EDA Agenda 03-15-2001
.
.
.....
-
AGENDA
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMI':NT AUTHORITY
Thursday, March 15,2001 - 7:00 p.m.
City Hall - Academy Room
MEMBERS: Chair I3illlkmeulcs. Vice Chair Barb Schwientek. ^ssistant Treasurer Ken
Maus. Clint Ilerbsl. Roger Carlson. Ron Iloglund, and Darrin Lahr
ST^FF:
Treasurer Rick WolfstellcL Executive Director Ollie Koropchak. and Recorder
Lori Kraemer
GUlSlS:
Steve Budd. Integrated Recycling Technologies. Inc.
I. Call to Order.
! Consideration to approve the Novernber 8. 2000 EDA minutes and the January 30. 200 I
FDA summary of discussion.
3. Consideration of adding or removing agenda items.
4.
Consideration to review fl.)!" discussion the preliminary GMEF loan application for
Integrated Recycling Technologies. Inc.
5. Consideration to approve or deny GMEF No. 018 for Integrated Recycling Technologies.
Inc.
6. Continued - Consideration to review for approval/disapproval the second DM RF
application for 113 West Broadway.
7. Continued - Consideration to review CiMEF No. 014 relative to late payments for actions
to call loan.
8. Executive Director's Report.
9. Other Business.
a) Annualmecling of the ED^ - Tuesday. April 24.2001.
10. Adjournment.
.
.
.
MINUTES
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, November 8,2000 - 7:00 p.m.
City Hall - Academy Room
~MBERS PRESENT:
Chair Bill Demeules, Roger Carlson, Ron Hoglund, and Darrin
Lahr.
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Vice Chair Barb Schwientek, Assistant Treasurer Ken Maus, and
Clint Herbst.
STAFF PRESENT: Treasurer Rick Wolfsteller and Executive Director Ollie Koropchak.
GUESTS:
None.
1. Call to Order.
Chair Demeules called the EDA meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
2.
Consideration to apProve the August 29.2000 EDA minutes.
Ron Hoglund made a motion to approve the August 29,2000 EDA minutes. Seconded by
Roger Carlson and with no corrections or additions, the minutes were approved as
written.
3.
Consideration of adding agenda items.
Additional information relative to DMRF No. 111 (Bruce Hamond) added under 6.
Director's Report.
4. Consideration to approve extending the balloon payment date for GMEF Loan No. 010
(Blue Chip Development Company).
At the request of Jim Harwood and Brad Barger, the EDA is asked to consider extending
the balloon payment date from December 1,2000, to December 1,2005, for GMEF Loan
No. 010 for Blue Chip Development Company dba Vector Tool & Mfg, Inc. Assuming
the November 1,2000, payment is received, the remaining principal balance is $42,962.81.
The $50,000 real estate loan was approved on September 13, 1995, at 6.75% fixed
interest rate and amortized over 20 years with a five-year balloon payment. The
conventional lender is Firstar Bank, Gary Taverna.
1
2
.
.
.
EDA Minutes - 11/8/00
The request to extend the balloon payment is not because Blue Chip "the borrower" is
unable to refinance. The request is due to the high cost of refinancing due to unusual
circumstances of the real estate parcel split for Vector Tool and the B&B Metal Stamp
buildings. The EDA Business Subsidy Criteria, GMEF Guidelines state under Deferral of
Payments: 1. Approval of the EDA membership by majority vote. 2. Extend the balloon
if unable to refinance, verification letter from two lending institutions subject to Board
approval.
The EDA noted the following:
1. Firstar Bank submitted a letter of support to extend the balloon payment date and
noted the lenderlBlue Chip loan had been paid to date according to contract terms.
2. The EDAlBlue Chip loan agreement in good standing as of October 30,2000.
3. The CMIFIBlue Chip loan agreement in good standing as of November 8,2000.
4. Prime rate, November 8, 2000, 2:00 p.m., First Bank, 9.5%.
5. EDA-GMEF current cash balance approximately $600,000.
Because of a timing issue and the unusual high costs associated with refinancing the real
estate loan and cost of appraisals of the split lot, Roger Carlson made a motion to extend
the balloon payment date from December 1,2000, to December 1, 2003, for GMEF Loan
No. 010 (Blue Chip Development Company) at a fixed interest rate of7.5%. Preparation
costs associated with amending and reaffirming the documents, the responsibility of the
borrower. The motion was subject to submission of credit worthy current year financial
statements or financial summary for Vector Tool from a CPA. Ron Hoglund seconded
the motion and with no further discussion, the motion passed unanimously. The requested
five year balloon date extension was reduced to three years to ensure an adequate funding
balance of the EDA/GMEF and the fixed prime rate was increased to 2% below the
current prime rate to discourage similar request.
5.
Public Hearin!! - Consideration to adopt a resolution amending the EDA Business Subsidv
Criteria.
Based on the authorization of the EDA at their August 29,2000 meeting, a public hearing
notice appeared in the local newspaper October 26 and November 2, 2000, relative to the
proposed amendments to the EDA Business Subsidy Criteria.
The proposed amendments included an increase to the wage level (a wage of the higher of
$9.00 per hour, or at least) and other criteria affected the Legislative action. The
proposed amendments provide consistency between the HRA and the EDA Business
Subsidy Criteria.
Chair Demeules opened the public hearing for comments and hearing no public comments,
closed the public hearing.
2
2
.
.
.
EDA Minutes - 11/8/00
Roger Carlson made a motion to adopt EDA Resolution No. 00-2 amending the EDA
Business Subsidy Criteria as proposed. Darrin Lahr seconded the motion and with no
further discussion, the motion passed unanimously.
6.
Executive Director's Report.
The EDA accepted the Director's report and invoice of $204.19 as submitted with the
agenda with the exception to the following addition.
Koropchak provided each commissioner with a copy of the request from Bruce Hamond
relative to the approved DMRF No. III and an excerpt of the DMRF Guidelines. After
discussion, the commissioners elected to retain the guidelines for the DMRF rehabilitation
loan as stated: The rehabilitation loan will be in a subordinated position to the lender.
The commissioners agreed the intent of the EDA programs are not as competitive dollars
with the lending institutions and felt the combination ofthe below EDA prime rate and the
lender rate provided for a blended interest rate. Ron Hoglund made a motion that
approved DMRF No. III rehabilitation loan remain in second position behind the lender.
The approved loan remains at an amount of $10,644, fixed interest rate of5.5%, 10 year
amortization with balloon payment is 3 years. The non-performance date for DMRF No.
III to be extended from May 29, 2001 to August 29, 2001, per the request. Roger
Carlson seconded the motion and with no further discussion, the motion passed
unanimously.
7.
Other Business.
None.
8. Adiournment.
The EDA meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
O~ \~cJ\o ~~~
Ollie Koropchak, RecorderlExecutive Director
3
L
.
.
.
FDA Minutes - 1/30/01
MINUTES
MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Tuesday, January 30, 2001 - 7:00 p.m.
City Hall - Academy Room
Members Present:
Absent:
Staff:
Guests:
Chair Bill Demeules. Roger Carlson. and Ron Hoglund
Barb Sel1\vientek. Ken Maus. Clint Herbst and Darrin Lahr
Executive Director Ollie Koropehak and Recorder Lori Kraemer.
Kevin Heaton. property owner of 113 West Broadway.
Pam Campbell. DAT Chair
1. Call to Order.
4.
Chair Bill Demeules called the meeting to order at 7:20 pm and declared no quorum. It
was decided to discuss item 4 on the agenda as both Kevin Heaton and Pam Campbell
were present and the following is a summary of the discussion.
Consideration to review for aporoval/disapprovalthe second DMRF application for 113
West T3roadwav.
Ollie Koropchak. Executive Director. rcminded the members that at the August 29. 2000
EDA meeting. the commissioners approved DMRF No. 110 for the property located at
113 West Broadway after much discussion rclative to the three plans approved by the
OAT and the three bids presented by Kevin Heaton. Approved DMRF No. 110 was for
up to 50% of the rehabilitation costs, not to exceed $11.000. for the front facade and
signage. The one time exception to the DI'v1RF Guidelines was due to unusual
circumstances: length of linear front footage. prominent location (heart ofto\vn). and
extreme per square j(Jotage rehabilitation costs. Koropchak also provided the DA T
minutes for review.
After the approvals by OAT and FDA. Heaton elected not to mme for'Yvard with the brick
facade options and proceeded with a front facade treatment of stucco. retaining the
cornice and installing a canvas awning. Prior to applying the stucco. Mr. Heaton
informed the Building Official and EDA Office of his change in plans and the OAT Chair
\vas notified. 1vIr. Heaton inquired if the awning would qualify t()r funding. he was
advised to re~apply with the kno\vlcdge of no promises. The a\\l1ing was included with
the three (brick facade) plans and bids approved by the OAT and LDA.
EDA M inutt's - 1/3010 I
.
On January 2. 200 I OAT vvas requested to review the design of the awning associated
with the second funding application. DAT did not accept the application as the request
came after the installation of the <l\vning. The OAT minutes and review were provided.
It was the Office of the EDA that suggested Mr. lIeaton submit a new application for
funding. It appears that the first approved DA T plans include awnings with either of the
brick t~lcade options. In review of the approval for the design and funding of DMRF No.
t 07. it appears a previous application submitted by Mr. Steve Johnson received approval
tor design and funding lor the awning on the MCP office at the time the stucco was
applied. The 01\ T review noted stucco would not be recommended if this were a
restoration. but for rehabilitation purposes it was just tine. However. Mr. Johnson was
never reimbursed because he did not complete the cornice treatment as appro\ed.
Tv"o points of consistency: First. DMRF No. 110 or 107 did not receive reimbursement
because they did not complete the projects as approved for design. Secondly. application
No. 107 and 112 both request funding for an avvning only vvith a new stucco fi.lCade.
.
Again. January 2 OAT motion .. application not accepted as request after completion of
the installation of the awning'" Mr. lIeaton stopped by the Office of the rOA on October
17 or November I. 2000 relative to his change in plans. OAT and Bob Claybaugh were
both notified for input and to encourage the brick facade as \\e11 as city stafr. The
building permit for the stucco was issued October 23.2000. and the permit t()r the awning
was mailed December 21. 2000. The OMRF application is dated December 27.2000. It
is unclear as to the commencement or completion date of the installation of the awning.
Certainly every effort was made by the city staff and OAT to encourage a brick t~lCade
treatment. Mr. Heaton addressed his reasons for the change in Llcade treatment. Skip
Sorenson. a new member of OAT and local architect. is researching other community
design guidelines. It is his view if the design guidelines are only enforceable by those
wanting EOA funding. the design guidelines have no teeth and the objectives of the
downtO\vn revitalization bcade program will not be met.
Mr. Heaton inquired if the reason OAT did not accept his application was because he had
stuccoed or if it was the fact that the application was submitted after he had installed the
awnings. Pam stated that OAT was under the impression that Mr. Heaton \\as not going
to come back to them t()r funding since he was not putting brick on the: building as he had
lirst intended and \vhat DAT had approved. Pam noted that stucco \vas not
recommended.
I !caton asked if OAT would have turned them down for funding of the awnings had he
come back to DAT with plans for stucco and awnings. Pam explained again that OAT
.
2
.
.
.
EDA Minutes - 1/30/01
would not have approved the stucco of the building and could not state tor sure whether
DA T would have approved or not.
Chair Demeules advised that the ED1\ needs to be consistent as in the case of Steve
Johnson's application. lie also felt that DAT/EDA would not have approved a plan
involving stucco and fcels that we need to remain consistent.
Heaton advised the reason he went with stucco explaining that the building had
previously been ravaged by fire and after he contacted someone \vho docs masonry. they
found that the bricks did not match up. the upper right hand corner of building was in
poor condition and Vvould have to be replaced. and it was also discovered that whoever
did the original brick work put the windows in after bricking which meant that if I Icaton
would be redoing the brick. he would have to replace the windows as \velI as he was
advised that the original glass would break ifremoved. Mr. Heaton also advised that this
company would not take on this project. Heaton advised that the brick work was
approximately $20.000 to $25.000 and $10.000 for new glass. He stated that he could not
justify putting that kind of money into this building. He also stated that the steel beam
across the front of the building was severely bowed and would have to be replaced if
brick work \vas going to be done.
There \vas no action taken.
5.
Consideration to review GMEF No. 014 relative to late pavments t'iJr action to call loan.
The members discussed this item and stated they would like to look at modifying the
guidelines to either add a percentage or a tlat rate for late payments. They did discuss
that perhaps that would not include this item but that it would be for future loans.
As you recall. GIVIEF Loan No. 014 with 1..J. Martin (Lake Tool. Inc.) has been a topic
of discussion at previous ED^ meetings. The loan payments consistently appear to be
late. Letters dating November 2000 and August 2. 1999 and numerous telephone calls
relative to late payments h.we been made. The company eventually pays but not on a
timely basis. [01\ loans have no penalty for late payments. Koropchak prO\ided copies
of the payment status lor #014 noting their late payments.
The GMEF (iuidelines read: LATE P A Yl'vlENT POLICY: Failure to pay principal and
interest when due may result in the loan being immediately called. Events of default
under the Loan Agreement: (a) failure to pay when due any principal or interest on the
Loan.
Koropchak stated that this information appears on the agenda for t\VO reasons: Notice to
..,
.J
.
.
.
FDA I'vI inutes - J /30/0 I
FDA member and consideration of action. She also advised of some options the EDA
could consider.
6.
Executive Director's Renort. Koropchak provided the EDA with updates regarding
GMEF No. 010 (Vector Tool), modifications to the Loan Agreement and other
documents which \vere drafted and executed by appropriate individuals at the closings on
November 29.2000. Appropriate filings at the Secretary of State and Wright County
have been recorded and originals returned:
GMEF No. 017 (["win City Die Castings). UCC not filed as all equipment has not
arrived or been paid for:
EDA Annual Meeting is scheduled for April 24,2001. Koropchak attached a copy of
minutes from a budget workshop of the city council on November 16, 2000 noting some
discussion relative to the EDA funds. After the )"ear-end report. the EDA may give some
consideration to begin payback tl.W Liquor Funds. Secondly. relative to the DMRF - I
will research a few parcels which received DMRFs ll)r a comparison of incrcased markct
value over the years to see if the EDA imestment is paying off:
Intcgrated Recycling Technologies. Inc. - The Prospect Team visited this Rogers
company. They are an auto catalyst refiner \vith 3 FT and 2 PT employees. The owner.
Steve Budd, purchased Kermit Benson's home. He's looking to perhaps build a 10,000
sq ft mctal building on a 2-acre parcel along Fallon A venuc. He would add 3-4 fT
workers within 2 years. Wages betvveen $35,000 to $50.000 annually w/o benefits:
Barger/Han\ood - Looking to construct another 15.000 sq ft metal building behind
Vector Tool. This resulted after C. H. Holt Company called my office for the need tl.W
another 5.000 sq ft and B&B Metal Stamping's need for additional space. Space may
also accommodate a 51. Cloud and Big Lake company:
Red Wing Foods - Met \\lith Charlie Pfeffer. company, staff. and builder relative to
construction of a 50,000 sq ft precast building on 6 acres of land to the west of Twin City
Die Castings. Red Wing Foods \vould take 20,000 sq ft and the remaining for lease. Red
Wing foods is a pacbger and distributor of gourmet foods with contacts to Byerly's.
Lund's. Target. etc:
North Anchor - Still working on acquisition of parcels along Front Street and \vorking on
concepts tl.)!' Amoco Block. SIO\\ going. There are concepts and liRA is working \vith
Barry Fluth and Brad Johnson:
Economic De\elopment Goals for 200 I - There has been some suggestion to think about
the City' of l'vlonticello combining the po\\ers of the HRi\ or EDA. Simplicity and
consistencv. Give sonle thou!.!ht to this for discussion at the annual meetin!.!. 5econdh,
. "- ....... ..
looking to host a Lenders Breakbst \vith IIRA/EDA again this year. Thirdly. looking at
the MTED community assessment for le\el of readiness tl.)r [-commerce. Ron Hoglund
added getting more industries inLU to\\n as another goal. Dcmeules also discussed that at
one time [1),\ had talked about putting up a building that \\ould be ready tl.)!' a business
to move into and \Vas that still a goal. and the) belie\ed it \Vas something they \\ould like
.f
.
.
.
EDA Minutes - 1/30/0 I
to look at again;
DMRF No. III Hamond - Following the EDA motion ot"November 8. I mailed Mr.
Hamond Attachment D for signature and confirmation. It was never returned and the
lender. Mr. Doty. has heard nothing from him.
8.
Adiournment.
The meeting \vas adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
5
.
.
.
EDA Agenda - 3/15/()1
4.
Consideration to review for discussion the prcliminarv GMEF application for
Intccratcd Recvclinc Technolo2:ies, Inc. Steve Budd, Applicant.
A. Reference and Backcround:
GMEF I,oan Application: See Attachment A.
Rcquest is fl1r an $80.000 real estate loan.
Project Summary:
Steve Budd is President and 113 owner of Integrated Recycling "Technologies. Inc.
Untl1rtunately the date set fl1r the I.:!)A meeting is the Thursday prior to his wedding date
so I excused him. lie was present at the I-IRA meeting on the Jlh of March. The HRA
approved the preliminary concept for $40.000 ofTIf pay-as-you-go assistance for land
write-down. the City Council \vill consider this the night of the 121h of March and Mr.
Budd will be present.
The company is {()llr years old and currently exists in Rogers. The company recycles
platinull1 group rnetals from spent auto catalyst. The Prospect Teall1 of Fred Patch.
Mayor Belsaas. Kevin Doty. Ron Hoglund, and rnyself visited the existing plant some
time ago. Mr. Budd purchased the Kermit Benson home in anticipation of his upcoming
marnage.
The company proposes to purchase 2 acres of I-I property along Fallon A venue to the
immediate north of Pipeline Supply. The 10.000 sq ft: steel structure with some brick will
consists of production and office space. Proposed contractor is Tricon, Inc. Construction
to begin soon as possible. The company requires no outdoor storage. The company plans
to create 5 new jobs for the City of Monticello within two years. See Attachment B.
USES AND SOURCES
I:::stimated Uses of Funds
Construction Costs
W AC/SAC Fees
Trunk Fees
Permit Fees
I.and Costs
Contingency
TOTAL
$433.868
$ 10.J25
$ 17 ,.,!~
. ,-)~)
$ 2.676
$ 87.120
$ 13.211
$565.000
I~DA Agenda - 3/15/01
.
Estimated Uses of Funds (TIF reimhursementmethod $40,000 NPV)
Lender
City
GMEF
hluity (2 ()lYo)
TOTAL
$3X6,XOO
9,000
$ 72.500
$ 96,700
$565.000
Please review the application for compliance with the EDA-CiMEF Business Subsidy
Criteria.
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND GUIDI.:L1NES
PUBLIC PURPOSE CRrTERIA: Must comply with four or more orthe criteria listed
belovv, criteria #1 being mandatory.
1.
Job Coal: Five new full-tinle johs to the City of Monticello within two years
of the benefit date.
.
Wage Goal: At least 4.5 or the nevv jobs must pay a wage or the higher of $9.00
per hour, or at least 160(Yc) of the federal minimum wage, exclusive
of benefits, fl.)!' individuals over the age of20 during the tcrm ofthc
assistance. See Attachment B.
Annual reports arc required until termination date. Failure to meet job and wage goals
require partial or full payment of the assistance plus interest.
2. Increases the comlllunity tax hased: [MY of building is $290,000
Estimated increase of annual taxes is
$12.000 (land and building).
..,
-, .
Factors:
To assist a new manufilcturing business to expand their operations.
Otherbctors for consideration but no limited to: Nature of
business (manufilcturing), no availahility of service and product
currently, potential adverse environmental effect (permit for
furnace). and cOlllpatihility to the comprehcnsive plan and zoning
policy (yes, steel exterior acceptable in I-I zone.)
.
7
.
.
.
KDA A~enda - 3/15/01
4.
Used as a secondary source to supplement conventional financing.
The GMEF will be a second position real estate loan behind the lender.
5. Used as gap financing: Used as gap financing and as an incentive to encourage
development.
6.
U sed to assist other funds:
[n addition to the GMEF. other funds obtained are
lenders, TIF. and equity.
UREATFR MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND POUCIL.:S
I. BUSINESS ELIGIBILITY
Industrial business:
Yes.
Located within city limits:
Yes, Zoned I-I.
Credit worthy existing business:
For determination by Tim Melrose, State Bank of
Rogers. ([ .eHer to be provided in future.)
$10,000 loan per each job created. $ I 0.000 X 5 ' $50.000.
Or $SJlOO per every $20,000 increase in property rnarket valuation. whichever is higher.
$290.000 divided by $20.000 is 14.5 X $5.000'- $72.500.
Criteria: $72,500.
II. FINANCING METHOD:
Companion Direet I.oan:
All such loans may be subordinated to the primary lender if
requested by the primary lender. The GMEF is leveraged
and the lower interest rate of the (;MEr lowers the
crfCctive interest rate on the entire project.
Criteria: The GMEF takes a second position behind the State Bank of Ro~ers on the
rcal estate.
III. USES OF PROCEEDS:
Real property acquisition and development.
"l
_J
.
.
.
IV.
EDA Agenda - 3/15/01
rERMS AND CONOrnONS:
Loan Size: Maximum not to exceed 50o;() of the rernaining revolving loan fund
balance. Approximate balance March 12. 200 L $420.000. Request:
$80.000. Criteria: $210,000. Remaining balance thereafter, $210,000.
Leveraging: Minirmlln 60lYrl private/public non-GMEF
Maximum 30% public (GMEF)
Minimum 10% equity of EDA loan
Proposed
$386.800 (68.4%)
$ 72.500 (12.8%)
$ 9.000 ( 1.59IYo)
$ 96.700 (17.1 %) (> 1 0% EDA)
$565,000 (99.89%)
Lender
(lMI.:F
City
Equity
TOTAl.
Loan Term: Real estate property maximum of 5-year maturity amortized up to 30
years. Balloon payment at 5 years.
Criteria: As stated above.
Interest Rate: Fixed rate not less than 2% below Minneapolis prime rate. Prime rate per
National Bank of Minneapolis on date of EDA loan approval. Prime rate
March 15. 2001.
Criteria:
Minimum rate is
fixed rate.
I.oan Fee:
Mininlum fee of$200 but not to exceed 1.5% of the total loan project.
Paid by applicant to the EDA within five working days after City Council
approval of GMEF loan. Non-refundable. Loan fee may be incorporated
into project costs. EDA retains the right to reduce or \vaive loan fee or
portion of loan lee.
Crih.'ria:
Minimum fee of $200 or $1,147.50, due and payable not later than
April 2, 2001.
Prepayment Policy: No penalty f(Jr prepayment.
Deferral of Payments: 1. Approval of the FDA membership by majority vote.
2. Extend the balloon if unable to refinance. verification letter
from two lending institutions subject to Board approval.
4
EDA Agenda - 3/15/1)1
.
Late Payment Policy: Failure to pay principal or interest when due may result in the loan
heing immediately called.
Interest Ii m i tat ion on guaranteed loans:
Not applicable.
Assulllability of loan: None.
Business equity requirelnents:
Subject to type of loan; Board of Directors will
determine ease by ease. analysis under normal
lending guidelines.
Collateral:
Personal and/or corporate guarantees (requires unlimited personal
guarantees) as per the (rMEF attorney.
Non-performance:
^n approved CiMEF loan shall be null and void if funds are not
drawn upon or disbursed within 180 days from date of ED^
approval.
March 15,2001 EDA approval - loan becomes null and void Septemher 15, 20()).
Non-performance extension: Not applicable.
.
Legal Fees:
R.esponsibility of the GMEF applicant.
B. Rccommel1d~ltion:
Recommendation is to review this infonnation prior to the EDA meeting for
discussion and potential questions. Consideration to approve or deny CiMEF
Loan No. 018 is the next agenda item.
C. Supllortinc Data:
Preliminary GMEF application and job and wage-level goals.
.
5
.
.
.
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE
250 EAST BROADWAY
MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
PRELIMINARY APPLICATION FOR LOAN
AtI 0 t.,r."K 1
A-
APPLICANT: ~t(:>\I(:> Rllrl~
FIRM OR TRADE NAME: ntegra ted
BUSINESS ADDRESS: 20005 Hwy 81
CITY/STATE: Rogers MN
TELEPHONE: (BUS.)763-428-1954
DATE ESTABLISHED: July 17.1997
___SOLEPROPRmTOR s
Recycling Technologies
ZIP CODE:
OiOME) 763-295-3830
EMPLOYER LD.# 41-1883563
CORPORATION _PARTNERSHIP
MANAGEMENT
NAME
TITLE
President
Treasurer
OWNERSHIP %
33
33
33
~tQve l3'1dd
Rngpr Mpypr
Arn;p Rprqllam
PROJECT LOCATION:
Monticello MN
-2L-NEW LOCATION
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE: $ $ 513 , 000 . 00
_EXISTING BUSINESS
PROPOSED USES:
REOUEST:
LAND $ 80.000.00
EXISTING BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION 433.000.00
MACHINERY CAPITAL
WORKING CAPITAL
OTHER
TOTAL USES: $ 513.000.00
AMOUNT OF LOAN $
MATURITY & TERMS
REQUESTED
APPLICANT'S EQUITY
LOAN PURPOSE
PROPOSED BEGINNING DATE:
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: 1:1- 01-01
TITLE TO
PROJECT ASSETS TO BE HELD BY:
OPERATING ENTITY
ALTER EGO
PARTICIPATING LENDER: State Bank of Rogers
(Name)
Tim MplrnC:p
(Contact Person)
(Address)
<Z.al)428-2222
(Telephone #)
):'flt( _ " \. '> - y ~ g - ~ So \--0
PROJECTED # OF F.T. EMPLOYEES(within :2 yean)
PRESENT # OF F.T. EMPLOYEES:
PROJECTED AVERAGE WAGE PER HOUR: $14.00
-
ADDITIONAL PROJECT INFORMATION:
APPLlCANTSIGNATURE:~ d
.. ~
DATE SIGNED~ft /
LJA
fr\t~c,~~ ~
.
)
"
GOALS OF BUSINESS RECEIVING ASSISTANCE
Please indicate number of employees at each level and indicate the corresponding benefit level,
Number of jobs created is over the first two years.
.
Job Creation
Full-rime
Part.time
~
/
/
. /
.
Tricon, Inc.
Construction · Development
February 19,2001
Mr. Steven Budd
Integrated Recycling Technologies
P.O. Box 455
Rogers, ~runesota
. 55374
Dear Mr. Budd:
We are pleased to provide a quote fora Butler@ pre-engineered. steel building system for ~...' ....
propoSed new facility in Monticello, Minnesota, . This consists of a 10,000 square foot building; , .: '
with an eave height of 20'0". This provides a minimum under-struct1lra1 clearance of 17'9",
.' L BUlLDING
.
.,
A. STRUCTURAL - The proposed building is a structural steel building system,.,
engineered and fabricated by Butler Manufacturing. The roof is a double slope roofaric;l has~'. ",:
1/4": 12" roof slope. The roof structurals are-designed for a 30 pOund.' per square foot snow load'" ,
. and a 3 pound per square foot collateral load. ' The interior sidewall col~ are straight, not:'
tapered, to allow for easy pallet racking installation. .
B. ROOF - The roof system will be the Butler MR-24@ standing seam roorsyste~"
. which is constry.cted of 24 gauge ALZN panek The roof has a UL'Class 90 windup-lift rating;'.'-
~ereby allowing for possible insurance reductions. The roof is designed to expand and contract.' , '
Roof clips hold the panels to the supporting structurals with no fasteners to'penetrate the panel.
Gable and eave trims are provided for full roof panel/wall panel closure. Gutter and doWnspouts-
are provided on the eaves.
, c. WALLS - The walls will have natural colored rock faced concrete block to a height of
3' 4"and 10', with Shadowall@ panels above" as per the preliminary architectuial drawings. The
block walls are insulated, above and below grade, with a core-filled foam which provides aR-19
insulation value.. These new Shadowall panels are finished with a Butler-Cote 500 FP paint' "
which has a 70% K YtW-t finish., There are two colors' of panel beillg utilized 011 this' building, ,s~ell .:
. gray, and hun~er green. The gutters, downspouts, and eave trims are hunter grl?en-,' " ' ','
:. '
-' '. - D.INSULA nON . The roof will ~' iriSulated~tli i 0" of scrim foilla~inat~:iIisulation. 'i
luiytfig II ~ame spread of 25 or. less., Thi~r.will 'provide an insulatlon.value. of-'R~31.-,The. ":
" SIla.dowallpanels ,will have 6" of scrim foll laminateinsulation, providing an insulationvahie,of
..,C,It:?\\ithlhO ~e characteristics :;0::: DriVe .... , . ....' <. ,:' ~\%.;0;;i.~:L
"'~rtl~;~~::~' . il63} 29~o;::;u:.::t!~f~;:~i51.'.... .... .... " .....~,,~2:;:.~.,..
... .~'...
,...~ .. : /.
",,::..,".," ... . -, ,:;'>:-::. ':..'; "!"::::.,:),'
u,~-:~-~;,}:~,):.:_'.>:,,;Y~/i::::~;~;..'~:/: ::>, ':.;~.'. ~;,~'.;~:~>>:::' .,,::.;.{ ::::, ::.>.c.:~:\..,.:.-,..
~I- "
.' ..' .....' . C; ........... . .... . '.'i.i{i. .......... .':.;<::::,:::,S;\},;~'(r;-, cj:').~(!j:':::'~}:
, ~':" .- ,., ,E. DOORS & ~WS:~ -.11ie~e,areJivt(?)"~~9C:-'9~~~)ilsulated;(yvith)*~~e',~:;,~.,,\;.:~.:,'~
ii,1cll1~ ,in .this proposal.::: Utere" are)w~2)~plat~d_-'oy~r~e~d,~C\90t,s\~c:lu~ed #i"~~:'pr9p<>~;,-:'/t~;;:,..;,:;. ,,'
ne . ..oyerhead 400is are.::' 12'xl4~,,:.aD.c;t(,,12'*1~,.:~;,~,Jp:~~~:P<l9rs~:'!ie.\elec.1rlcatJy:oPeratea,:~d_ are ':,':/;::';~;':':':"
.,. .0', .. ........ -'JO. \ I '.:,~ '," '.;'I."l.A..,. ""'-:':"~'..::-',i"\'~ ,..,!.. .:....'I.......~>l,'..'j .,. d. _., .+~ "';;... ,. '''''..;" .:",~ ','..
',' ,insula~~d to ,R~ ~4.' The~_9fli~;..~t)~:~~o!;:~s~90~~~:~~~~d(~~~~,_:~y.~ted, '~~ :for~:~gi;~n:;':<7,;.~":-~
frames. . The WIndows lD :the .office ~e ~~ doubl~ ..~ated glass~' gray tinted, In forest :gr~n" , . '
. frames.' . ". ;::" ~: "':::i':;,:. ,~:: :!,;:!~:i;F~{;:,,:;. . . '.: ,. ," :,q
. .,' n. .E~CA V A TION/SITEWORK/LANDSqNPI~GivtItt'TIES/BITUMINOUS":;~'(.;;~,,:",: .:
'. "~STTD1l'ACING' <. "." u - .' I.. .'. :" ".,:! _' y'_< L_., '::;':' :' '; :''':.'< .,' "'. _ " . ,;' '. .' ::::"'>. ,"~':; ,
-, Y"'''-I.r T.. '. ...~ ~...-. 1"' ...... . l~'~~~ --'....~""r _'- . .1 0( _, . _ I'I.'~' . ~
",:, :;.. ...... >...:' '.:;,'; ~:' '. ,:.! ',., .~:: .'; :..,;. .:--. ,:' .;{ /,':": '~:,"., :-<:,:,.::~ .~-. ".:-~,i ::.:':->.~~~~~\~,\~~:',:::.:;~ .::::. : ~:,~}::. _ ~) ~,~..::-}'bl_,Y',:-',~:>:~
~\.~~,~..'
: . .-'.L:>,< l';'~"~' fXCA V A TIO~ ;- :?~~vatioJ;l ~d packfillip.g;. Q( lQOtW~;~:~~. ~*~ _ FCJlaIl':ti~P.i: ~~,\:\ :.~'~S'". .
,". - 'include4 W:this. proposal. '. ..~';-. h "',..~, ':" \', ,./ . '::: < ;':. r -, ;';-,..':>.,_" '.~ ..:.. \~~ ....;" -1:1":"..:"-';'."1'<" :' ,,'''::',:--''; ':,: :. ',:
:;.: >:.': ~,,':;.:;:: -~~.: ::;~,: : :,", :'.: ",::' ".' '.:.',< :, <. ',~.'. . n:'. ':.', ':'\";::','~: :._";: ~~,~".';~..,:-':',: :,:' ;.~\ ~,<:<::.:~: ~,\-~,:'r:' :.::~~~:~t;:~.,
~~:',)6~/<,<':~ ~~~~";~:;:'\:.~
" . ,,'. ~ '-. .. ~:,- B~. LANDSCAPIN~ - LaIidscaping,is iliclut!ed iQ. this:propQsaL'(See'allO\Y81lcesy; ...,' ',:' ""t.. .'~>.: :'.~.: :'.
::' : <.. "'>(~:::'''~:':'':;'~::'' : ~ , ",' , "'..:, :';;. :,,;1: '.:...., .:< ,'; ,::. . ':'"" ,,::,"~.~,,':- "., " ,',' ::~,',~; .:.~~~:::.:,~.~~..::,:,~.,,;~:?:~:;{~,~,\;:: _ ):;!}'~>:':';,',.:-
:.:~~.,~ '.
. -:'. \.". C.- utILITIES' w Utility hook-ups are inclUded lit this propOsal. (See'iijlo~J'~':L ' .'. .-":::: <: ,"': ~'~. :
. : :;'.;::.}-:-:' .~.~,:,,,.' ,'.:',-:-: -.:: ':;_...:,,'~ - :..... :">. ...-,:<;.:>~; :"',. '<'.'.:..:~~\~~:~<~,;.:.~~~'~t./~.~.:~",:-:;,,:~_.,;,,:,..
.-: :~,;,P~""'Ill1MINOUS SURFAClNG.':BitWnino~'.surfadng is incWd ii{iliiSj;r6pOsai>~..'.'.'~,:"
~~~~Ie:i#~' ~l qave ~n r, ~l~ :~'w:ay~i.~~e.~i? a;2"~bas~'~Qufs~:~1;arta:~"~"_~~~t:'(i6~~'~,-<: ".-::":...n._
"'. . ~,tl.?r.,.....a.,.-,to..ta1...... of4" Of.. bl~m.~us.,~ac..'.. 1 J;lg':"fh.~.a.yto_~..~.a..s~.:~ll,l1aveQ:I,-.O{Cl~S.'-~~l::~~:;\,:.,;:,..''': .
Wl~J~..lY2,,':base course m~ and a_I .%~ w~~course nux;.for a, totalof-3" .of bltuinmous;,';(','>,
surf~irig; ':The truck turn aroun~ area,:"ill have, S"of class 5reey,?led pase_ . : . , ". . .., _, ::,' '_,
,;, >':-':,-." '.,-' ,. ..., ,..,.;', :'. '", . "" >.. ....,.,;.,.; '. :',. " .. ..,
o " ' . . -. ... I i ~ . ' I r
. ~~:;):'CONCRETE , .' _ " . ,.,: ..J' .
',,>.'..3.;,,:".,,:', ,c ,_' ',', ',', , "'n . .":, .:"-', "'. ',"~ .':.; co'; '.:' ,',..",,''','''',. >: ;' ';.: '.', _", '
. ':,.:J~:'~.'FOOnNGS- AND FOUNDA nos 'WAL~-::,Fo<>tiiigs' have beelld~signed: ~:C6rdiiig>~~:)" /.-:,:.- ,
, ,~ ,...., ,!' ,.. . , ,.. . 0 ~. '. ,.. . ,', ~., ~.~'. '"
,,': '. '.tQ.:,~,4;:,~pgine,eiing practices" based on j ~ooo" poimd,jesf'sdil: -:':foQtings.ai~ desigrieautilizing">{:,,~>.~:
,~jkllf.~;~~~~I.~i.~. "~~~:ilii:~i:i.;(.>
"....,.,~,:...,._~~~T~W1i1.".' "'es~.' tJ?J"Mth. "fiberm..eshieinft.Qf.c4l "'s~dS. .' >::E'" "'jon'.Q.',ml{an. -.....(f'co..'ntto..l jO.'m.~'.t$.....~'~d~i:~r.'.iJ;..,:~,:"
....,'~,."..,.:~~~~J}l,..-)',.,.".,..,.,',., .."".,.... "..,..... ,.,.,,~., '.' ,.:.,,,~..,,.),, '." ,,,,,.,.,..,._,,.,~,..;_.iI':"_'.^,.:'
;, ':~'':'<'-.'mQY1~Iii:.it!OOQ:pQWid test' concrete WillbCiiSed fortM slabs' ~;"'. :,i,' .:::......_..:,:.. -': .'>:>.:;:'. ._",,',,<.;'if'/f;.t;,:.-.f&.<;"~ 'c';, <..' .:.
'::i~:( }ll~;10f!'~J~:~~t,i;~:~:~{:~:~Yd:.: :'. ". :. :','.! .'.:..,,: ,;;:~/ E :{:':" .~.: ;;J :':.:.' '. .:',:::::.r' :.:;':'~'~ :~,' ,> '-:/ :" ;'<'::''- ;;',~'''': '.:, ;';' :,:.;:.).t~~";.-)?r~;
' ,:i.:.;(.'~,:\: ~.~:: ,_-. .
. '. .. c, ...., C' ~CELlANE9US'CONCRETE' , -,' - , ". _ _c,. '."
i':'.. 'S~;APiQDsfor o~ doors:" ,;:>' .' .:": ,;'?".,
>"'-"', .><~~.~~~' ~,~Ce- dOOr~ (or all servi~e' doorS, .'".' ~-'. ': > "~,,,"',;!;,i'.i,~',:.' .
..,.~."li!. '-, J~~~',''''''i.. ~:'~\oIo(:/" "-".';-'U'"~''' ". r' . .'_'1'. "'.\.'.;~ ......- , i.... _ r...... ,'..... ",","~
,'j:.,- CO~ tilled !xi ardL. ..', ..... ". .' '!. .' ",:[0;c!~.r'
~'.;t;},J'.~.:~lr-Truck dOCk.:. ': . ~'.', ,.,'~ ,\.,
". '."'.... ... "" - I ','. '.".' _.
:~~~i~~~:;;~:. : ~'." :"~j\.>i.., ....', . .: ,,:, i),: ::/.;,:::~ 'u~~'(\Y f;~;~;M~)<~}~j~~~~
..} ~~:=F'~tf:'~~"'~J~' ":,~';'. -~~1' ~::'I.t 't\..c:. .V}O.fr! ~i - ~.. 7/\\J~'"ji..... I~>: '":.;1 ::~::"J" 'f.'~:.* I !\:.; ~:...... ," ;,. 1 ..' o:~. 'w~=. $) /:.....~.?i.. -<~~,-:.~!
'~-~~..."~~.''; ~'i. ~..~:.~..~;~., :-f.......;,~. N.~)~f'~'
./'o-'ii .~],,,;'\-,t..~t.~l!.:-\i'-:-l:;',)l,-:-"',,, '"'-. :';~'i~,,~.';':"{':~^:!;';;" 1;,,;':,..>>.:'':, ..' .:', ",:: :Or', .,:~" / d ~ ':"'1.JIi,"';;~~./; ~....),.;... . ':';>1
',!lf~~'II!" ~;;I'; .. \ t.,'9~~~---;~'II}~'-(j.'~~.;J\.1; l"~~\ ~. .,:~f\~,:; 10,
~1#':">';.+. "'Jr1~~J'"1+,tI~"".'1""o,..<~~.-'" .i'~"'",/,'.'~~ ~';I..l~' .,.l, ""....' ~ '" .......t ..,..t~ "/~q.t.F!("'~v,"~,'~"~":'~~.If"'. '......ti,.. Ir~";",\,~...... ~"\-"l.t
1"':"-;-l.:..,'~"'.~1,:'\. .li.j<<t~.~ ""'~f..'#'''''._
'. ..~:0~;;.Z:d'~ ;-~ ~ ~",'..,},; ..,1";;,:~{':";i.\ ";\-iJ.~<. ;t.' :,~: '..K~ ",~':~>f ,,' " ;::..;:( ;:,;o:n.,:l.'f' ;';!;[W. ~ :!l"'!r.rj: ..~, ,~\;1~:'iV>i,"\i;;';";" ~,.,; H ~'~#;i,t\-:?:-;.;;
V.,;;~iJ-~: '
. ,,';." "." ''''.'~-, " ," '''.' , .,' ,:. " -: '~.:"-~~'"'' ~;" /':'~.:;,;.; ,':",: c;;';',-':.:' "~':~Z~':i.y.. .:.',:j.: ;~.:~~",i. !:t;fh~;t1il~".."" 'i,'1~. '.', :-;-~ft;i~~f5(<~t~~J>_
'. . ~ 'r. .
..,
. <
.. ,..
':",1 ':
- . i.' ': .. i.: .,"
. . '.;.~.:':'~' '.._;.,i.;.~;;'.'>.">.;.'_.';'. :,1~'. ,
IV. ELECTRICAL " ...,. "~'..." ';'''n:;'':(-; ,.'/',',,:,~,,"
'. :.Thefollowing are u):clud~ and inst~.h~:~':\,,:\';~:~~,:~_':;',"~~;>:h:.:"~',::,("~' ';",. '.' ".' .~.
'1 -':12QO Amp 120/208: volt s~tch b9~di,oca.t~~Withih2i5'. Q(o~tdQOr transformef;'.. ~.
1 - 800 amp fuSed'switcb. ':, /:,/:.','.>::t' :~)}:~;,.:;t"i:~~:~t;;:~, >~':':';'-:<. .'
1 - 400 amp'fiJSed'"sWitch "~Li::;;,~':',,:.~:',,,":":'.;:,!:;J:;i',':'>;;,,;-',:: "\~.:',: ":::'.'.
.\- ...," _'. ."! .....~~.....~~ ~.,:.,;"'-..~\..:t~ .-,>~\.\.,.~"'r~:~;,~"1..;:~"r;...~'.': :'~~l'}'<: .,HI', '}
2.400 amp'spare switchesJoJ:fUture;~,,:':;.~h:t:;~:1;:~:;.':':,,>~.,:-::'
,,'1 -.400 Amp 1201208,84'cir~UitjjaI1etb.~~aVi/409~i{f.eede~~pto 100' in length "'. ....
~uipmerit Wiring ~~../'''': "I.:;\\'I'j\r ~\t.. '<~~::~~~:I~;./.~~~~./~t::.;~ft:~;~:~~:~:j-"~'I:(~:"~":~If.~,.",. r:,! ':.~ ~ \~ .~'
. ~'" .'JOt,/-\ "! c.....~..,..~4:./...~'r,!OO...:1.d...:~l: "t~\j:..:<li.t";" (:_'I...r..,r:",'\~."l~"r... ' . .. J.;...1 ," ,,1..' .:
1 - 8QO amp smgle POUlt Ct?IU;le.9Qon,up,~,:lQ()'.~l~ngtt(;~~i ~::' ,';:.....t.'.=-.. . ,,';.... ...~.. ':-: - : '- .\ :", >,
.. . . " ",:.! 4 - 60 amp single po'" iD.t CQooectiOri upn(tQ;lO<r.'mJe.n~j..~>:,,:;.~' ';'~"'-~'''-:.~':' :"" " :'~.: :<'-, , \< ~:. " ,.... :; ':'.,' '<.
. 'l-~ " .~J' ..4 'po" " II" ''o \""J' : '. ' ~....... o.~,.,* ".. 40'.~ ....r;-._~.. ~ : ...........,~ ",,"'" 1.)." . oJ ~,,!
, - '.' ;.....:' ":' ::'2J.:80'aJnp singlennint'eonn' ection'up"to"IOO,'mle:';'''':''''': ,';, -~,;:.,'~ ':';:,;'~~:':'\. ::-:. ~.;':";':\':~^> .>,:. :::-:.) "/"'
I;./''''.Ij.;...-;.t-t......~,'''~. ..r~ r. , ',"\"., . r- ~'.J ...J .~~....\...._....}"\I."....\4~.t.1. """'"""'-1,1 .~.,~.... ....~.~..,..l ,"f. {"'n
~ ~--,j..'".2...G~r'1.... 'd" h' k ....:. ~."" ~\.'.....~"l"r~l_i'f"f",_,""-"'~''''..'''''Jdl~,,:'~ tr:..............l-...l!...".. ;..~..l.,'_ _"-'.".,...._ft,.. <(. . .., \
..' ..' '.- "-" ~~e oor 00 ups .',' I ,I, -I'l""--""""~" '_1"1""",'_"-" '.,r< ,....~",.'" ..'..-.... ~.,,,,-.. ',,' ,.
. ~:"c:'.~:~~ ':.~;;~ ~~{.i~~~~~~ h~U;~: ~z~..:.::~'.::~ ~":~::~::,t~}::::~:~~~~:~:/~~:::; ~;-~/~ ; ~,;.?:i:i;!::.~~.;:t:\;;.:;~t,~:~~~ ~~::~,,:~';~ ~i ~:~~.~;t?:":.~~~_~:;;- t:..::~.
~:~
. '.. .'",'.' .,_.::.,t:t.J ~'.F.tirnaCelAir Conditioner W1Q.Ilg. ,;~. ..... ".', ~ '.;'. ;.' .;,..." :., c,:', ",":'" "'~. "r~""';';>'-rr-.' "_~"',::. .-","";': o' ",. \,'..
. · . '......, :'>i~~J~It":~~~fan~~,~':;: .' }~?'.;: :; ':: ";:,,~~;:?''';~!:t;'!\~U~';f'W~~~~i~~4i~'0ti,{,j~k~::~~':'.'
..' " ;:"019400 watt prismatic highbay tlXtUtes (average 50'foot'cai1dles)' ",':---: :.: <' '-'~,,"..;~;y,'::':~s '~~-:'. ,,; :.:..;:,'
, 'I'':..Z'.< \ ~ ,,'\.,. ~,j ,';'" d "'<I:'.. '.. ~ \,,;:r ....~... ;;?: .: :~~~'~.-"'~;~',;, -',,"'. .
,< ~., 0-- ExrtlEmergency WIth battery back-up:"~:' , ;-, >, .: . ,'--::. :>,,-. .~; '.~: .:;;. ., ,', ..~. .,,,':", .' ", r.,,'''.
i~::"i,;;J~%~t~~:==:~6~~)~';Z .... .' ':,: :i~r:<7}:!Gi;;~":<;:~~?+; ',. '. .
, ~",':::'\.~'..7.Re~~ssedcanlightsii1yestib~~;'., '>::' (.: '!"'>';'-" :';...~<:.,,~:~:< ~;;,..':.~:~'\_..
. : \.:.7>: .s!itgle Pole light switches. ..', .'-','.' . ""~.< ~.",~:-,..,., ., :.' .:~7, .., :',. :~:.::;,?:\_,
: .'~"', '.\. 2',:,~,Tliiee way light switcheS " /' . ," ",::" :<'~.:<I'~,L.<;,.
;;;';~~~~~":~::r~ies .~;:.':~::,::,,:, '. "';';< .
.. ;:'..~;;:",V~,:gene.ral.purpose receptacles \ ,>>-"" '.' '.- }~..: "'d' ';, " ,,:;/.,,;. ',.';',
"'.-';:~5'::C.ircJ.ritsfor'thelunchrooni '." 1/.:'.' ;:. ..' "" ".."
, :':,~~';;;;;;~:l:)j~pf~~'recePtBcl~s f~r the;:sh~p;::--' ',~ '-.. __ '. "~ ;." ,;,':':,'~' "'".
, >~. ~:. ':\~!" ~,:- patalCommunication rough;in locations, ..... ,,,~.,'., ,,' r,
..' .... ."'"',,~. ~,rl:;"'t I' ~ ..... . . ....f. \.".:.:::.(',,-<~..;~-..;.... .':1,.".
:<j'py:;;f~r~~~;:'. .'. ... '.,. :<."':E~.<' ':. :.:";./,,
-<: ,,": ,!,;:"..:.t.:,~lOO.OOO BTU mfrareds. 50'ID length:". '.,' '" "/:.. . ,. -, \' .~.:;.-. .
.-' .:<t:"~r:',:,a;~'.F.tmmce'and'~ coriditiOliet's~ fortne~officb\':~:~' .':;:'," .'
. ,....;..,.-.~,._~ "-r: ".'~ .... '~'.. ~ I ~'~'.' -. ~~ ',1. "'.. _ ~-:...\ t... .~...~. .... .J,'., !..\~: .":',.lo," ,.',
'_".' -:'~: >...~.:~.:- ~ath e~ust fans . "'-l"~ '., ~..:'::. .,,~.,~'=:..,' :'~.::.\.. " ...." "~".-.', . .,,';.-'~: :i....-'.
.' - . _,.t:'/'-:/:G~' P'~' " ',",-.,. .,.......,", i....-,. _ ':,c.. ',___ ~:"'.',,'
. . ~,,"',i :.'".. .' as Ip.m,g,. '. ,':. . '. . . .; <. .
, ' , ,. .. (~' .~..l.~ ,1..'''' "_ ~~.~~~.:.: r :,":.'.J:,~'~; .'~ \.
7' :.:..::l\.r~;'~-;''-'.L'' ."V':r~ ". ;.,".:........ l:.:';.\........';..... ..1 '. :'. ~t~;~<~>;l.'.r:.t .:.... . ,.'~:'.~, ... .'."
:, . :;' ..... . . " . ,....,.",.0..', "'.' ,c ';'.'- "': . -' f " :'.? ;'.';' ~. .'.~ .-.... :" .. ;:.,:::"-.:,..'..,:.:.,::1<,:.":'..:::.,;,,..'.',.'..... ~.: p,', ~. I~
. ,,":.,--k '. ;'q . ,.- .,,' .' 'n .. "'. " ':" - ~:,>~'::,:::h~~..
"j~t.;.:::,.:p~~~~:,:, ),.',' "":-;' :-::i-:,:':;',>?:':~:" ".'. "../.;'.>: .."~' '<"";,'" .';i'::. "". ""<'- ..,'
<, . ,: : .:<,::::-Th2'" eLa{o~ow~!rax:e prQY1ded and Instal, ,led:', ~.-..:. , , . ,.''';'.,?\...:,,,: y,;'-:' ,. ':;',',"''''.':_,' :.'.......',:...',.,:,.:._.,':::..~.,,';.".',,:J,:~~.,;,:,~:',:~"
,':,',':"':.:'"
,\::':.::::.:~-.>,'~..,- '.~""v~tones-;' ,....,,' .'."."...-:.-,..-.::':;:.....;"~':;~:\'. ~.'< ""
!. ,-', .' ,,:.... ~.. ';.., . "" I ' ..' .. ..~. '_.'.' , \ . 1 ...;.l.
- :.; .:'.:. "~.:..'::.:' . 2, ~ Toilet stool~ ': ,'.' . " '. ". ,::;:" '.' '.' "
.:~~.~~:;~~lf:~)~.~,~i:j~;j(jtc~~n-~ink-withfaucets "', '\. ..'~><:<~.: " .., ''':''';'_':~'_'' ,:.:;'~'''._~,'',~..._:
~)~'l~~:i~~:L.;....:t~~::".";.;'}':;.t~;~~5~~~~1~i~;~~:,;'.;;<i;h~i:i :~:A~6~,~~~i~)i~lf~ik~(
.~J<~I-!.i;i~~~~,'~"';::f"i:;~....'" .' \... h, ;... ....~;. .:'.... """'.:.'". ,,,':t,':,,,-'h,,.~"'" lM.;' ",,,..1.) ..>.li..:il
..''''"i:~~~tl,. ""~~,.,,,,,,,,.......t'. '~,,,, .',. ''. "t. '/,-" "'l'.,d. 1....h''1\').;.~.I<i~''!llI'!:'''' w''''(f,;' '" ,
c .(,~'ft,~3?~'y...;~1~~~:rl-l'i~.. \ 1%;~'~~< '~t.. : ~:~ :t};~{:~ 1 ~~~}::wt!~lri,;.'..~~li1~~~~~~ . ~:'i. .
j I.',. ,. -. 11,., ~.J . ...'..!~\'"'\"...'",I;..,.~'j~,,'y._: ~..,-:-:.~~:t~_~~, ./7t..~~-..:~~.
e..
e
-' l..),::~.~.:.':~ ,.
r;
. . {,
.." ~. . ;
;'~'{."',,,. ':.:..;';>' "
('
'.
. ~. -.. '
r:. ..
,'\ .'
.'..1:,"
, "
,;,.. .
.,,~., .~'-~..~ t
~. "'. ~. ;-', :
."
'''4
, ,.".,
.\ .
:. ~': ...;. ' .
. -, ~ ;';.'. -10 't.
) {'
;. '..' ."'~
. ,I '."
f:",.
....
;~ ~ ",'
".
" '.
.f .'
r ....,...;.
>.'j
, ,'-; 2 ~.~-
" ,
..-:..... ~
_. :. ~ l~.~'~'
....-"-
. ~ ".,
. _: ~ ....~.r. :.,: ., - .
.::'" '';,.; :.,
"-'
:{
:. . -..:;,. ..~t." '.
...'.... .....;0.
, '. ~..
- ~ , .j , . ~.'-
> ~
/;., "~.-:..
'"
.'
: ~_ ~ .1;~., ..
. . ~ j,.{ .' .;'0;: "
...'\1.....
("., ,
...., -.
"',.' .".,,, ......."..:.: -.
) ~.. " ~ . ~ r' .~.',..
.... '..
'.'. .
, :: ..1'.,..... ,,:. : ~
.,~. !.
".
.... .',
. ' . ~...:~;_"::>J>: ..~;-
.":'1'
_.".1: '-l
. t;~:.'-i+:::.~--'.
.,' ;.-
".:,o~ _ ;:... ~.-" ;~.. '. ~-~~
'!;," -
, '
': _.I~
" '.,,,'
, ....,
, c '
""~.'
"". .
.,-. .
... .
. ". .
.,' ,.' .
"
1 - Laundxy tub with faucets ,
1 - 6 gallon electric water heater
, 2 - Floor drains in bath
1 -Electric water cooler
- Sanitary sewer stub into future sPace .
. .', . - I',
. .'.. ';:' .,.
.... ,'.
, .
,'. .",
. . ....,.
'.. ", '., ."
~ , " . ,
'/ "
. . '. -. .
.": ';, . ~'. I '.... '.....
. ~ ''',' r "
, ' '
'"
,. ,
, .',
.' '.' I ,~. "1
:. ",:. \, . ':', . l.. "'. '. I ~ '~:" . .,...:.. ,
'Vn. SPRJNKLERS'",\ ".,:;':',', ,.,';, ':', ~ ':', : ",:, ' " "
Sprinklers are excluded from' this proPosal.;, 'We 'will, 'proVIde a water line ,sized to
accorimwdate a sprinkler system.if ~eqUired fot the future expansion. ~ :'; .' ". ',' , .
. . ,....,.. r.....,' . ~ ""~;~" ~ . :.,_~....'. ',.,..:.
. " . , .-.. ~' "'" ':.' 'Y :1". . .: .', .:. .... ~ . , . " ~
...'......
.",
VIIL ,FINISHES
..
'~ ShopArea ' ,,' . " " "
; ,
Floors ~ Exposed concrete , ,',' , " .'. "', ",,,,"
" .' . Ceilmg~ Exposed insulation ,'. .' H, ',::' >r:' ,::~:,-,>, ,::' ".' '..,
"'. Walls - pxposed insulation "",," ", ',' ' ,
, , '~, Baths ' , , "', ,::' , '"
/', Flqors - Ceramic tile' , " ,,: , ..:.' -'. '.
',' '. Ceiling-Acoustical Ceiling tile, 2'x4', scored to appear 2'x2', .' , " i., ',- '.'~' , .' , ,:
,t'" :,;".,Wa~ls,~Sheetrocked,sanded,primedandpaipted;ceramictiletoahdghfof.4~,~ >;' :.':; :,',:,' "
, '. L h' . , . .'.. '" " ,
" une room " , , , " :. . ,. .' ' .', ". :' ,.".:,' ,;,. ," ""','"
:. .~ r... -", .' ,..' .: '. . ." '. ".' ,.' '~. .., ,. ',~,':';" .T .: ...."J,', .',,'~::. '~.~, . ';~, ":,i.. '. .- '.
" " ',' Floqrs- Vmyl floor tIle WIth VInyl base: ',;'" ";',: ,;''',' k'<,' : . _ ',: .,,:,,:,: ': '" '.
,:"Cei~g'.: Acoustical Ceiling tile, 2'x4'1scoredtoapPear 2'x2',.':- '" '.,' :"':', ~', :,>~, .<~>':,/.':/" '::',,"','
. ".,", Wcij~s,- Sheetrocked,sanded, primed8.nd painted, ': '.' ,: " . . "', . .;:' ',', '~,::~;;:;::<..<-: ..,: ",c',:: .~. "";
," ~ ':'. Offices and R~eption Area'., " : . "",:'" '" -,,' "
. . ), FloorS~ Carpet with carpet base "" , ;: :,' ',. , ' " ,
:/,' Ceiling - Acousti~al Ceiling tile~ 2'x4'; scored'to apPe3r 2'X2' i '.: ' '., .' ',:..,; :', ,'~ \ ' ,';.,
',' W~is-Sheetrocked,sarided,prim~dandpainted : ,.','''' ,,'.',.:......1\, :., '
",", Miscellaneous<. . . ':"',, _ ,',.' :"'::~':; \: ...;;,,.:,,,,:,';',','.:..';', ',:-
,,' " , '.;, ,Ply'wo~d mezza.nine above' offices dCsigned for, 7,5 PoUndisq~~' foot Joad::: ,'/; /..";~:~'/;'. '.: .~, :', " ' ,', "':.;'.'~:'
'~~~~ ~~~~,
" ; '. ,:.':':'.\:',DeIivery' Qf steel will be 10 -llweeks'after receipt'o(contnict'::PioJecicOriipl~on\is':::,_ /::
,'" ',:tJ;ir~eO) nion$s'after delivery of steet; "contingent upon'reaSonable,'~v~lability'.of:laoor9.il~::~:/i,:"''-.
"materials. '<,.' ' , .' " '~' ':, ,:,"<.:. ,,'; \~".:..'f;','.~:"'. ;,
,'. , ". . ,.,.. ,I,'.' ~ ... "
, ~. , . .,
'.
TERMS . " .....
. x.. ,'''. ) . r ~t. j ~.;. " " _: "f" ~ ':~'....'"",'. .,',
",' Five ~r cent (~%) of the contract amount upon receipt of the c~>li~t ',Steel to be paid ,,~.
,five' days 4fter delivery. Balance of contract made at 'monthly interVals ~ progress:'payments. '
" finalpa)'lt1ent within five days after completion ofproject. ' ,",
". ,': I
.
,'. .',
:'~~t;I~JI~l:~~~J
"-'3.".,:/::::.:'
.. . ,. ~ ,..' ".: ' .' , . .
',", ,;',"~:",';;'ici~;;:i\,:,,,t,:,"i,,,;<~;'il~ff~tf~;IJil~~~:~~~t.i~i~i.
":""",~".I,,'..I,,.~.,. '~""<"',':,<"~''-:-'' :"v'<l' :" .'; ";,:",~~,~jJ:'i~,'fi)t:f;'::lrk!l,";i'i1!;~,:f.~,~~l;;',,:-;:,,,:,,;'
, ;., . ~ .' ,., .1": ~'~.,/t ~'_,:<'r~'":.:, ....> ":~':.~:~,j":',~~~.'~:,. ," .~~~~.t';::'(.:?~~),~~:";'~":~~~~,.'f\:~ti~~;':~~i~~~~~~:'11~~)~~.J,,;i~~~~~~!?~';".
, I
· .. BASE BID COST for this project includlllg del;veIy,;~i!lli~~PPliCable tax~,ere~on;steel. ...
,~ncrete and masonry, architecturit1an~ structural drawing~,'site plan:, and eVerything specified in
~s proposal: FOUR HUNDRED TJiIRrt" TIiREE'QJQUSAND JLIGHf HUNDRED SIXTY , ,
~IGHT DOLLARS($433,868.o()) , ,", .:' ," ',:' , ':, '.';:', " ,,',' "'_::'" "..", -' :';, ' ,', ';'
.:
, , ' .- " ,'- ,:" "...
,,'oj
ALTERNATES ". :'..'r~.'~.. ". ._" .': '~.}.-.~' . -, .-
Alternate #1 Replace 1200 Ampservj~e'with 160Q -' "::"AddS2,500.0Q
Amp Service' ,",. ..'.", " ',~ ,;.... ..' '.' '::.
ALLQWANCES " " ,,' , , ,,_ _ ,
An allowance is a number in,cluded in thepase bid~bu~ estimated at th~ time of the proposal.
contnict willlle adjusted once the actual costs are known.",' . .-", , : ,,'
. ' .' .' . .' .. ~: ' \' ,
The
.~. ~". \; ,. . -
I" .
., Allowance # 1- Landscaping,
Allowance #2 - Utility Connections
$ 5,000.00
$10,000.OQ ,'.
.': ",.:..'
,l!
'".,
....,
,I, :
XI. EXCLUSIONS., _ ,_', _ " ' , ," ,I':
, Utility hook.up charges, building permit; land puichasecost~ unforseen local ,governing -
body requirements and anything not specifically mentioned in this proposaL ,:, ' ' , -
, '
, . . I ' ',: .. . . .', : .,! . , ~. , .,., - . " ~ . j.: '-:,.:," " .
We are certainly looking forward to working with yo~ on,this'project~ Any further qu~stions can, '__
bedirept..rtomeortoTravisRippieat(763)'295.,.1141. ,,' n,:_" ',',.
.
j' ~,~, ...
.j.....
j",:,
Respectfully,
,,','
"
:'(0'
. r;:.;
Thomas N. Feaski:t.__"
, President '
- I :,:.'.
" ...;.
r',..
. r . ,..,
, ,'j"
'. ':" " ",' ...--
..' ....,".> .
. ." . \
;' '.'~-./
,"'1
.( ~""",
."" ;
.', ,;.
. 'I. ~.
./'(' , .'
-'
-!
''t:;::';
, --
, ,. '&.~;, ,. ,:. ,
, '. . ", '. ": .~,
'," "~,><,',..~;,,,,'~'::':;'.:"'<:;': "~'_.'" '
" J' ~: . -- ' ",; ,,:
, ,I, '". "j,'.
'"
, .
, .,'1.
" ,
,..... ,. ,\,'
'~',
, , . .
.' :""!',' ... J ;", ,j'.:.... I..,. .." '~' ..... ,.
',.,;1' '.'" '. I
. -;',.':',' ~; .' ,.,~ \
. . ,~. ':s ~. : . .t.
, .'",,<;,
'..' ','
,- If
, '
, ' -
. . ~ ~ .
" . '. ~ '.,',' ",'.i
",' .."".,. ~'
J,' ') .... .,.;
~"i ,
. " . . ~
" '
I, . ., ~ ....,.' ~
. ~.
." .' ," "
,'.. ; .... .., ~. "
.'-,:
, ,
"
/,' '.. ~ '
.. ,.',: ;. .. .
" ;
I.i ... . . ~ r
), ;',-' <", ~;' '.
, ....;.
'. I ... .c," f:'.~,: t~,~~ ~"'~"'"
. ,:' 1.1~' ~
:.I ~, . . . . ,:'. ., . I'. '';..:,
. ''', l(.....
.', -.:.
. ,.:, ~;
e "
, . ,
. . I \ '~,' _ ., '.
'. ,',."
. .:,'" I""'.
..; '. '~
:-
~
,', ,\.
"
,. '.
:\'
.
.
.
EDA Agenda - 9/28/99
5.
Considenltion to approve or denv GMEF No. 018 for Integrated Reeveling
Technologies, I nc..
A. Reference ~,"d Backc:round:
After review and discussion of the preliminary application from Integrated Recycling
Technologies. Inc. (IRTI). the EDA is asked to consider approval or denial of the request
f()r a $XO.OOO (,MI.:F loan. In my conversations with the lender, Tim Melrose of the State
Bank of Rogers, Tim inf(lrmS me the bank linds the company to be sound. lie also
infonns Inc. the bank has not received sufficient information relative to the project to
make a conHnitrnent for funding..
First. the I-:DA needs to determine if this GMFF loan application from IRTI will
encourage economic development. Secondly, the EDA must determine if the proposed
construction real estate project application cOlnplies with the EDA Business Subsidy
Criteria - (iMFF Guidelines. Lastly, the FDA must determine the amount and terms of
the loan for approval.
The City Council will consider ratilication of the EDA's action for compliance of the
EDA-CiMI~F Business Subsidy Criteria on March 26. 2001. If approved, the GMEF will
be disbursed at the closing date yet to be determined. It is recommended, the approved
dollars be disbursed from the GMEF funds. The UDAG and Aroplax State (lrant should
be closed out.
B. Alternative Action:
I. A motion to approve GMEI.' L,oan No. 018 f(Jr Integrated Recycling Technologies.
Inc.. an '.S" corporation, in the amount of $72,500 with term and conditions as
recommended at the meeting Collateral. guarantees, and other condition
requirements to be determined and prepared by the (iMEF attorney. The (iMEF
loan approval subject to lender commitments. verification of company financial
credit ability. and Council ratification of EDA action.
7 A motion to deny (lMEf Loan No. 01 g f(H Integrated Recycling Technologies,
Inc.
3. A motion to table any action.
EDA Agenda - 9/28/99
.
c.
Recommendation:
RecollHncndation is for Alternative No. I with terms and conditions as recOlnmcndcd at
the meeting. Arrmwa1 subject to lender commitment and determination as a credit
worthy company by lender.
D. Supporting Data:
None.
.
.
2
.
.
.
EDA Agenda - 3/15/01
6.
Consideration - Consideration to review for approval/disapproval the second
DMRF application for 113 West Hmmlway.
A. Reference and back!!round:
This agcnda item was tabled from the January 30 meeting because of the lack orquorum.
Mr. Heaton was present at the January meeting and informed those EDA members
present of the high cost to removc paint rcpair brick and repaint: remove paint and repair
brick; or re-brick. l-Ie also mentioned it was his understanding the awning was approved
for funding with the first application.f'he FDA is asked to review for
approval/disapproval the second DMRf application for 113 Westl3roadway.
TIIF FOLLOWING BACKGROUND APPEARI]) IN TI W JANUARY AGENDA
At the August 29.2000 FDA meeting, the commissioners approved DMRF No. 110 for
thc property located at 113 West Broadway after much discussion relative to the thrce
plans approved by the DAl and the three bids presented by Kevi n (--Icaton. Approved
DMRF No. 110 was for up to 5<n'll of the rehabilitation costs. not to exceed $11,000. j'IJr
the front facade and signage. The one time exccption to thc DM RF Guidel ines was due
to unusual circumstances; length of linear frontllJotage. prominent location (heart or
town). and extreme per square flJotage rehabilitation costs. Attached are the DAT
minutes and review.
After the approvals by DAT and EDA. Ileaton elected not to move fl)rward with the brick
t~lCade options and proceeded with a tt-ont facade treatment of stucco retaining the cornice
and installing a canvas awning. Prior to applying the stucco. Mr. I Icaton informed the
Building Official and EDA Office of his change in plans and the OAT Chair was noti lied.
Mr. Heaton inquired if the awning would qualify for funding. he was advised to IT-apply
with the knowledge of no promises. The awning was included with the three (brick
t~lcade) plans and bids approved by the DAT and EDA.
On January 2. 2001 DAT' was requested to review the design of the awning associated
\vith the second funding application. The DAT minutes and revieyv are attached. DAT
did not accept the application as the requcst carne alkr thc installation of the awning.
It was the Office of the EDA that suggested Mr. Ileaton submit a new application lew
funding. It appcars that the lirst approved DA T plans include awnings with eithcr of the
brick f~lCade options. In review orthe approval Il.lr the design and funding ofDMRF No.
107, it appears Mr. Johnson received apphlVal Il.lr design and funding fi)r the awning on
thc MCP office at thc titnc the stucco was applied. The DAT review noted stucco would
not be recOllllllcndcd if this wcre a restoration but lilr rehabilitation purposes it isjust
line. /-lowever. Mr. Johnson was never reimbursed becmlse he did not cOlllplete the
.
B.
I.
. 2.
~
-) .
c.
EDA Agenda - 3/15/01
cornice treatment as approved.
Two points of consistcncy: First DMRf No. 110 or 107 did not rcceive reimbursement
because they did not complete the projects as approved for design. Secondly. application
NIL 107 and I] 2 both request funding for an avvning only with a new stucco facade.
Again. January 2 DA T motion" application not accepted as request after completion of
the installation of the awning." Mr. Heaton stopped by the Onice of the EDA on October
] 7 or November 1. 2000 relative to his change in plans. DAT and Bob Claybaugh vvere
both notified for input and to encourage the brick j~lcade as well as city staff. The
building permit for the stucco vvas issued October 23.2000. and the permit j()r the awning
was mailed Dccember 21.2000. The DMRF application is dated December 27.2000. It
is unclear as to the commencement or completion date of the installation of the awning.
Certainly every effort was made by the city stair and DAT to encourage a brick ElCade
treatment
Alternativc Actions:
A motion to approve DMRF No. 112 in the amount of $2.250 I()!" the J/'ont
signagc improvement at I] J West Broadway.
A motion to deny approval of DMRF j(lr 113 West Broadway.
A motion to table any action.
Rccommendation:
Although it is very important [or the EDA to endorse the DAT design findings. it is also
important that the design approvals be consistent Everyone worked very hard to
encourage this project as a prime example I()r dO\vntown revitalization and was let down
with the stucco facade: however, the second application is j(lr funding of the awning only
similar to another application. Whether DA 1'"s request to review the application came
arter completion of the installation of tile awning is unclear to the On-Ice of the EDA.
DAT's question was: Docs the awning meet the Design Guidelines?""
D. Sunnortin2: Data:
Second DMRF appl ication. DA T minutes and review.
Previous I)AT minutes and revievv.
.
:2
.
informed the Building Officialand EDA Oftice of his change in plans and the OAT Chair
was notified. Mr. Heaton inquired if the awning would qualify for funding. he was
advised to re-apply with the knowledge of no promises. The awning was included with
the three (brick facade) plans and bids approved by the OAT and EDA.
On January 2. 200 I OAT was requested to review the design of the awning associated
with the second funding application. OAT did not accept the application as the request
came after the installation of the awning. The OAT minutes and review were provided.
It was the Office of the EDA that suggested Mr. I-Ieaton submit a new application for
funding. It appears that the first approved OAT plans include awnings with either of the
brick facade options. In review of the approval tor the design and funding of DMRF No.
107. it appears a previous application submitted by Mr. Steve Johnson received approval
for design and funding for the awning on the MCP office at the time the stucco was
applied. The OAT review noted stucco would not be recommended if this were a
restoration. but for rehabilitation purposes it was just fine. However. Mr. Johnson was
never reimbursed because he did not complete the cornice treatment as approved.
.
Two points of consistency: First. DMRF No. 110 or 107 did not receive reimbursement
because they did not complete the projects as approved for design. Secondly. application
No.1 07 and 112 both request funding for an awning only with a new stucco facade.
Again. January 2 OAT motion .. application not accepted as request after completion of
the installation of the awning."' Mr. Heaton stopped by the Office of the EDA on October
17 or November 1.2000 relative to his change in plans. OAT and Bob Claybaugh were
both notified for input and to encourage the brick facade as well as city staff. The
building permit for the stucco was issued October 23.2000. and the permit for the awning
was mailed December 21.2000. The DMRF application is dated December 27,2000. It
is unclear as to the commencement or completion date of the installation of the awning.
Certainly every eftcxt was made by the city staff and OAT to encourage a brick facade
treatment. Mr. Heaton addressed his reasons for the change in facade treatment. Skip
Sorenson. a new member of DA T and local architect. is researching other community
design guidelines. It is his view if the design guidelines are only enforceable by those
wanting FDA funding. the design guidelines have no teeth and the objectives of the
dov,intown revitalization facade program will not be met.
Mr. Heaton inquired if the reason OAT did not accept his application was because he had
stuccoed or if it was the fact that the application was submitted after he had installed the
awnings. Pam stated that OAT was under the impression that Mr. l-katon was not going
to come back to them fix funding since he was not putting brick on the building as he had
.
!
6;4
.
.
.
,
\
\
EDA Minutes - ]/30/01
first intended and what OAT had approved. Pam noted that stucco was not
recommended.
Heaton asked if OA T would have turned them down for funding of the awnings had he
come back to OAT with plans for stucco and awnings. Pam explained again that OAT
would not have approved the stucco of the building and could not state for sure whether
OA T would have approved or not.
Chair Oemeules advised that the EOA needs to be consistent as in the case of Steve
lohnson's application. He also felt that OA T/EOA would not have approved a plan
involving stucco and feels that we need to remain consistent.
Heaton advised the reason he went with stucco explaining that the building had
previously been ravaged by fire and after he contacted someone who docs masonry, they
found that the bricks did not match up, the upper right hand corner of building was in
poor condition and would have to be replaced, and it was also discovered that whoever
did the original brick \vork put the windows in after bricking which meant that if Heaton
would be redoing the brick, he would have to replace the windows as well as he was
advised that the original glass would break if removed. Mr. Heaton also advised that this
company would not take on this project. Heaton advised that the brick work was
approximately $20,000 to $25,000 and $10,000 for new glass. He stated that he could not
justify putting that kind of money into this building. He also stated that the steel beam
across the front of the building was severely bowed and would have to be replaced if
brick work was going to be done.
There was no action taken.
~
5. Consideration to review GMEF No. 014 relative to late pavments for action to call loan.
The members discussed this item and stated they would like to look at modifying the
guidelines to either add a percentage or a flat rate for late payments. They did discuss
that perhaps that would not include this item but that it would be for future loans.
As you recalL GMEF Loan No. 014 with T. 1. Martin (Lake TooL Inc.) has been a topic
of discussion at previous EDA meetings. The loan payments consistently appear to be
late. Letters dating November 2000 and August 2. 1999 and numerous telephone calls
relative to late payments have been made. The company eventually pays but not on a
timely basis. EDA loans have no penalty for late payments. Koropchak provided copies
of the payment status for #014 noting their late payments.
The GMEF Guidelines read: LATE PAYMENT POLICY: Failure to pay principal and
...
.)
.
.
.
DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO REVITALIZATION FUND
Monticello Economic Development Authority - 271-3208
250 East Broadway, POBox 1147
Monticello, MN 55362
FUND APPLICATION
I. Basic Information:
Name of Applicant/Property Owner \< ~ \J I~ L \\. e.l:L.'"t" " 'f'..
~\ b <b ":). -r..l\.~\p.i. '. Q...() ~
Address of ApplicantJProperty Owner ~ \...ID ~"'v "' "^ f\) '5 s "1> ~C
Telephone Number of ApplicantJProperty Owner ~?-o - CO S ~ - ~ <"\ <\ S
~ 'b":4::> - ?-"i:>e - '-J", I..t ~
Social Security of Applicant/Property Owner l,\.l\ f) - fl t ~ (.p 0 J _ -:s
Tax ID# of Applicant/Property Owner
II, Nature of Revitalization Fund Request:
Street Address of Revitalization Property \ '\ ~ \....) '<2l1\....c cd v.) ~ . "0\~
PID Number of Revitalization Property \ S S - c \. c - b S .'). 0 La!)
Legal Descrie...tion of Revitalization Property - Block ~ ~ Lot(s)
Lc\ \.0 b- t:: \~ ~t \8 \~. ~q.. LC' S
Revitalization Property is currently:
Occupied '(,
Prospective Occupant
Unoccupied
Ifawlicable, Name of Occupant (Business) or Prospective Occupant (Business)
'<.J..l hu.J\ Q ~ \' 0\ ~_
\)
If applicable, brief description of the nature of the business of the occupant:
~ \...a ~ ' ~J \\....~ ~ ~ '"~ o.-b \ ~
1
.1
LPB
.
.
4
.
.
.
.
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund
Fund Application
m. Type of Revitalization Fund Request:
A. Facade Grants
1. Front Facade and Si2Ilage Grant (Matching funds of up to $2,500)
Amount of Request $ ~ ~ ~ So Projected Cost of Improvements $ '-\ SOt)
Amount of Equity $
Amount of Private Loans $
Please submit a minimum of two written cost estimates for the proposed revitalization
improvements, any deviation must be approved by the Design Advisory Team (OAT).
The DMRF does not Cover routine maintenance or insured losses.
Brief description of the improvements for which applicant is seeking funds:
2. Rear Facade Grant (Matching funds of up to $2,500)
Amount of Request $
Projected Cost of Improvements $
Amount of Equity $
Amount of Private Loans $
Please submit a minimum of two written cost estimates for the proposed revitalization
improvements, any deviation must be approved by the Design Advisory Team (DAT).
The DMRF does not cover routine maintenance or insured losses.
Brief description of the improvements for which applicant is seeking funds:
2
L(
.1
.
.
.
.
.
.
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund
Fund Application
ill. Type of Revitalization Fund Request:
A. Facade Grants
1. Front Facade and Si2Ilaee Grant (Matching funds of up to $2,500)
Amount of Request $ ~ ~ ":). So Projected Cost of Improvements $ l\ So V
Amount of Equity $
Amount of Private Loans $
Please submit a minimum of two written cost estimates for the proposed revitalization
improvements, any deviation must be approved by the Design Advisory Team (DAT).
The DMRF does not cover routine maintenance or insured losses.
Brief description of the improvements for which applicant is seeking funds:
2. Rear Facade Grant (Matching funds of up to $2,500)
Amount of Request $
Projected Cost of Improvements $
Amount of Equity $
Amount of Private Loans $
Please submit a minimum of two written cost estimates for the proposed revitalization
improvements, any deviation must be approved by the Design Advisory Team (DAT).
The DMRF does not cover routine maintenance or insured losses.
Brief description of the improvements for which applicant is seeking funds:
2
.1
.
.
.
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund
Fund Application
3. Side Facade Grant (ifaoolicable) (Matching funds of up to $2,500)
Amount of Request $
Projected Cost ofImprovements $
Amount of Equity $
Amount of Private Loans $
Please submit a minimum of two written cost estimates for the proposed revitalization
improvements, any deviation must be approved by the Design Advisory Team (DAT).
The DMRF does not cover routine maintenance or insured losses.
Brief description of the improvements for which applicant is seeking funds:
B. Rehabilitation Loan (Maximum amount is the lesser of25% of total cost of the
improvements or $20,000)
Amount of Request $
Projected Cost of Improvements $
Amount of Equity $
Amount of Private Loans $
Please submit a minimum of two written cost estimates for the proposed revitalization
improvements, any deviation must be approved by the Design Advisory Team (DAT).
The DMRF does not cover routine maintenance or insured losses.
Brief description of the improvements for which applicant is seeking funds:
c. Fee Reimbursement (Reimbursement of City fees in an amount equivalent of
10% of the total cost of the improvements up to a maximum of $500)
Amount of Request $
Projected Cost of City Fees $
3
.,
.
.
.
4
.
.
.
Downtown Monticello Revitalization Fund
Fund Application
IV. Lender Information:
Name of Participating Lender
Contact Person
Telephone number
J/we certify that all information provided in this application is true and correct to the best of
my/our knowledge and J/we agree to apply for and receive all applicable building permits prior to
the start of work and to comply with all building inspection requirements.
~~~
Signa e of Applicant/Property Owner
/ ~... ~ '7 -OCJ
Date
4
.,
.
.
.
4
.
.
.
DowntowD Monticello Revitalization Fund
Fund Application
N. Lender Information:
Name of Participating Lender
Contact Person
Telephone number
J/we certify that all information provided in this application is true and correct to the best of
my/our knowledge and J/we agree to apply for and receive all applicable building permits prior to
the start of work and to comply with all building inspection requirements.
~~~
Sign e of ApplicantlProperty Owner
/ ;)... d '7 -OC>
Date
4
.,
.
G & J A wning and Canvas, Inc.
1260 10th Street North
Sauk Rapids, MN 56379
I BILL TO
fpREFERRED TITLE, INe.
! CINDY HEATON & KEVIN HEATON
i 113 WEST BROADWAY
I PO BOX 727
I MONTICELLO, MN 55362___J
ITEM
I----
AWNING
I
I
I
.
I DESCRIPTION
I' 2 TRADITIONAL STYLE
A WNINGS, ONE
I W/GRAPHICS
I
Invoice
~-~-----I
I DATE INVOICE # i
I 12/20/'00 594\ --.
L....-__ ---------'
I SHIP TO
rsAME
I
I
~--~---------.
i
TERMS
I
DUE DATE I
i
12/30/'00 - J
F PO NO=J
Est Amt Prior Inv.
NET 10
4,500.00 2,050.00 !
Prior % I
45.56% I
I
i
:
Curr % Total %
_lease remit to above address. Thank you!
l1\ny questions? Call 320-255-1733
L-----
54.44% I 100.00%
I
i
I
I
!
i I
_~____-L__
i
I Total
R~~j
I
T~
,
AMOUNT !
~
2,450.00.
.
I
; I
.~-~,~~---~
$~
(gC-,
.
.
.
/
I.
\
KC & THE BOYS, LLC
21082 FRANKUN ROAD
CLEARWATER, MN 5532Q..1307
~170
919
4271610394
5067
Oat.
I ~ - .}'7-01.J
Pay to the A " . .It
Order of 0" -1-- ::r- I"'tW f\ ; ^ ~ Q r. A.l"\ "IL ~
~Z; ~"d - ;+--~. --lJ. 015- ~~
::~:: NOfWtltll 8,mk Minne.solll SouM. N.A.
NORWSrBANKS SI. Cloud Otllee
.<;/I_iII. 400 Fiftlt Stletlt South
,;~::qOOb"q::N~'.b .03%172~-~-~--~
I $ al 4 sa . (T()
,..; ~ - Dollars I'D =-~-=
- -----.---..-- -_.~---
\
\
~.
(
'--/-
.
.
.
3w.f3c
J I
Building constructed about 1912. The
storefronts were reconstructed prior to this
1930's photograph.
Two-bay storefront wtth decorative brick comice
and band above storefront.
Exposed steel beam over storefront.
Canvas roll.up awning above display windows.
Wood and glass storefronts wtth transom
windows.
Wall signs and projecting signs.
Historic Photograph
~.~~"}!?,,~;:;:>i -
. .......
Transom windows have been covered with a
pointed wOod panel that serves as a sign
panel.
Projected lighting over sign panel.
Brick building front facade and bulkheads
below the display windows have been painted.
The historic wood and glass display windows at
Preferred Title. Inc. have been replaced with a
aluminum and glass system.
The wood and glass display windows are stili in
place at Mountain Top. One of the wood entry
doors has been replaced with an aluminum
door.
Preferred Title, Inc
11 3 West Broadway, Monticello, Minnesota
PT-O 1
Apr. 10. 2000
CCLAYBAUGH PRESERVATION ARCHITECTURE INC
l.Pl>
.
.
.
'------
..
.
~
......
Ii
'j
I
I
, I
i I
.~
f'
4
,J
~.
.
. 'J..
,
" 1!
i j
.
c(
.
.
.
Minutes
Regular Meeting - Design Advisory Team
Tuesday, January 2, 2001
Monticello City Hall - Academy Room
MEMBERS PRESENT: Pam Campbell, Dennis Sullivan, Ron Hoglund, Mike Cyr
MEMBERS ABSENT: Susie Wojchollski, Amanda Gaetz, Skip Sorenson
OTHERS PRESENT: Jeff O'Neill Ollie Koropchak, and Fred Patch
1. Call to Order
Pam Campbell called the meeting to order at 4:30pm
2. Approval of minutes
Mike Cyr made a motion to approve the minutes of December 5.2000
Seconded by Pam Campbell Motion Passed
3. Consideration of adding items
a) Renewal of expiring Terms
b) Agenda Preparation
c) Update on Methodist Church
4. Heaton Property at 113 West Broadway
Heatons are requesting funding for a matching grant for the installation of
awnings. In effect the application is requesting design approval after
installation has heen complete~. Motion to not accept the applic~n was
made by Mike Cyr and seconded by Dennis Sullivan. Motion passed
4
S. Update on Broadway Avenue Improvement.
The Wright County Highway comminee approved the application for
variance to the State of Minnesota. By the time this was accomplished,
the quickest it could be considered will be in March. This pushes the
project off until the 2002 season.
6. Update on \Va]nut Street Landscaping plan
Steve Grittman is still \vorking the details.
7. Discussion ,,'ith the City Council concerning strengthening the design
guidelines.
a) JetT O"Neill made copies of the city ordinance covering the CCD district
and passed them around for study.
lYE
.
~.
.
.
.
.
Design Advisory Team
Final Review of Project
.
Date January 12, 2001
Project Preferred Title Building
Name of Property Owner Kevin and Cindy Heaton
Address of Property 113 West Broadway
Team Members Present Dennis Sullivan, Mike Cyr, Ron Hoglund, Pam Campbell
Team Members Absent: Susie Wojchouski, Skip Sorenson
StafT Members: Ollie Koropchak, Jeff O'Neill, Fred Patch
Findings: From the DAT minutes of Tuesday January 2,2001, "Heatons are requesting funding for
a matching grant for the installation of awnings. In effect the application is requesting design
approval jlfter_ the installation has been completed. Motion to not accept the application was made
by Mike Cyr and seconded by Dennis Sullivan. Motion passed."
.
Approve
Disapprove
Not accept the application
Comment: The Design Advisory Team worked with the Heatons for over a year to rehabilitate their
building facade at 113 West Broadway. Bob Claybaugh, historic preservation architect, assessed the
building in March 2000. At the August 2,2000 meeting the DAT approved three possible treatments
for this facade based on his assessment. They were: repainting the brick with an appropriate color,
stripping the existing paint to expose the original brick, or rebricking the entire front facade. Awnings
were an option with any of the choices approved by DAT.
The Heatons chose instead to stucco the exterior. This treatment of a turn of the century
building does not comply with the design guidelines. In fact, the design guidelines encourage the
removal of such inappropriate materials to retain the architectural character of a building.
While the awnings alone would otherwise be eligible for matching funds, the Heatons did not
get DAT approval prior to installation.
.
.
.
.
Design Advisory Team
Final Review of Project
Date January 12, 2001
Project Preferred Title Building
Name of Property Owner Kevin and Cindy Heaton
Address of Property 113 West Broadway
Team Memben Present Dennis Sullivan, Mike Cyr, Ron Hoglund, Pam Campbell
Team Memben Absent: Susie Wojchouski, Skip Sorenson
Staff Memben: Ollie Koropchak, Jeff O'Neill, Fred Patch
Findings: From the DAT minutes of Tuesday January 2, 2001, "Heatons are requesting funding for
a matching grant for the installation of awnings. In effect the application is requesting design
approval j!ftc!" the installation has been completed. Motion to not accept the application was made
by :Mike Cyr and seconded by Oennis Sullivan. Motion passed. "
Approve
Disapprove
Not accept the application
Comment: The Design Advisory Team worked with the Heatons for over a year to rehabilitate their
building fucade at 113 West Broadway. Bob Claybaugh, historic preservation architect, assessed the
building in March 2000. At the August 2, 2000 meeting the OAT approved three possible treatments
for this facade based on his assessment. They were: repainting the brick with an appropriate color,
stripping the existing paint to expose the original brick, or rebricking the entire front facade. Awnings
were an option with any of the choices approved by OAT.
The Heatons chose instead to stucco the exterior. This treatment of a turn of the century
building does not comply with the design guidelines. In fact, the design guidelines encourage the
removal of such inappropriate materials to retain the architectural character of a building.
While the awnings alone would otherwise be eligible for matching funds, the Heatons did not
get DA T approval prior to installation.
F MONTICELLO / BUILDING PERMIT ·
n Street/Suite 1/Monticello. MN 55362 (612) 295-3060
)ite Address: Broadwa
Legal: 6 Block
Pr.rty Owner Name: Preferred Title.
Address: 113 West Broadway
PERMIT #
00-5501
PID # 155-010-052060
52
Plat
Zone:
Original Pla~ Acldition
CCD
rue. - Kevin Heaton
City: Monticello
=ontractor Name:
S tate License #
Address: City:
:::ng./Architect Name:
Address: City:
)lumber Name:
Address: City:
Iechanical Name:
Address: City:
escription of work: Stucco front of buildiuK facing Broadway.
Est. Value: $
4,000.00
.J''' ...f Work:
L New
tA\ddition
gII' Alteration
o Repair
o Move
o Other
pe of Con'itrurnon:
o Single Family
o Duplex
o Multi-Family
.g Commercial
o Industrial
o Res. Garage
o Other
Tree Ordinance Applies: 0 Yes x::J No
Other Handouts Required: 0 Yes ~ No
Additional Information:
COIlSL type: VIi
Occ. group: HID
Division:
Sq.FL: 1
. # Stories: .
# Res. units: 0
Max. ace. load: NA
Fue zone: NA
FIre sprinlders: 0 yes D no
Off-street parking covered:
Off-street parking uncovered: _
*******************
ark performed without required inspections will result in removal or materials at
Iler/contractor's expense until inspections are completed. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Big. pennit 97.25
Plan review
S~tesunax 2.00
BIg. Total
Plbg. permit
Fixtures
State surtax
Plbg. Total
Mech. pennit
Futures
State surtax
Mech. Total
Sewer access
Warer access
Warer meter
Meter sales tax
Meter Total
Sew & wafer pennit
Trunk water
Trunk san. sewer
Stann sewer
Lift station
Park & Pathway
Fire Lock Box
TOT AL FEES
Receipt # ;;;(, l~~
Date /i..$ 057
/ L . -, ::::> _ /"\. /,..-.
() ....,..{ , r i .~
L?f'
99.25
99.25.
!fl
A~
CITY OF MONTICELLO / B ILDING PERMIT
505 Walnut Street/Suite 1/Monticello MN 362 (612) 295-3060
PERMIT #
00-5561
pm # 155-010-052060
Zone: eCD
Plat Or1einal Plat Addition .
Site Address: 113 Vest Braadwa
Legal: Lot
~perty Owner Name: ""'rln L. llearon
Address: 21082 Franklin Road
City: Clearwater
Phone 4# 320-558-6795
State: MB Zip: 55320
Contractor Name:
State License #
Address:
Phone #
City:
Eng./ Architect Name:
Address:
Plumber Name:
Address:
Ylechanical N~:
.J
Address:
City:
City:
City:
gescription of work: Install AwninJZ: on Store Frane.
Est. Value: $ 4 ~ 000. 00
~,v .
New
Addition
c: Alteration
o Repair
o Move
o Other
Tree Ordinance Applies: 0 Yes DNo
Other Handout') Required: 0 Yes 0 No
Additional In(ormation=
Canst. type:
Oce. group:
Division:
Sq.Ft:
# Stories:
# Res. unit'):
Max. oce.load:
FIre lone:
FU'e sprinklers: 0 yes 0 no
Off-street parking covered:
Off-street parking uncovered: _
r~~e or Cnn~tructinn~
o Single Family
o Duplex
o Multi-Family
l:J Commercial
o Industrial
o Res. Garage
o Other
*******************
Work performed without required inspections wUl result in removal 01 materials at
)wner/contractor's expellSe until inspections are completed. NO EXCEPl'IONS.
: have read and examined tb~ permit and agree to comply with the building code in
ofTect at the time 01 th~ application. I agree to comply with the ordinances of the
~ity of Monticello.
- .\
I'.'. . ~ );
~
L\Q..)
-\e?.... ant SiFture
'. -' '//
3uiiding Official ignature
\~-a \ ~CY)
Date
\'~. o.._\-('()
Date
FEES:
BIg. pennit 97.15
Plan review
S tate surtax 2 . 00
BIg. Total
Plbg. pennit
Fixtures
State surtax
Plbg. Total
Mech. permit
Fixtures
S tate surtax
Mech. Total
Sewer access
Water access
Water meter
Meter sales tax
Meter Total
Sew & water permit
Trunk water
Trunk san. sewer
Stann sewer
Lift station
Park & Pathway
Fire Lock Box
-9t
TOTAL FEES
99.2. '
-:uW
( ~
Ii
CITY OF MONTICELLO / B ILDING PERMIT
505 Walnut Street/Suite 1/Monticello MN 362 (612) 295-3060
PERMrr #
00-5561
pm # 155-010-052060
Zone: CCD
Plat Orh:inal Plat: Addit:1.on
Site Address: 113 Wesc
Legal: Lot
.operty Owner Name: Kevin L. Beacon
Address: 21082 Franklin Road
Phone # 320-558-6795
State: KN Zip: ~
City: Clearwater
Contractor Name:
Stare License #
Address:
Phone #
City:
Eng./ Architect Name:
Address:
Plumber Name:
Address:
\lIecbanical N~:
.,/
Address:
City:
City:
City:
~escription of work: fusca!.l AwninJl: on Store Front:.
Est. Value: $ 4,000. 00
[vue of Work~
New
'Addition
. Alteration
o Repair
o Move
o Other
Tree Ordinance Applies: 0 Yes DNa
Other Handouts Required: 0 Yes B No
Additional Inrnrmation~
COnsL type:
OcC. group:
Division:
Sq. Ft.:
# S rories:
# Res. units:
Max. occ. load:
Fue zone:
FIre sprinklers: 0 yes 0 no
Off-street parking covered:
Off-street par.king uncovere.d; _
.~"V~ nf rnn!fitrllctinn~
o Single Family
o Duplex
o Multi-Family
EJ Commercial
o Indusaial
ORes. Garnge
o Other
*******************
.;y ork performed without required inspections will result in removal o{ materials at
lwuer/coDtractor's expeDSe until inspections are completed_ NO EXCEPTIONS.
: have read and examined tb~ permit and agree to comply with the building code in
~tTect at the time o{ this application. I agree to comply with the ordinances of the
:ity o{ Mooticello.
I.. ,\ '\ \
. ~ '" ."\,...,.\
,,"-.\ . J
~p t Sianature
'-...... n
,/'1/
3uiiding Official ignarure
l~ - a \-("()
Date
\~-a \-CY)
Date
FEFS=
BIg. permit 97.15
Plan review
Slate surtax 2.00
BIg. Total
Plbg. pennit
Furores
State surtax
PIbg. Total
Mech.pemtit
Furores
Slate surtax
Mech. Total
Sewer access
Water access
Water meter
Meter sales tax
Meter Total
Sew & water permit
Trunk water
Trunk san. sewer
Stann sewer
Lift station
Park & Pathway
Fire Lock Box
99.25
TOTAL FEES
99.25
'S'
.
.
.
MINUTES
Special Meeting - Design Advisory Team
Wednesday, August 2 - 1O:30am
Monticello City Hall - Academy Room
.
1vfEMBERS PRESENT:
Pam Campbell, Ron Hoglund, Susie Wojchouski, Mike Cyr,
Amanda Gaetz
OTHERS PRESENT:
Ollie Koropchak, Cindy Heaton, Jeff Heaton, Bruce Hamond
1. Call to Order
Pam Campbell called the meeting to order at 10:30.
2. Add Items
Not all DA T members were present so no agenda items could be added during the special
meeting.
3. Review of proposed building improvements to Heaton property (113 W Broadway)
The Heaton's expressed their appreciation of the Bob Claybaugh concept drawing completed
for their building, but also expressed concern with the idea of removing the gray paint from
the brick on the front fayade. It is very possible that major patching and poor tuckpointing
has been completed on the brick underneath the paint and would look quite poorly if
exposed. Pam stated that the best historical preservation work would be to remove the paint
and expose the original brickwork. Mike stated that this building has great potential to be
restored and that it may be possible to rebrick the front fa<;ade if the paint is removed and the
original brick is found to be in poor condition.
.
Kevin Heaton stated that they will be having an awning made by Steve Houle in Clearwater.
They will have signage on the awning and the windows. The east side of the building is in
good shape and probably will not be touched. The boards will be removed over the transon
windows and the windows underneath will be repaired and exposed. Doors will be repaired
or new doors will be found.
DA T members decided to approve the proposed improvements in a 3-tract format so as to
allow the Heatons to attain assessments for removing the paint and for an entire rebricking of
the front fa<;ade.
Pam Campbell moved and Susie Wojchouski seconded the motion to approve the design
improvements plans for the Heaton property at 113 W Broadway provided that they follow
one of the following three plans: Plan A includes repair of existing brick and repainting of
brick in a new color scheme; refurbishing of aluminum trim, uncovering & repair of transom
windows, restoration of door, and awning addition. Plan B includes all items from plan A
except that the front fayade brick will have its paint removed and all necessary tuckpointing
.
~G
.
.
.
and repair will be completed. Plan C includes all items from plan A except that the front
facrade brick will be removed and replaced with new or refurbished brick, with the
understanding that DA T will make a recommendation to the EDA to increase the funding for
this project. The Heaton's will move fOlWard with either plan A, B, or C at their own
discretion.
.
Motion carried.
4. Review of proposed building improvements to Hamond property (214 W Broadway)
Bruce Hamond handed out copies of his DMRF application. He stated that he is requesting
grant monies for all four sides of the building and is also applying for the rehabilitation loan.
The Hamond property improvements will be done in 2 phases. Phase 1 has already begun
and is designed to get the building in decent condition for their tenant to open her business.
Phase 2 will involve more major improvements and is the phase that will be using the DMRF
program.
Phase 2 may include removal of the front staircase provided that it will meet code
requirements. They will be adding a side entryway to the small green space on the west side
of the building whether or not the staircase is removed, but the staircase removal will dictate
where the entryway is located. The front facrade will look similar to the concept drawing
completed by Bob Claybaugh.
Bruce stated that they will probably use siding rather than clapboard because of the lower
cost and maintenance associated with siding. Mike eyr stated that masonry siding should be
used instead of vinyl siding as it is not much more expensive than vinyl siding and it is much
more aesthetically pleasing.
.
Susie Wojchouski moved and Mike Cyr seconded the motion to approve the design and
materials presented for the Hamond property at 214 W Broadway with the reconunendation
that masonry siding be used instead of vinyl siding.
Motion carried.
5. Adjourn
Pam Campbell moved and Amanda Gaetz seconded the motion to adjourn.
Motion carried.
Respectfully Submitted,
Amanda Gaetz, DA T Secretary
.
4
.
.
.
and repair will be completed. Plan C includes all items from plan A except that the front
fa~ade brick will be removed and replaced with new or refurbished brick, with the
understanding that DA T will make a recommendation to the EDA to increase the funding for
this project. The Heaton's will move forward with either plan A, B, or C at their own
discretion.
Motion carried.
4. Review of proposed building improvements to Hamond property (214 W Broadway)
Bruce Hamond handed ont copies of his DMRF application. He stated that he is requesting
grant monies for all four sides of the building and is also applying for the rehabilitation loan.
The Hamond property improvements will be done in 2 phases. Phase I has already begun
and is designed to get the hnilding in decent condition for their tenant to open her business.
Phase 2 will involve more major improvements and is the phase that will be using the DMRF
program.
Phase 2 may include removal of the front staircase provided that it will meet code
reqnirements. They win be adding a side entryway to the small green space on the west side
of the bnilding whether or not the staircase is removed, bnt the staircase removal win dictate
where the entryway is located. The front fa~ade will look similar to the concept drawing
completed by Bob Claybaugh.
Bruce stated that they will probably use siding rather than clapboard because of the lower
cost and maintenance associated with siding. Mike Cyr stated that masonry siding should be
used instead of vinyl siding as it is not much more expensive than vinyl siding and it is much
more aesthetically pleasing.
Susie Wojchouski moved and Mike Cyr seconded the motion to approve the design and
materials presented for the Hamond property at 214 W Broadway with the recommendation
that masonry siding be used instead of vinyl siding.
Motion carried.
5. Adjourn
Pam Campbell moved and Amanda Gaetz seconded the motion to adjourn.
Motion carried.
Respectfully Submitted,
Amanda Gaetz, DA T Secretary
.
.
.
Design Advisory Team Review
Date August 24, 2000
Team Members Present Ron Hoglund, Susie Wojchouski, Mike Cyr, Amanda Gaetz, Pam Campbell
.
Team Members Absent Gail Cole
Ex-Officio Members Present Ollie Koropchak,
Applicant Present Kevin and Cindy Heaton
Property Owner Kevin and Cindy Heaton
Building Address 113 West Broadway
Sketch of Proposed Facade Improvements:
See attached
Improvements in conformance with the Design Guidelines:
All improvements listed in the report by Bob Claybaugh are in conformance with the Design
Guidelines.
Improvements in Don-conformance with the Design Guidelines:
.
None at this time
Design Advisory Team Recommendation: To approve the application.
Comments: The DAT approved three alternatives for this project regarding the brick facade. First,
and least complicated is to simply repaint. Second, chemically remove the existing paint on the brick,
repair damaged brick and retuckpoint the mortar joints where necessary. Third, if the historic brick
is so damaged as to be unrepairable, the front of the building will be refaced with new brick.
Obviously this is the most costly of the alternatives.
Until an assessment of the condition of the brick is done, the owners have not reached a
decision. At this time they are considering the options. Any of the three will meet the revitalization
guidelines.
My initial recommendation would be option two. Find out what condition the brick is in by
chemically removing the existing paint and repairing the brick and mortar joints. Although there is
a chance the building will have to be repainted if the bricks are not in good enough shape, there seems
to be an equal chance they could be exposed to recapture the original facade of the building.
However, the DAT will work with the Heatons on whichever option they choose.
This building is one of the few with a reasonable chance of easily exposing the historic brick
facade. The owners seem conunitted to completing a quality project that will restore the integrity and
character of this building. It is a fine example of early twentieth century small town architecture.
.
lo~
.
.
.
EDA Agenda - 3/15/01
7.
Consideration to rcview GMEF No. 014 f'elative to latc payments for action to eall
lo~rn.
A. Rcferenee and background:
This agenda item was tabled fhllll the January 30 meeting because ofthe lack of quorunl.
The members did discuss the potential to amend the GMFF Guidelines to include a
penalty fee which \vould apply to future approved loans. Koropchak was requested to
inquire with the local lenders as to the amount and type of penalty tees.
TI-II~ FOLLOWINC BACKGROUND APPEARED IN THI::: JANLlAR Y AGENDA
As you recall. GM[~F Loan No. 014 with T. J. Martin (Lake Tool, Inc.) has been a topic
of discussion at previous EDA meetings. The loan paynlents consistently appear to be
late. I.etlers dating November 2000 and August 2. ] 999 and numerous telephone calls
relative to late payments have been made. lhe company eventually pays but not on a
timely basis. I:::DA loans have no penalty fl.)r late paynlCnts. You will notice on the
attached record, the Octoher I and Novemher I, ::WOO payments were paid on Novemher
'"21. 2001. The December 1. 200! payment was paid on January 19, 200!leaving the
January L 200! payment unpaid \vith the February 1. 200! payment due vvithin days.
Plcase note the most recent paymcnt schedulc. Although T. .J. Martin madc a
payment on Febmary 28, they still rcmain delinquent for the payments due
February 1 and March I.
The February, !99S, 7-year loan anlOunt was $87.500. 6.5% interest rate. Interest
payments cOllllllenced the first day of the second month fi)lIowing the Loan Closing date
and principal payments cOl11menced on the first day of the twenty-fifth l110nth
immediately following the Loan Closing date. Monthly principal and interest payments
are $1.716.12 with last payment due Aprill. 2004. Remaining principal balance is
$76.!52.03.
The GML~F C,uidelines read: LATE PA YMFNl POLICY: Failure to pay principal and
interest when due mav result in the loan beinL'. immediatel)! called. Events of default
'"' L
under the Loan Agreement: (a) fililure to pay \vhen due any principal or interest on the
I . ()(1l1.
This appears on the agenda for two reasons: Notice to FDA l11ember and consideration of
action. Below arc some alternative li)r the FDA to consider.
.
EDA Agenda - 3/15/01
B.
Alternative Action.
I. A motion directing staff to dran a letter stating late payment clue 'vvithin
days. ifpayment not received the EDA authorizes stalTto contact legal consultant
to begin proceedings to call fl.)r loan.
! A 1l1Otion directing stalTto contact our legal consultant to research the potential of
an arnendlnent to the Loan Agreement adding an interest rate pcnalty 01'____ ___
% or a flat monthly late fee 01'_ ___ Il.)r C1MEF No. 014 as an alternative to
calling the loan.
3. A motion to continue notifying the bOITO'vver of late payments due.
4. A motion to table any action.
C. Recommendation.
.
Recommendation is alternative no. 1 and 2. Again another I Y: months have passed and
the account is not current. An interest rate or tlat monthly fee with substance may act as
an incentive lor the borrower to pay on time. This gives the borro'vver the choice to agree
10 a late ICe or call of the loan. Il00vever. the penalty involves more bookkeeping but
doable.
D. Supporting Data:
Copy of previous letters and loan payment record.
.
!
,-_. .._Q4/(11/00 '0 1226 . - 86273.64
2 05 01 00 467.32 1248.80 85024.84
3 06 01 00 475.90~ 1240.22 83784.62
4 07/01 00 453.83~' 1262.29 82522.33
5 08 01 00 461.90./ 1254.22 81268.11
6 09 01 00. 454.88 V 1261.2 80006.87
7 -1.Q.LOl 00 433.37 v 1282.751/ 78724.12
8 11 01 00 440.64 ,,/' 1275.48 774:48.64)8'
9 12 01 00 419. 51,./'" 1296. 6lv' .-76152. 03 - ". . _ ' /
YEAR 2000 4097.11 11347.97 76152.03
To- _n "ol/oi/Ol' u_ 426: 24/ t289 .8"8---''-''i4862~T5:~
---ii --..- 02/b:L10i' . 419.02' 1297.10 73565.05
12 03/ailaT' 371.91 "-'-1344. if 7~~~Q~I1I
----'.'--' 13 - 04/01/01- 40'4:24 1311.88 70908.96
'._"___ 11 .. ,9s!gIZQ\':' ,.' 384:Q~"--"Ij~'2-':,"'63 '-"--,~~E~,$I~,~?~_
15 06/01/01 389.44 1326.68 68250.25
.---.--'-~--.~~_.,-.--...-.---T6'-'-...lJ7/0l/0J. '369.69"'1346 :43' .. 6690:r: 8X'-
..---------""-'.--17 . 'u8101/01 '--'J74048-. ' "1341. .64 "65562'.I8-
"-'''''''--'T8'''-09/01/01' -366.97-- 1349:'15 64.213.oT
,.,.,--,.....---.""',..,..,.,........---n.,-'-19'10}01/01--, 347.'82 ' 1368.:30 62844.-13
-..------"""-".-"-.~._-'~-~-'---'.---20. ,. 'iI/oI/61' .' ""'151:'"76'" 1364.36 '6'148(5".'3"7
. '".. m.. m.,",,__.., "'"':"'~:~"-'''''~', ~2"~'.-'""---I2"/017DI"'~. .... ....m']"3 3:CY2- 13 83 . Ibm 6009'7'-27
YEAR 200'1 . '~'"~"'~'4"E;38":68-""'" \""~16054 ':';7'6 ... d6oo9~1':27
'.22' '.' 01/bi/()2 ....-- "'--336:38" 1375)':7<1'. '587i 7.53
23 oi/01/02'" _....'"~-'..3"28':.6K'. 1387":'4'6'"'' .""--!)7336-:-07
24 03/01/02'-2'89.84 1426.28559Ci3:-;:i9
'._-"..~ -"2S'----04/oi/5i 312. 91'"14CiY:'2I" --~'--"5450-0. 58--
26 05/01/02 295.21 1420.91 53079.67
.'"-'---'):7--'." ---Obfb1ltt2 297:10 .,,, --'----'14T9.02"-".51660 :'-65
28 07/01/02 279.83 . 1436.29 50224.j~
290S!OI/02 281::C">'" 1':135.'00 481$9.36
30 o9/6i/(j2'2~i3:b8 14'13.04 47346.32
31 10/01/02 .256.46 1459.66 45886.66
32 11/01/02 256:84 1459.2B 44427.3$
33' 12f01/02 240.65 -'-1475:4742951.91
YEAR 2002 3i14s.ClS' '17145.:36' 42951.91
34 01/01/03 240.411475: 71. 41'176.20.
35 02/oi/03 I' ~32.l5., 1483.9739992.23
36 ' . - 03/0T/ 03' "~--'--~202:T8~~O" '"'"'-~"-'-T5IT~94-" ,...'...""3134'78"-:'2'9--"
3 7 .' (Y47 01/03 "215:'37----'-- -'---1500-.75'." ---""36977: 54-
38 05/01/63-.200.'3'0 1515':"82 .'35461"; 72
39 OG/oi/oj 198.4g 1517.63'. 33944.09
40 07/01/03 183.86 1532.26 32411.83
41 08/01./03 181.42 i534.70 30877.13
42 09/01/03- 172.83 1543.29 29333.84
43 10/01/03 158.89 ~~5J~?3 27776,61
44 lIf0 r/C)3 155.47 1560.65 26215.96
45 12/01/03 ' .., ]04.2:'00 ' 1.574':12 "24641.134
YEAR 2003 2283.37 18310.07 24641.84
46 01/0i/04 137.93 157e.19' j3063.65
47 02/01/04 1'29.09 1587.03 21476.62
48 03/01/04 112.45 1603.6719872.95
49 04/01/04 111. 23 160~LH9 '18.26n .06
~:::~si.
$l'1l(..'[~
.
1lJ- 0
I II '1 ( 0 l
"
'-.- 0'-' .-'-
;;.. ~,f/P t,
-#3",(.,/
- , '.'''--
-l.'f ~g, .
....-_....
".' .,.,..,
'.
li:J; fV\. Cl r t/Y'-
GME:F :#'01'-/ CL~::~)
02-18-1.998 -A-x NIDRTIZATION SGIEDULE ** 08:29:36
( Actual/360 ) Page 1
~~~= - ~ - i"" - - ~=~ _._ _ i .~E~3~~~~Q .~!. -lE?I~!l1~ _ i _._ _ ~:=~=: _ ,_
60 I 03/01/00 I 6.500% i- $87500.00 I $87500.00
---_________.M_____,________~_______________..______~___________~__
Monticello City Hall, 505 Walnut Street, Suite I, Monticello, MN 55362-8831 . (763) 295-2711' Fax; (763) 295-4404
Office of Public Works, 909 Golf Course Rd., Monticello, MN 55362 . (763) 295-3170' Fax: (763) 271-3272
r;A
.
rl ~i~ ~
0
C"')
LO 'r,
"
I ~
i
a '-J "
\ I
\[)I
II
cd
I
i'l
'"
;:.~~ :
cc
....
r1'I
lJl
."'::: ru
'\
-,~ \
,
, I
, ~ . .
1 -
>- I , C'-
Z Vl J
I
<3: t"" I t.D
a. i I t.D
:!:", I ~ ....
1
012 ! 0
(,)'? <(I ~ ....
. '" (1"
I- ~N . I
Ci
Z N<O I 0
~'"
w<O:2 WI i . .
:!:~z '"
z
a. ::E ~ ~ ~ ~
Ow. ~ c Ii ....
CIJ co ~
..J 2: 0 IlCl ~ '" 0
wO::] ~ A>>.!~ili; .
Ow r1'I
>-u j iiiiJl',> 0 lJl
w 0._
o.f-- ::;a..-!III.....lJ,l..2
o -;z I I:r'; l).~~ q 0
~o .:.FI :; c,~a...i 0
a. ~::E . : EJ!I')~~
bl ~i I ~
J:~ JiiI u.1
U~ C
w 1 'JJ:
::> '2!
..J ;'~~_: ~~,~,; I
m .,1 ~ 0'
- I
1-"1; 1
'~, ~':~; i
":1
',}"fjl!,"1'14.:"~\<:nJ\1S1,,~,,",, .',
.
~
ru
o
o
[j
r1'I