 29, 2019 EDA Staff Report Allocating Additional Funding for FIGP 2 I T 1' (_ ) F ._,Mon Ice o MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DOWNTOWN FACADE IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM GUIDELINES POLICY PURPOSE The City of Monticello Economic Development Authority ("EDA") recognizes the need to encourage investment in commercial and retail buildings in the Downtown area in order to maintain the economic viability of the City and the Downtown/Central Community District. The purpose of this grant program is to support a visually and financially appealing Downtown and greater Monticello community by providing grants to improve the facade of existing Downtown commercial and retail buildings. ELIGIBLE BUSINESSES Commercial property located within the geographic area illustrated in Exhibit A of these guidelines may be eligible for a Downtown Facade Improvement Grant("Grant") as further defined herein. It is the goal of the EDA that 70%of the buildings within the eligible area complete improvements to their properties. The EDA has allocated a maximum of$200,000 for the initial Grant program. This is a pilot program, and additional areas and allocations will be considered at a future date. GRANT FUND TERMS & CONDITIONS Grant Structure &Amount Individual grants may be made in an amount ranging from$5,000-$50,000. The Grantee must provide at least 5%of the project cost in cash. The Grantee percentage shall be used as the project down-payment, as may be required. Eligibility Requirements Tenants and property owners should discuss the grant program to determine responsibilities and commitment for application and its components. The owner of the property must be a co- signatory to the application and Grant agreement. The property owner must carry current property insurance both at the time of application and through completion of approved Grant improvements. 1 I Page Property taxes on the subject site must be current for the duration of the Grant. Applicants are not eligible to receive funding if the property to be rehabilitated is in default under a property mortgage, contract for deed or comparable obligation. An applicant/property owner is ineligible to receive assistance if currently involved in bankruptcy proceedings. Applicants may apply for only one Grant per building. Concurrent Grants &Loans The concurrent use of different EDA grant or loan programs by any one borrower or for any one project is permitted. Business subsidy agreements may be required. Permitted Grant Uses Exterior renovation of front and corner side facades of principal use retail or commercial buildings. An architectural rendering supplied and paid for by the EDA is required for use in determining final scope of work in consultation with the applicant and the applicant's selected contractor for any project. The cost of the rendering is a service of the EDA and shall not be included in the Grant amount. Architectural renderings will be considered for preparation after initial letter of interest by an applicant. Facade renovation may include,but is not limited to:windows, doors, siding,brick, stucco, masonry, painting, steps, cornices, parapets, shutters, dormers, signage, awnings, and structural roof components and such improvements shall be guided by the architectural rendering- Interior side renovation proposals may be considered on a case-by-case basis. The applicant will work with a contractor to define final selected improvements using the architectural rendering as a guide. The architectural rendering with final selected improvements must be reviewed and approved by the EDA and will be included in final Grant documentation. The improvements must be completed in substantial conformity to the approved architectural rendering. The cost of the building permit for the approved Grant project will be included in the final Grant amount. CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENTS CODE COMPLIANCE As applicable,buildings for which public funds will be used within this program are to be brought into conformity with city ordinances and state building codes in effect for the area in which the building is located. It is the intent of the Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Program to comply with the City's building standards for the Downtown/Central Community 2 1 P a g e District(CCD).Please refer to the City's Downtown Small Area Plan and zoning ordinance for complete details as it relates to the standards governing this program's design guidelines. TIMING OF PROJECT EXPENSES No project may commence until the EDA has approved the Grant application and the Grant agreement. Any costs incurred prior to execution of the Grant agreement are not eligible expenditures. No building construction may commence until the required city permits are secured. Grant disbursements shall be as provided for within the Grant agreement and shall be made directly to the grantee/owner's contractor. The Grant agreement shall reference final contracts for improvements. COMMUNICATION Success of the project depends on the completeness of applications and good communication between all parties. Applicants should feel free to reach out to EDA staff with any questions at any time. PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR APPLICATION AND APPROVAL The applicant shall meet with city staff to obtain information about the Grant program, discuss the project, and obtain application forms. The applicant shall complete and submit a letter of interest to the EDA. After review, the EDA will consider authorization of the facade rendering by the EDA's architectural consultant. Once the architect and applicant have completed the rendering process, the applicant must submit a formal application to the EDA for review. Applications will be received and reviewed on a first-come,first-served basis from the time of submission of a complete application. An inspection of the building may be required. The EDA is a governmental entity and as such must provide public access to public data it receives.Data deemed by Applicant to be nonpublic data under State law should be so designated or marked by Applicant. See Minnesota Statutes, Section 13.591, Subd. 1 and 2. The formal grant application will be reviewed by EDA staff to determine if it conforms to all city policies and ordinances, and will be presented to the EDA for formal approval, as follows: 1. Staff will complete a preliminary application review and may consult with the EDA's Financial Advisor and/or EDA Attorney in preparing a report for EDA consideration. 2. Staff will evaluate the project application in terms of the following: 3 1 P a g e a. Project Design-Evaluation of project design will include review of proposed activities,project construction and renovation plans including architectural rendering and final building elevations detailing selected improvements,time lines and capacity to implement the project. b. Financial Feasibility-Availability of funds, private investment, financial packaging and cost effectiveness, and bid-quote submissions. c. Evidence of applicant's ability to meet the 5% cash requirements. d. Letter of Commitment from other financing sources stating terms and conditions of their participation in the project, if applicable. e. All other information as required in the application and/or additional information as may be requested by the EDA staff. f. Project compliance with all applicable city codes and policies. 3. The EDA Commissioners will review each application in terms of: a. Its consistency with the goals of the city's Comprehensive Plan and Downtown Small Area Study. b. Whether it is desirable and in the best interests of the public to provide funding for the project. c. The project's overall potential impact on the community's economy. 4. The EDA Commissioners will approve or deny the application, or request a resubmission with clarifications, at the EDA's sole discretion. APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF GRANT APPLICATION The EDA, at its sole discretion,may deny any application if it is found not consistent with the goals of the city's Comprehensive Plan and Downtown Small Area Study, the project's overall impact on the community's economy, and the above criteria. GRANT POLICY REVIEW The above criteria will be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure that the policies reflected in this document are consistent with the economic development goals set forth by the city. COMPLIANCE WITH BUSINESS SUBSIDY LAW All developers/businesses receiving financial assistance from the City of Monticello EDA shall be subject to the City's Business Subsidy Policy as amended, and the provisions and requirements set forth under Minnesota Statutes,Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995. GRANT AGREEMENT If the application for a Grant is approved,the applicant/property owner will be required to enter into a Grant agreement to proceed. The Grant agreement will specify the terms and conditions of the Grant as identified herein. 4 1 P a g e DISBURSEMENT OF GRANT FUNDS Upon approval of a Grant application, applicants are required to provide executed contracts with qualified, licensed contractors for work per the approved Grant plans. Contracts shall be consistent with the procedures and requirements herein. Grant funds will be disbursed to the contractor based on completion of work as outlined below. The City's Chief Building Official will verify completion of work. Upon verification of completion, payment will be dispersed per contract amount for the work completed based on submitted invoice. PROJECT CONTRACTOR PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS A. PARTICIPATING CONTRACTORS: All contractors participating in the Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Program must have a contractor's license on file with the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry. The contractors will be responsible for securing insurance of the amounts specified on the application form. The application must contain proof of insurance coverage via a Certification of Insurance Coverage, and the contractor's registration and license number and bond. B. BID/QUOTE SOLICITATION: To participate in the Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Program, the applicant must solicit bids or quotes from at least two vendors. An applicant is free to choose any contractor, provided the license requirements are met and the cost differential in the quotes received does not exceed 20%. C. CONTRACTOR CONTRACT: The contract for work is between the property owner (applicant) and the contractor. Each selected contractor will enter into a contract with the property owner. The contract will outline the terms for completion of the rehabilitation on the project and will include the following: 1. Scope of Work 2. Project Start Date; 3. Project Completion Date; 4. General Conditions; 5. Building Elevations and Architectural Drawings; 6. Special Conditions; 7. Project Warranties; 8. Change Order Procedures; 9. Payment Terms; 10. Termination Procedures. D. FAILURE TO START/COMPLETE PROJECT: Upon approval of the Grant agreement, the applicant and selected contractor will have 180 calendar days in which to complete the contracted work. The 180-day time period shall not be 5 1 P a g e exceeded except through the issuance of a change order. Failure to complete any work within 180 days will be grounds to terminate the Grant agreement. E. PAYMENT PROCEDURES:All contractors will agree to the payment schedule, which is as follows: 1. Pre-payments for contracted services may be disbursed from an escrow account established with the EDA's specified agency. Such escrow account shall be administered per the Grant agreement. 2. Lien waivers are required for all contractors and sub-contractors before payment will be made. 3. Final payment for work completed, including any retainage amounts, will be made after work by a contractor is completed with verified receipts and costs incurred,the final inspection has been conducted and the Chief Building Official, property owner, and contractor have signed off on the work. F. CHANGE ORDERS: Change orders to the approved Grant project require the approval of the EDA. Change orders will be allowed only for the following reasons: 1. To rectify hidden deficiencies that are discovered once the work has begun. 2. To change a specification due to unforeseen difficulties arising after work has begun. 3. To address a deficiency that was inadvertently dropped from the project during project packaging. 4. To change completion dates. PROJECT COMPLETION The city's Chief Building Official will complete a final project inspection and issue a Certificate of Completion verifying project completion per the approved Grant plans. 6 1 P a g e EXHIBIT A Geographic Program Limits Eligble Area - DIW''I' t J� r. t a„„ • w 'y / �. • FA AC if�r r 's • ` ! 1 00 r ! `._ limb- •8ifm w.ar EXHIBIT B Permitted Fund Uses—Visual Reference r � f n tr C OIV 0 Ihi1 s LL co C O ra }+ a, a ++ `1 F x CL Y Y N E Ev Yo E a 0 2 O O C Cc, cm N a) N C 7 c 0 N Y i O- Q a i S C E °� N V 6 ro Q 3 �_ L a o w Y o ��o tm 3 Ys a o E c ° E Y'R rn ao 3 C o $ vs w 3 0 f0v > o c �r C N E E 3 o S o_0 c c Q c v _ra m S atca oa 000v EEo � e � oo� c v o rn a o v R o w N E V a YT C V > r C V MU Q v p a v m '� ,O, O c R °� _ C VI E C N aU o 3 v � °V' Y � 0 3Yv Y � �Y I�' R Em E2ir,.° c .; m E .� o w - v o. � 3� o o a v° T� 3 s. t m Y r ° 3 ° .n 3 c A v " a+ a ° v v a ¢ 2 � � � E > p °-� o � E � v N 3 > o E •� a, rn.E p n _ 'C o � > c o. £ o 3 � E �Y Q p c c o c o y 5 0 $ o m Y Y c a o p h r E p F- a rn °C ap aOl >p ru o v Ov o Lv w rnY sfN3 N 'o- o Y a LL r.,,i!aill.1�11 CO S 1 _ o C Qjc p al O W o J v c u �( v o_ p o }� Q � C link, a 2 _ •g a 3I � � �• � ..r r.�a 3 I ' III a 5 p 11. � '- t V L V V > Ol yj >c �4 > Y c o -o =1 T o c, v o o > c 3 a a� m -0 Eo N m c c .� a w ;� ai a E o C o$ o . o c c a o rn c < O fl.Ycu in � ,v v .. YYE Ac m me V - .N m v v - c D v C E m m °. w >. v o a a E v -0 v c s Y Y rn a m t> v u c E o m 1 :5 o 1 ^ ° 1 c Tv E ° 2 o �° °' m o - c v ° 0 m o a v o $ � `m � � u �O .� •o o � .N Ipa i u o FL- 3 v 'm w L c o a,01 + s v v i "O C m > O -O O L m t6 an c L = o c 3 Y A N > Y `o v _�v a a, s rn 3 IId d C@ N aCL 0+ v C o O L L m m m m m Y m 3 " 3 m o c a m Y ° 3oEs Z ° :° .E °c�o -0 ° " n oY m a rn rn� Y � � m °r a w L o v m o .c H u c6 v 7 0` c 'S c E i y IFi! m c w o o-o �'- w >. .cam m ai -0 v E a a>i °-0 c a E 'a� e" Y N W 10 a v LL yr a+ S Yr '>, o jo ° ; u m F- C t _^ .0 c L v _ o £ 0, v o o C a c ~ e rn ~ °1 — , H > v o °' d � v O v o t E -' c c _ - — O w e � t — r v 0, _ " 'a v a1 m 3 N ' o ° R O W m a F — `m v - v C O 'c: H o 3 * L Y a c Y c > aY c _ a o > a. rn 9 a�y E y o o w � 5 0 °J c r 0 Q E '� rn v N as c c v me C 3 —_ . O ms� © m ° Lj a1 v o v o t O - m rn._ oR- V v E Ca o O m 3 c c w ? c o c a o a R v E 3 o . N ,OvLo o 3C c m n"aC+ N 3O I I I O Ow >.i v N > °v m YE y o c (2 O N C _0m N m m i V C N Op 9.N v = �.-. 7 i o 0) 3 N S c a� ' u O u 0 I— m � O > F-- i mr v d ¢ � N E ° O � a E 0. °1 o •Ir E H V) EDA Agenda-08/08/18 5. Consideration of Pilot Program Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Program Guidelines (AS/JT) A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND The EDA held its third workshop on July 11, 2018 to further review the proposed downtown facade and frontage improvement programs and provide staff with feedback. The feedback directed additional clarity regarding the funding format, uses and process for the Facade Improvement Program. Staff made additional changes to the fagade grant program guidelines based on the EDA's comments. The EDA will want to review the documents in detail. As in the past, staff defers to the EDA on any additional comments and suggestions. The frontage improvement grant program guidelines were only briefly discussed and will be brought back to the EDA for separate consideration at a later date as directed by the EDA. Prior staff reports to the EDA detail the background and evolution of the proposed program. Al. Staff Impact: Staff time estimated at 40-50 hours has been spent in preparing the proposed guidelines, including arranging and coordinating the downtown luncheons. Moving forward, staff estimates 100+/-hours of time commitment to the program, based on a pilot loan program resulting in 5 loans. This includes marketing, meetings and administration. The EDA's attorney has been consulted for guideline review and will assist in developing loan agreement and application review as necessary. A2. Budget Impact: The Finance Director recommends that the funds for the pilot program come from TIF 1-6. The pilot program with$200,000 in available funding for the building fagade improvements is proposed as a first come, first serve basis. Staff would further estimate $20,000+/-in fees from Cuningham and Kennedy& Graven for development of the renderings and legal grant documents. Staff intends to work with Kennedy& Graven to develop a template grant agreement which can streamline the document process for loans. A3. Strategic Plan Impact: The proposed program meets the following Strategic Plan Goals: • Create and Preserve Sustainable Livability: Implements a program to beautify the downtown's existing commercial buildings. • Strengthen Our Image as a Destination: Supports enhancements to the downtown commercial core in support of Monticello as a place to visit and explore. • Support a Vibrant Economy: Establishes a financial resource for existing property and business owners to utilize for economic reinvestment in downtown. 1 EDA Agenda-08/08/18 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS If the EDA is satisfied with the guidelines and attachments and wishes to move forward with the proposed guidelines and application form for the Facade Improvement Grant Program, then staff offers the following alternatives for consideration. Decision 1: Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Program 1. Motion to adopt the Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Program Guidelines as presented. 2. Motion to adopt the Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Program Guidelines, subject to any final revisions by the EDA as well as to review by the EDA Attorney. 3. Motion to table for additional discussion. 4. Motion to deny the adoption of the Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Program Guidelines. C. STAFF RECONFaENDATION Staff defers to the EDA on the matter of additional changes and readiness of the guidelines. Staff recommends the implementation of a fagade improvement program for the Downtown per the direction of the Downtown Small Area Study and implementation workshop. D. SUPPORTING DATA A. Draft Downtown Fagade Improvements Grant Guidelines B. Draft Downtown Facade Improvements Grant Application C. Downtown Business/Property Owner Meeting Summary D. Cuningham Group Architectural Services Estimate 2 EDA Agenda— 12/12/18 4. Workshop -Facade Improvement Program—Proposed Proiects (JaT, JT) A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND During the August 8, 2018 EDA Regular Meeting, the EDA approved a pilot program for the Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Program for a total of $200,000. Property owners on the north side of Block 35 are eligible. The goal of the program is to"encourage investment in commercial and retail buildings in the Downtown area in order to maintain the economic viability of the City and the Downtown/Central Community District." To date, City Staff have held an initial meeting with Block 35 property owners to discuss the program. Per the EDA guidelines, property owners were encouraged to submit a letter of interest to the City. City Staff received six letters from property owners plus one property owner that voiced interest in the program, but did not submit a letter of interest. The program gathered 70% interest on the block with one property owner owning the remaining three parcels. City staff met with each of the six property owners and the EDA's consulting company—the Cuningham Group—to discuss possible building fagade improvements. It was an open dialogue to meet the needs of the property owners and the goals of the Small Area Study. Staff have received renderings completed by the Cuningham Group and would like the EDA to review and discuss the drawings. The EDA should direct staff of any changes they would like to see to the renderings. Per discussion of the EDA, staff will direct the Cuningham Group to make any revisions as necessary and then meet with property owners again to discuss proposed renovations and apply for funds. A flow chart of the remaining tasks for the program are attached to the report. C. SUPPORTING DATA A. Renderings, dated: 12/2018 B. Flow Chart C. Guidelines 1 EDA Agenda: 05/29/19 3. Consideration of a status update on the Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Program, authorizing $50,000 in additional funding and direction on grant fund allocation for Facade Improvement Grant Program, and amending the Facade Improvement Grant Program (AS) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND The pilot Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Program was approved for initiation by the EDA in August, 2018. Project Status Update Since the time of program approval, staff have been working with property owners within the project area to determine level of interest and to assist them with completion of the application process. The EDA's architectural consultant, the Cuningham Group, has completed building facade renderings for those property owners who submitted letters of interest, per the EDA agreement. Staff has prepared a spreadsheet summarizing project status within the project area to-date. Of the eight property owners within the project area, six have responded with a formal letter of interest. For those who have expressed interest, staff have coordinated a number of individual and group meetings to continue moving the project forward. At this time, only one property owner has completed a final full application for the project. The application will be considered in a public hearing during the special meeting on May 29t', 2019. One additional property owner has submitted an application, but is working to provide two comparable quotes. The other property owners are in various stages of application and obtaining comparable quotes for the work scope. Based on feedback received in preliminary quote information, the property owners will need to contribute more than the 5% minimum in order to complete improvements to the scope identified in the renderings, and/or find additional gap funding, based on a$50,000 project cap per building. Grant Fund In its approval for the pilot program, the EDA allocated$200,000 in grant funds from TIF District 1-6. In November, the EDA held a discussion relating to project interest at that time and the potential for an additional $50,000 allocation to the program. As noted earlier in this report, six property owners have expressed interest, and preliminary quote information is yielding individual project costs above the $50,000 to accomplish improvements in concert with the renderings. In reviewing the video and minutes related to that discussion, no formal motion was made to add to the original $200,000 grant fund. At this time, no additional action is requested. However, staff will continue to monitor 1 EDA Agenda: 05/29/19 applications as they relate to the EDA direction on funding allocation, and will bring forward a formal motion as may be needed. It should be noted that the grant guidelines clearly state the project is on a first-come, first-served basis for funding. However, an action item is included should the EDA choose to formally authorize the addition of$50,000 at this time. Fund Allocation At this time, staff is seeking direction from the EDA on a funding formula. Clear direction from the EDA on how it will allocate grant funds will help communicate project parameters to potential applicants. As the project progresses, it is recognized that the projects are not equal in scale and scope, and the EDA may wish to allocate funds based on those factors. Item 4 provides detail on the completed application of Tricambra Foods. While only one application has been received to-date, staff believes that given that applicant's diligence in preparation, it was important to bring that application forward. It is recognized that the application may also help provide some foundation on how to develop a funding formula for the $200,000 pilot. Staff would offer the following formula options: 1. Grant award based on facade square footage 2. Grant award based on project cost 3. Grant award based on project commitment 4. Grant award based on a combination formula Staff's recommendation is to allocate funding based on the square footage of the building. In doing so, the EDA is addressing the scope of improvements relative to the facade size, as well as expanded improvements for corner properties. That funding alternative is explored further on the status spreadsheet provided. If the EDA would like to incentivize financial commitment by the property owner above the 5% minimum requirement, additional funding could also be added on to the facade square footage allocation. For example, for each additional 10% of project support provided by the property owner, an additional specified dollar amount could be granted. However, this presents complications in managing the project fund balance. If the EDA seeks to employ this incentive, the additional $50,000 in project funds be used in support. FaVade Improvement Grant Guideline Amendment Pending the outcome of the EDA's discussion on the fund allocation and any additional funding for the program, amendments to the Downtown Fagade Improvement Grant Guidelines may be needed. If the EDA implements a funding formula, staff would recommend amendment to include that information. If the EDA elects to award more than $50,000 to any single applicant, staff would recommend that the EDA amend its guidelines, as the current cap is $50,000. 2 EDA Agenda: 05/29/19 Action relating to amendment to the guidelines is included as a decision, if needed. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Decision 1: Fund Allocation I. Motion to direct allocation of Facade Improvement Grant Program funds as directed by the EDA. 2. Motion to table action for further discussion. Decision 2: Grant Fund I. Motion to authorize an additional $50,000 from TIF 1-6 to the Monticello Downtown Facade Improvement Program. 2. Motion to table action based on further information. Decision 3: Grant Guideline Amendment 1. Motion to direct staff to prepare amendments to the EDA Downtown Facade Improvement Guidelines as directed by the EDA for fund allocation and amount. 2. Motion of no action. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recognizes that a project of this nature requires time and commitment by all parties involved. As a pilot project, much is being learned regarding costs and expectations. It is the request of staff the EDA discuss alternative funding formulas and provide direction in support of continued program work. Initially, staff would recommend a funding formula based on the facade square footage as the most equitable apportionment. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Downtown Facade Improvement Grant Pilot Program - Status Spreadsheet Fagade Renderings Grant Guidelines 3 EDA: 05/12/21 8. Consideration of Update regarding Otter Creek Business Park Stormwater Drainage Flows and Ponds (JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The EDA is being provided an update about the stormwater ponds in Otter Creek Business Park (OCBP) as a proactive informative step due to several recent inquiries regarding available sites in the Park. In the past 45 to 50 days, there have been several inquiries regarding available land for light industrial development in Otter Creek Business Park. In house staff discussions regarding next steps related to interacting with the prospects and identifying the potential sites suggests that the EDA be updated regarding the stormwater ponding capacity and flows if these additional development projects move forward. As a starting point, the attached Memorandum from WSB to City Engineer Matt Leonard, dated April 15, 2019 summarizes various water flows and ponding scenarios and accompanying solutions for the EDA and City to choose from. Staff want the EDA to be aware of information in the OCBP Stormwater update Memorandum and the identified options addressing the flow and ponding levels. Each scenario solution is viable and incurs different impacts and costs. Scenario 3 is the most sustainable and incurs the least cost. It identifies an option to enlarge the western most ponding discharge pipe. This option suggests that a minimal amount of land or perhaps no additional land will have to be used for the purpose of pond expansion in OCBP as the western half of the Park is further developed. With that as background, staff discussions with the three recent prospects will continue with the goal of maximizing the available land for development as each prospect moves to the step of preparing concept plans. Al. STAFF IMPACT: There is a minimal staff impact related to updating the EDA about the status of the prospects and how it may impact changes in the existing stormwater drainage and ponding infrastructure in Otter Creek Business Park. A2. BUDGET IMPACT: There is no budget impact at this point related to updating the EDA about the status of the stormwater drainage and ponding infrastructure in Otter Creek Business Park. As the prospects move to the task of creating development concepts, it may be determined that some infrastructure changes (piping size, location, or ponding adjustments) may be needed. That will be a cost that may be borne by the EDA at the time of construction. There may be various funding mechanics that allow minimal cash outlays for these potential changes. Staff will continue to update the EDA as more information is made available related to the potential development proposals. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. No motion; discussion only. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1 EDA: 05/12/21 There is no staff recommendation to the EDA. The update is provided as an informational update. Staff is acting proactively to inform the EDA of potential development that may involve related infrastructure modification and costs that require a budget outlay in the future. Further discussions will likely take place with the EDA regarding submitted development concepts and the stormwater drainage and ponding impacts. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a. WSB Memorandum to City Engineer Matt Leonard dated April 15, 2019 2 ws b Memorandum To: Matt Leonard, PE City of Monticello From: Heather Nelson, PE and Earth Evans, PE Date: April 15, 2019 Re: Monticello Business Center (MBC) Drainage Analysis—Summary and Options WSB Project No. 02596-290 This memo is in response to questions related to the stormwater ponding requirements as development prospects in the MBC are ongoing in the City. This memo summarizes an updated evaluation related to providing regional infiltration and an evaluation of existing freeboard ° constraints of the area. U (0 W Background m This site's ponding complex was first developed in the early 2000s with the extension of Chelsea 0 Rd then following with the development of the Monticello Business Center (MBC). There are a 00 series of ponds that have been built and additional ponding planned as development occurs (Figure 1). WSB prepared a Stormwater Management Plan for the MBC in 2016 in response to changes in storm sewer routing to the Karlsburger Pond related to the Dahlheimer Site. During the construction of the Chelsea Pond, there was a change in conditions in the field. It is understood that groundwater was encountered at the designed outlet elevation of 927. Therefore, the outlet pipe invert was raised resulting in an increase in the normal water level from 927 to 930.19. Because of this change, the storm sewer pipes on the Dahlheimer site continuously held water. � During the Dahlheimer expansion, they requested the rerouting of storm sewer to Karlsburger C6 Pond to keep their storm sewer free draining. J Regional Volume Control w z A review of the site was performed following conversations with City Staff regarding the potential for a regional system to meet volume requirements for new developments. Due to high 0 groundwater in the regional pond locations, infiltration is prohibited. 0 M w A large-scale filtration basin could be investigated adjacent to the Karlsburger Pond, however the D preferred sequencing for volume control would be infiltration. Infiltration should be viable at the U) individual undeveloped parcels based on the existing soils. There is potential to construct Pond A U) and Pond D with an infiltration/filtration area, as applicable. w Z) z w ¢ z w x 0 \\gvfiles0l\projects\02596-290\WR\Hydrocad\march 2019 reviewWemo_summary and options 032519 REV SKB.docx Matt Leonard April 15, 2019 Page 2 Freeboard Evaluation Freeboard to existing properties is a constraint that limits the volume of runoff that can be routed to the existing regional ponds. Table 1 below is a summary of the elevation of the existing infrastructure that is adjacent to the Karlsburger Pond and Chelsea Pond. Table 1: Summary of Elevations of Existing Infrastructure Location Adjacent to: Building Dock On-Site Lowest Ground Storm Opening (ft) Elevation (ft) Sewer i Invert (ft) Karlsburger Foods Karlsburger Pond 938.0 934.0 NA Surburban Manufacturing Karlsburger Pond 935.5 931.5 —928.9 Dahlheimer Distribution Chelsea Pond 935.9 932.0 —927.4 Determining the allowable HWL for Karlsburger Pond has been based on the following: 1. Two feet of freeboard to low opening of Suburban Manufacturing. Allowable HWL 933.5. 2. No ponding in the loading docks for the 10-year event. Allowable HWL 931.5 3. 1.5-feet of ponding at the loading docks for the 100-year event. Allowable HWL 933.0 4. Maximum 24-hour duration of ponding at the loading dock. 5. 1.5-feet of ponding at the low point in Chelsea Road for the 100-year event. Allowable HWL 933.36. The 2' freeboard requirement to the building low opening is based on the City's Design Manual and Water Resource Management Plan. No ponding at the loading docks in the 10-year event was based on the City's Design Manual to size storm sewer for the 10-year event. Additionally, it's intended to limit business operations impacts in light of comments received from Dahlheimer's during their expansion project. The requirement for ponding depth in the street was based on guidance from MnDOT Technical Memorandum 16-05-B-02. This Tech Memo requires a maximum of 1-foot of ponding for the 50-year event at sag points. We utilized 1.5-feet of ponding for the 100-year event as this is not a true sag and that depth is passable for emergency vehicles. Determining the allowable HWL for Chelsea Pond has been based on the following: 1. Two feet of freeboard to low opening of Dahlheimer Distribution. Allowable HWL 933.9. 2. 1.5-feet of ponding for the 100-year event in the loading dock. Allowable HWL 933.5. 3. Maximum 24-hour duration of ponding at the loading dock. 4. No ponding in the loading docks for the 10-year event. Allowable HWL 932.0 The additional constraint considered was to not increase flow rates to Otter Creek, which is the ultimate downstream outlet, from the site. Karlsburger Pond Modification Options A review of possible modifications to the Karlsburger pond was performed in order to meet the design constraints above. All of the scenarios below include the following assumptions: • Fully developed conditions for all properties • Includes proposed Pond A and D • No ponding at Bowers or Chadwick \\gvfiles0l\projects\02596-290\WR\Hydrocad\march 2019 reviewWemo_summary and options 032519 REV SKB.docx Matt Leonard April 15, 2019 Page 3 Scenario 1: • Maintain existing configuration of Karlsburger Pond Scenario 2: • Expanded configuration (45%volume) of Karlsburger Pond Scenario 3: • Maintain existing configuration of Karlsburger Pond • Upsize lower outlet of Karlsburger Pond from a 15-inch pipe to a 21-inch (432 LF). This work could be completed in conjunction with the potential Karlsburger building and parking lot expansion. Table 2 summarizes the HWL of Karlsburger and Chelsea Ponds in the above three scenarios. Table 2: Summary of HWL in Karlsburger and Chelsea Ponds Scenario 1 HWL Scenario 2 HWL Scenario 3 HWL (Existing Pond) (expand pond by 45%) (upsize lower outlet to 21") Pond 10 100 100 yr 10 100 100 yr 10 100 100 yr year year ponding year year ponding year year ponding duration duration duration Karlsburger Pond 931.6 933.2 42 hr 931.5 932.4 42 hr 931.1 933.1 22 hr Design Constraint 931.5 933.0 24 hr 931.5 933.0 24 hr 931.5 933.0 24 hr Chelsea Pond 931.9 933.1 39 hr 931.8 932.9 36 hr 931.8 933.0 32 hr Design Constraint 932 933.5 24 hr 932 933.5 24 hr 932 933.5 24 hr *highlighted areas do not meet design constraint Table 3 below is a summary of the flow rates from the site to Otter Creek in the above referenced Scenarios. Table 3: Summary of Flow Rates to Otter Creek 2-yr cfs 10- r cfs 100- r cfs Existing* 2.6 5.9 55.8 Scenario 1 8.8 16.9 28.6 Scenario 2 7.1 15.8 24.7 Scenario 3 11.8 21.8 30.5 `Based on Table 4 of MBC Stormwater Management Plan,April 2017 Conclusion We recommend reviewing the information in this memo with you to confirm the freeboard criteria outlined. We can then finalize an approach for the stormwater management solutions for full buildout of the MBC. \\gvfiles0l\projects\02596-290\WR\Hydrocad\march 2019 reviewWemo_summary and options 032519 REV SKB.docx � '33 k w �.�� rn , m , Renvlej .bar alO d"i O �S,pp • co E aNvs Y alO 31OV3 �831N30 a,,F`• �" .'�r��'F Ilk, �S co dTiNno ' // sZ . � ¢� O• iDO 2.0 1p0 G7 r+ • �J oocfl � m O p LLC7 U o O �2 ) S - Presc< J �' tiros U0 0 • • �0 P 3cn UJ o d� = O c +ti . cc ; �P aAP � c Q O a°c m 20 UJ co O 34Ve NO 1 • J 3n G� w N • • N C • Ca ; KQm . 7 W O Z w .. M , Q O ' % • d S�NE zco Y -V f, T LU IL r j � h �.. Y Y 1 EDA Agenda: 05/12/2021 9. Consideration of Update regarding EDA Meeting Stipend for Non-Council Members (JT) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At its regular April 26, 2021 meeting, the City Council approved an attendance stipend for non-Council EDA members at the rate of$50.00 per regular meeting. Follow up paperwork and instructions were subsequently mailed and emailed to the impacted members by the City's Human Resources Director. The first meeting at which attendance stipends are scheduled to be paid starts in May 2021 with receipt of the payments scheduled to occur in the following month. The City Council action wherein the stipend was approved also authorized the transfer of funds from the City General Fund to the EDA General Fund annually for the purpose of paying the stipends. This essentially results in no impact to the EDA budget. Following the City Council approval of the stipend, the EDA attorney reviewed the EDA Bylaws and the EDA Enabling Resolution (City Council Resolution #2013-10) to determine if any language changes would be needed. Her conclusion was that neither document needs to be modified to move forward with the stipend payments. The Stipend Policy and Procedure will be reviewed by the Personnel Committee in early 2022 to consider adjustments as needed with any recommendations provided to the City Council as a subsequent step at that time. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. No Motion— Informational only. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: No staff recommendation is provided as this is informational only. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a. City Council Staff Report b. Stipend Policy and Procedure 1 City Council Agenda:04/26/2021 2F. Consideration of approving a $50 per meeting stipend for non-council Economic Development Authority (EDA) members. Prepared by: Meeting Date: ❑ Regular Agenda Item Human Resources Manager 04/26/2021 ® Consent Agenda Item Reviewed by: Approved by: Finance Director City Administrator ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve a $50 per meeting stipend for non-council EDA members with the annual amount transferred from the City General Fund to the EDA Fund. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND City staff recently reviewed board and commission payments following a question regarding potential payment for Economic Development Authority (EDA) members. Currently, Councilmembers receive a monthly stipend and non-council Planning Commissioners receive a $50 per meeting stipend. When considering whether to implement compensation for the EDA, city staff opted to broaden the scope to create a policy for determining when board/commission responsibility may merit payment. Within the policy, staff established criteria to use to for evaluating the appropriateness of a stipend. The criteria included: statutory authority, time commitment, ruling or recommending power, and degree of influence. Using these criteria, staff reviewed all current boards and commissions. Most boards do not meet the threshold for payment, but staff and the Personnel Committee recommend approving a $50 per meeting stipend for non-council EDA members. This acknowledges the responsibility of the board and is commensurate with the Planning Commission. I. Budget Impact: The estimated budget impact to the general fund is $6,459 per year based on 2 meetings per month. Funds would be transferred from the General Fund to be distributed through the EDA fund. II. Staff Workload Impact: Minimal impact. EDA members receiving the stipend will need to complete new hire paperwork, and the EDA liaison will be required to track attendance and turn it into the payroll clerk monthly. III. Comprehensive Plan Impact: N/A City Council Agenda:04/26/2021 STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff and the Personnel Committee recommend approving a $50 per meeting stipend beginning with meetings in May 2021 for non-council EDA members. The EDA members were informed of staff's intent to bring this item to Council for consideration, and members did not have any comments. SUPPORTING DATA • Draft Board & Commission Payment Policy CITY OF ' City Policy and Procedure SECTION: ADMINISTRATION NO: ADM-01 REFERENCE: BOARDS & COMMISSIONS DATE: APRIL 2021 NEXT REVIEW DATE: JANUARY 2022 TITLE: BOARD & COMMISSION PAYMENT POLICY 1.0 Purpose The City of Monticello welcomes public participation through its various boards and commissions. These opportunities create space for volunteer civic engagement without expectation of payment. However, the responsibility of specific boards may merit compensation.This policy specifies how the City will determine eligibility for payment. 2.0 Scope This policy applies to current and future city boards and commissions, including: • City Council • Industrial & Economic Development • Economic Development Authority Committee • Bertram Chain of Lakes Advisory • Parks, Arts, & Recreation Council Commission • Library Board • Planning Commission 3.0 Payment Criteria The City will consider the following criteria in determining if payment is warranted: • Statutory Authority: Does the board/commission have authority authorized by State Statute? • Time Commitment: Does participation require presence at frequent regular meetings, special meetings, and/or workshops? • Ruling or Recommending: Does the board/commission have power to unilaterally rule on specific topics or is it limited to recommending action? • Degree of Influence: Do decisions have long-term impacts on the growth, development, and stability of the community? 4.0 Payment Process Board/commission members eligible for the stipend will complete new hire paperwork and authorize automatic deposit of the monthly payment. The staff liaison for the board/commission will track attendance and turn in request for payment to the payroll clerk monthly. HISTORY Approval Date: April 26, 2021 Approved by: City Council Amendment Date: I Approved by: EDA Agenda: 05/12/21 10. Economic Development Director's Report (JT) A. Project Gia-Saurus Update: City staff continue to monitor the company's efforts to understand potential funding through the recently approved American Rescue Plan (ARP) set aside for PPE production. B. Project Orion Introduction: A State led initiative brought a site selector team to the City to view a potential site for a large warehouse-distribution facility on April 7, 2021. City staff and the official team had a positive introductory meeting to review the development criteria involved in the site selection process. The project would need 115 acres, invest about $130,000,000, and create 500 new jobs in the city. C. Community Energy Transition (CET) Grant Program: City staff is in the beginning phase of executing the scope of work related to the $500,000 grant. The current work focus involves contracts in the amount of approximately $49,607 for the following services and deliverables task: 1. Comprehensive Sewer System Study = $32,107 2. Comprehensive Water System Study= $17,500 The CET grant program assists eligible communities with developing a plan to address the economic and social impact associated with the closing of a local electric generating plant. Plans may include,but are not limited to,researching,planning,and implementing activities designed to: 1. Assist workers at the plant find new employment,including worker retraining and developing small business start-up skills; and 2. Complete plans to increase the eligible community's property tax base;and 3. Develop alternative economic development strategies to attract new employers to the eligible community. D. Housing Development Activity: In early 2021, City staff have received numerous inquiries regarding potential sites for multi-family housing developments. These developer inquiries, in concept, could total approximately 350 units. This total does not factor in Block 52 development goals outlined by the EDA. Currently, the Deephaven (Phase 1) market rate apartment is the only active multi-family development. The 54-unit building is expected to open in July or August 2021. Deephaven's Phase 2 and 3 buildings (total of 111 units) are expected to be built in succession as each apartment reaches full occupancy. Active single family housing development projects consist of the following: ❖ Haven Ridge = total number homes expected to reach approximately 335 (build out to occur over the next 6 or 7 years) ❖ Featherstone = approximately 46 lots ❖ Edmondson Ridge = 54 lots 1 EDA Agenda: 05/12/21 E. Wright County Newsletter Link: https://conta.cc/3b3bM83 F. Prospect List Update: Please see the updated Prospect List as Exhibit A. 2 ! ! I ! 2 ! # » ! » ! # » a ! » ! ) ! ! ! ! » » \ y � ■ ■ k n § # k § / � ■ M + ■ k § / ) § k , 2 ! / § # ! K r ! \ / , a } ! ! 2 \ } ! \ } ■ = e ! � ; a 10 ! ! ' � \ ! - !! ! ± * ! ! * ! * * * * * * 2 * * * * * * ; , § \ \ \ & / / } > / \ \ \ \ \ \ J ! �