HRA Agenda 12-04-2002
.
.
.
AGENDA
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, Dccember 4, 2002 - 6:00 p.m.
50S Walnut Street - Bridge Room
COlllm issioners:
Chair Brad Barger, Vice Chair Steve Andrews, Darrin Lahr, Dan Frie, and Bill
Fair.
Council Liaison:
Brian Stumpf.
Staff: Rick Wolfsteller, Ollie Koropchak, and Lori Kraemer.
I. Call to Order.
2. Consideration to approve the November 6,2002 lIRA minutes.
3. Consideration of add ing or removing items from the agenda.
4 Consent Agenda.
5.
Continued - Consideration to hear an update on the progress tor redevelopment of a portion of
Block 52 and 51.
a) Consideration to approve entering into a Preliminary Development Agreement with Steve
Johnson f(.lr Phase I.
b) Consideration to hear project update by Sawatzke.
c) Consideration to hear summary of parking requirements for redeveloped area.
6. Consideration to authorize payment of lIRA bills.
7. Consideration of Executive Director's Report.
8. ComlniUee Reports.
9. Other Business.
] O. Adjournment.
.
.
.
MINUTES
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, November 6, 2002 - 6:00 p.m.
505 Walnut Street - Bridge Room
Commissioners:
Vice Chair Steve Andrews, Darrin Lahr, Dan Frie, Bill Fair and Council
Liaison Brian Stumpf
Chair Brad Barger
Rick Wolfstcller, Ollie Koropchak, Jeff O'Neill and Lori Kraemer
Absent:
Statl:
1. Call to Order.
Vice Chair Andrews called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. and declared a quorum.
2. Consideration to approve the October 2. 2002 HRA minutes.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DARRIN LAHR TO APPROVE TlIE MINUTES OF
THE OCTOBER 2. 2002 I--IRA MEETING. BILL FAIR SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED WITH DAN FRIE ABSTAINING.
.,
J.
Consickration of addint! or removinf!, items from the auenda.
Koropchak removed item 48 and 5, stating there would be discussion on item 5.
4.
Consent At!enda.
A. Consideration to approve chanf!,es to the Contract for Private Development bv and
amon!.!, the Citv. the I-IRA. and the Central Minnesota Single Family Housing.
LLC'. RccommendMion: To approve changes to the Contract for Private
Development.
Koropchak advised that this will be the same amount of assistance. just given in 3
separate payments which secures the H RA. s risk. Koropchak also noted that she
had not been aware that the homes would be constructed in terms of modular
homes. but the assessor stated it would not change the value. Jeff O'Neill advised
that he \\ould put together a packet of information on this project as well.
C'. Consideration to approve chanl!int! the date of the rClo!Ular mectinl! of the HRA
from Januarv 1,2003. to Januarv 8. 2003.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DAN FRIE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA,
WITH THE RErvIOV AL OF ITEM 48. BILL FAIR SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y.
HRA Minutes - 11/06/02
.
5.
Consideration to approyc assiunment of the Contract for Private Development between
the I IRA and T. .J. Martin, Inc. from 1'. .J. Martin, Inc. to WHL Enterprises. Inc. and to
amend certain conditions within the Contract.
Koropchak advised that this item was removed from the agenda so no action was
required. Koropchak proyided a copy of a letter sent to Wayne Hoglund after discovering
that the business would have to be a manufacturing business in order to comply with the
contract. She will be checking further with HRA Attorney Greensweig.
6. Continued - Considcration to hear an update on the prouress for redeyelopment of a
portion of Block 52.
Koropchak advised that Stcye Johnson, Jim McComb, JcffO'Neill and herself had met
previously and that Johnson \vould present an update to the I IRA on his progress. She
did advise there was no preliminary agrecment or deposit at this time. She also advised
that she had invited Pat Sawatzke and advised that they may be interested in his project as
well.
.
Steve Johnson noted that Kevin lleaton would not ,be participating in Phase I. but may in
Phase II. Phasc I would include Johnson's properties and the I--IRA lot. He discussed the
City's ordinance regarding parking which could be reduced to 60%. I--Ie presented a
parking study which they kit would he appropriate in comparison to other communities.
He noted that most parking spaces are at 20(;;) to 300;;, full. other than at peak hours. They
are tinding a demand for approximately 2 ~/~ spots per 1,000 sq. n. In further n:search
they noted weekday parking versus \veekends. They compared restaurants. retail. and
of/ice. lie then stated that the project would take 3 to 3 y~ parking spots per 1.000 sq. ft.
when combining retail and retail/of/ice.
Johnson advised of 2 altcrnatiyes. Alternative B included demolition and acquisition of
land, and Alternative A would be no additional land and rc-striping the existing parking
spaces. Johnson stated they \vould have 130 parking spaces for that block and with the
existing spaees there would be a total of 199, stating this was calculated at 4 spaces per
I, 000 sq. ft.
He stated that there had been no changes ill regard to uses and sources. Phase II would
require acquisition of land. I-Ie also noted that they estimated working capitol and
parking lot costs. Johnson adyised they had recei\ed an estimated yalue of buildings
when complete and advised that Koropchak \vas calculating numbers.
.
Johnson told the I-1RA he was looking for a consensus of the members that he should
proc:eed with his project. stating that he was looking for their agreement on the numher of
parking spaces they reel arc required for this project. Koropchak had c:oncerns \vith
parking counts from Johnson being different from \vhat the City staff had cktcrmined in a
previous parking study.
...
HRA Minutes ~ 11/06/02
.
Jeff (J"Neill auded that in the (,CD they can accept an application with 60% of the
required parking. but it would be up to the Planning Commission to approve. He noted
an exception in that they typically do not count the parking on the streets, as this is
generally for overflow parking. If street parking was included in the 60%, the overflow
parking would have to go elsewhere. although hc stated they were close with the number
of spaces.
Pat Savvatzke stated he also questioned whether they could count street parking. adding
that he was in favor of Steve's project as long as it did not create a parking problem. I--Ie
stated that the parking at his business and one other was not included in Johnson's count.
Steve Andrews adviscd that parking is a planning and zoning issue and not for the HRA
to determine. Johnson stated that he telt this does come into play. noting that if they find
they are short on parking they would need to acquire more land and that would increase
their costs and affect the amount of assistance rrom the II RA. 0 "Neill added that Steve
Grittman had looked at this proposal briefly and they will again review it at their site
review thc next day. as well as reyiewing Sawatzke's proposal. \vhich would give them a
better idea of parking counts.
Thc HRA askec.J that stall review both propo.sals and report back to the I-IRA. It \vas also
stated that at this time thcrc may be too much parking and not enough business so this
may work to balance it out.
.
Sawatzke advised the lIRA that he had several concepts to present and also that he did
not have a great deal or time to preparc for this meeting. They would like to build a 3
story do\vntown commercial building. \vith the main level housing their own business,
Jade Patrick Salon. as well as se\'Cl"al othcr business on the first Iloor. He advised that
the 2nd and 3'd tloors would be uppcr scale rental residential. possibly with balconies
overlooking the River. They discussed the square f()otage of the building as well as
parking spaces needed.
Sawatzke then advised of their seco.nd concept which included underground parking
which he felt would be benelicial fo.r the residential units. He noted their advantage for
underground parking due to. the ele\atio.n o.f their site. He added that they could not
provide all of their parking spaces on site and would need to utilize parking spaces in the
existing lot.
Thcre was discussion regarding the timing f()r these projects as they relate to the TIF
district and Sawatzke was advised to meet \vith Koropchak for that information. O'Neill
ask('d if there was a potential ti)r relocatio.n ofthc current property owner that Savvatzke
would need to acquire property from and it was stated that may be a possibility.
.
Steve Johnson stated he felt that the parking could be worked out and that h(' and
Sa\yatzke \yould get together and discuss. Fair added that they should not get hung up on
parking and the need to move the projects ahead. Fair also asked staff to provide a
J
.
.
.
I-IRA Minutes ~ 11/06/02
timetable that the I I/{^ \\ould have in order to keep moving forward. Koropchak advised
that there would he dates listed in the applicant's contracts as well.
Sawatzke then clarified the reason he was against a previous proposal on this block. He
stated that he is not looking at acquiring public property, would not be using up all of the
parking, and not be crcating a wall obstructing a view to the River, as thc prcvious
proposal had.
Andrews asked if Johnson had done drillings/soils on Block 52 and Johnson stated that
technically thc tanks that arc on this site do not exist and that back in the 1970's they were
told by thc Ci ty to cmpty them out and fill them \vith sand and-weld them shut. The cost
to take them out would be $25,000 to $30,000, but added that if there was no
contamination. the cost could be as low as $10,000. No testing had been done.
The I-I RA thcn asked Johnson about the $862,000 gap stated in his proposal. adding that
therc is only $306.000 of elig)ble costs. leaving over a $500.000 difference. Johnson
stated that this issue needs to be discussed with McComb. but that this gap may not be
entircly of TI F as there are other funds available to them through DTED. There \vas no
further discussion.
7.
Considerati(ln to endorsc the fi.ml1ation of a subcommittee to complete the I1usiness Park
Development I () I I ~xcrcise and to appoint a representative.
Koropchak advised that this item came as a rcsult of a conference she had attended.
stating it tics in \vith the IDCs request f(Jr funds for future industrial development or
purchasing of land. Koropchak described the process of this exercise and that she
thought there should he a member from thc lIRA. IDC Planning Commission and/or
City Council. as \vell as possibly someonc from Minnegaso or Exel. and City consultants
if needed. Koropchak advised that the IDC had made a motion to prepare a presentation
for the Planning Commission. endorsed the 10 I exercise. and appointed Don Roberts of
Sunny Fresh as the I DC representative.
O'Neill stated he vic\ved this as a repcat ofthc Comp Plan process and that they are
alrcady working on gctting a task force together to get utilities up to the North Corridor.
I-Ie also questioncd \\hy they \vOldd look to the South when the Freeway is a more viable
area fiJr Industrial. lie stated he also sees this as a possible benefit and that this could
compliment the intent of the task force for the North Corridor. O'Neill did advise,
howcver. that this \\ould require resources. time and energy. noting that there are many
projects happeni ng right now and that there nccds to be a balancc with the \vork load to
provide good senicl' to thl.' public.
It was clarificd that this exercise would bc different from the North Corridor Task Force
and Lahr statl.'d this sl'cmcd to be a "how to build an industrial park"" exercise. which
Koropchak stated it \\as. There was discussion on the \\'hat the City's role should be in
.;j.
.
.
.
HRA Minutes - 11/06/02
this. Thcy also discussed looking long term by purchasing property to the north \vl1ere
the interchange would eventually be put in and deal with industrial land on a short term
basis for now. O'Neill did point out that oncc annexation happens they would also have a
portion of the Gold Nugget propcrty for industrial.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DAN FRIE TO HAVE THE NORTHWEST CORRIDOR
TASK FORCE COMPLETE THE BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT 101
EXERCISE. BILL FAIR SECONDED THE MOTION.
Therc was further discussion by Lahr that this seems to be industrial park hunting but he
doesn't feci the City is rcady for that. Frie asked O'Neill about a time frame for getting
the task force devcloped and he stated it would be at least 4 months to get it all pulled
together. Koropchak then stated for the record that this would not be her
rccommendation as thcy havc bcen trying to do somcthing for months now and nothing is
happening. She stated hcr frustration at not seeing any progress since she started with the
City 17 ycars ago and that shc felt this was not a priority to staff. There was no further
discussion.
TI-IE MOTION CARRIED UN^NIMOUSL Y.
8.
Consideration of request fromlDC to re-instatc the use of the HRA committed funds for
purch:lsc of land t()r future industrial development.
Koropchak adviscd her rccommendation after talking with Brad Barger. they felt this
should hc tahlcd unti I after the 10 I exercise as that would tell them more. Koropchak
addcd that the rcquest from the IOC rcsulted from discussions at the Planning
Commission meeting whcrc thcy recommcnded to put dollars up for infrastructure. not
purchasing of lanel.
Thcre was further discussion on not reinstating thcir previous motion as they felt it ,"vas
not up to thc I DC to rcquest the I--IRA to do this.
A MUflON WAS MADE BY DARRIN LAHR TO NOT REINSTATE COMMITTED
RESERVE FUNDS OF THE HRA AND CITY FOR PURCHASE OF LAND FOR
FUTURI: INDlJSTRI^L DEVELOPt\,IENT.
There was furthcr discussion that Resolution 99A already stated that the HRA committed
dollars toward thc acquisition or development of industrial land and therefore there ,"vas
no need to rcinstate this. Thcre \vas no further discussion.
LAI IR AMENDED I lIS PREVIOUS tv,IOTION TO THE HRA REINSTATING
RESOL.l 'TION 99-4 WITI I CI IANGES TO THE COMMITTED DOLLARS FOR
^C0UISITION OR DEVELOPt\IENT OF INDUSTRIAL LAND. STEVE ANDREWS
SECONDED THE rvIOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5
.
.
.
HRA Minutes - 11/06/02
9.
Consideration to authorize paymcnt of I-1RA bills.
MOTION WAS MADE BY DARRIN LAIIR TO AUTHORIZE PA YMENT OF THE
HRA BILLS. DAN FlUE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSL Y.
] O. Consideration of Executive Director's Report.
Koropchak provided the report. Bill Fair asked if there was something the City could do
to acknowledge Sunny Fresh's donation toward the Central Minnesota Housing
Partnership project and Koropchak said that could be looked into.
Rick Wolfsteller added more information regarding the tax abatement workshop he and
Koropchak had attcnded. I Ie informcd thcm of what thc City of Albertville was trying to
do with road improvemcnts and tax abatement through the County.
II.
Committee Reports. Nonc
11.
Othcr Busincss. None
13.
Adjournment.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DAN FRIE TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:30
P.M. DARRIN LAI IR SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIl'vIOlJSL Y.
lIRA Vice Chair
Recorder
6
.
.
.
BRA Agenda - 12/4/02
5,
Continued - Consideration to hear an update on the progress for redevelopment of a
portion of Block 52 and 51.
a) Consideration to approve enterinc into a Preliminarv Development
Agreement with Steve Johnson for Phase L
On November 15, .Johnson, O'Neill, and Koropchak met to review parking stall
rcquirements and to rcview the TIf time-line schedule. See 5c) for summary of parking
rcquirements.
According to the schedule (Attachment A), at this meeting the I-IRA and developer should
agree to the following and execute the Preliminary Development Agreemcnt including
the $5,000 deposit: Phase] - 32,000 sq ft of use able spacc - three story office building
with underground parking (25 stalls). Estimated Market Value of/and and building,
$2,586.1 00, as of January 2, 2004. Up-front TIF assistance in the amount of $306, I 00
NPV (eligible costs). Construction to commencc March 15,2003. Bond paymenlto
begin August 1,2005 and end no later than Fcbruary 1,2022.
Data to support thc level ofTIF assistance for Phase I, $306.100 NPV.
Attachment B. Copy of the estimated land and building market value ii'om County
Assessor.
Attachmcnt C. Copy oflhc eligible TIF expenditures per revised McColl1b Financial
Feasibility Analysis.
Attachment D. Copy of the revised -rlF Cashnows fi:)r Phase I using 7% interest rate.
Project generates $424,000 NPV ovcr the life of the district.
It is reconlmended that the lIRA obtain an appraisal of their parcel (raw land) as a basis
for the public hearing for disposition of lands as requircd by Law. Additionally, plcase
note the developer must submit a current appraisal of his property using the income
approach as definecl in thc Analysis. For Economic District where the HRA provides TIf
assistance for land acquisition, a copy of the Purchase Agreement is providcd as the proof
of evidence ft.w land costs.
The schcdule assumes issuance of a building permit March 15, 2003, and a denlo and
remediation permit one month earlier, February 15. This would assume no contamination
on site. There is some flexibility in this schedule howevcr projects gcncrally seem to get
behind schedule rather than ahead. The HRA could agrec to January 2, 2002 date for the
EMV of $2,586, 100 and still retire the $306,100 NPV bond. The recommended
$306, I 00 NPV level of TIF assistance does not include TIF assistance for public parking
development which is discussed in 5c. The HRA earlier contributed between $9,000 to
$10,000 for preparation of the Financial Analysis.
HRA Agenda - 12/4/02
.
Y oumay recall at the August 2002 lIRA meeting, the commissioners made a motion to
authorize entering into the Preliminary Development Agreement Illr Phase I and II with
Steve Johnson and Kevin I-leaton. With a change in project scope (Phase I) and the
developer, the HRA is asked to consider the following action.
h) Alternative Action:
1. A motion to approve entering into a Preliminary Development Agreement with
Steve Johnson It)!' Phase I of the Block 52 Mixed Use Development and
authorizing Kennedy & Graven to begin preparation of the Contract It)!. Private
Redevelopment.
2. A 1110tion to deny entering into a Preliminary Development Agreell1ent with Steve
Johnson for Phase I of the Block 52 Mixed Use Development.
3. A 1110tion to table any action.
c) Recommendation:
.
Based on the assUll1ptions, the City Administrator and Executive Director recommend
Alternative No. I.
d) SUDporting Data:
Schedule, EMV, TIF CashI1ows, and eligible costs.
.
2
December 4, 2002* Developer and HRA agree - Steve Johnson, Developer.
Phase I - 32,000 sq it of useable space - three story offiee building with
underground parking.
Estimated Market Value of Land and Building $2,586,100, January 2,
2004.
Execution of Preliminary Development Agreement and $5,000 deposit.
Approval by H RA on level of up- front 1'1 F assistance to Developer -
$306,100 NPV (eligible cost).
Commence Construction March 15,2003.
Bond payment begins August 1,2005 and ends no later than February 1,
2022.
Direct Kennedy & Graven to prepare the Contract it)r Private
Redevelopment. (Ollie)
Execution of Contract for Private Redevelopment and Assessment
Agreement by the HRA and Developer. Minimum estimated market value
of land and building, $2,586,100, January 2, 2004. Developer provides
legal description of all parcels in Phase 1. Authorize appraisal onlRA Lot
and Update HRA abstract (Ollie).
Public Hearing Notice to Monti Times. (Ollie)
Public Hearing for deposition of HRA lot.
Closing of HRA lot - subject to developer providing evidence of
construction financing and building, site, parking, and OAT approvals.
Issuance of remediation and demo permit. Developer provides proof of
evidence of builder's insurance.
March 15,2003 Issuance of Building permit.
March 16, 2003 Reinstate parcels into District at County. (Ollie)
Prior to June 30, 2004 Developer provides proof of evidence for payment of eligible TlY
expenditures including copy of a current appraisal of the
developer's property within Phase I using income approach.
Eligible TlF expenditures paid to the Developer. (Ollie)
.
December 5, 2002
January 8, 2003*
.
January 20, 2002
february 5,2003*
Prior to February 15
February 15,2003
Prior to July 31, 2004
* lIRA meeting
Block 52 Mixed-Use Development - Phase I
TIf Schedule
Steve Johnson, Developer
THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE A SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING COMMISSION, BUILDING
AND SITE, AND OAT APPROV ALS. Site review is held each Thursday at 1 :00 p.m. All
approvals would be necessary by February 15, closing date of the HRA lot.
.
NOV- 6-02 WED 11:08 AM WRIGHT COUNTY ASSESSOR
FAX NO. 7636844553
.
y~-rY Ok
cfJ~
i~~
9~_ ~
'1) 4'"
1&56
Gregory A. Kramber
Wright County Assessor
Wright County Government Center
10 2nd Street NW, Room 240
Buffalo, MN 55313-1183
Phone: (763) 682-7367/ (763) 682-7368
J (800) 362-3667
FAX: (763) 682.6178
www.co.wright.mn.us
November 6, 2002
James B. McComb
222 South Ninth Street, Suite 380
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
RE: Block 52 Proposed Project.
Dear Mr. McComb,
After further review of the proposed project and fwding a clerical error in my previous
calculations, I have come to the following conclusion:
.*
In my opInion the estimated market value for the 2003 assessment would be as follows:
Phase l1and and buildings: $2,586,100.
Phase 2 land and buildings: $1,667,100.
Total project estimated market 'Value: $4,253,200.
P. 2
~)
These elOtimates are based on the infonnation provided and are only an estimate. No plans or
specifications were submitted for this estimate.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me. My e-mail address is
greg.l<rambe1@Co.wrighl.mn.US 01 telephono me at (763) 682-7365 01 1_800..362-3667 exl. 7365.
n &ely, A-IL
ory X. Kramber
Wright County Assessor
cc: Ollie Koropchak, City of Monticello.
.
Eql/al Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
,-
One
~ ~'cJ" ..
~ .
S~L
/7
Two ;:
(000) Total
$ 988.8 $1,830.3
128.8 149.5
$1,117.6 $1,979.8
Phase
Item
(000)
$ 841.5
20.7
$ 862.2
Financial Gap
Parking Lot Cost
Total
-<!~~-
~......"""
~~~
Parking lot costs are from Table 4 and total $20,700 and $128,800 for Alternatives A and B,
respecti,vely. Public sector costs of the Block 52 mixed-use development are estimated at
$862,200 for Phase One and $1,117.6 for Phase Two for a total 01'$1,979,800.
ELIGIBLE COSTS
Project costs eligible for tax increment reimbursement include land acquisition and the other
costs contained in Table 9.
Table 9
BLOCK 52 MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT
ELIGIBLE COSTS
Phase
Item
One
Two
Total
Land
$ 235.0
$ 676.0
$ 911.0
On-Site Costs
Demolition
Sidewalks
Paving
Curb & Gutter
Landscaping
Remediation
Architecture & Engineering
Contingency
Subtotal
$
27.7 $ 75.0
15.7 9.9
6.5 2.0
3.3 1.9
1.0 15.0
5.0
4.0 5.2
7.9 10.3
71.1 $ 119.3
306.1 $ 795.3
$ 102.7
25.6
8.5
5.2
16.0
5.0
9.2
18.2
$ 190.4
$ 1,101.4
$
$
TOTAL
,"
Source: McComb Group, Ltd.
Eligible costs total about $1.1 million for both Phases One and Two.
15
-
-
-
NOV. 7.2002 12:01PM
IIC1Co.o,
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
CU1 ofMontimlo
RcckYclopment District No. 1-2.2.
BlDck 52 Portion - Plwe I Only
t.l.F. CASH FLOW ASRUMPTIONS
I"~"lion Ro. (on __""lijO only.llIll rate In<<MMa a.. no1oapNrod)
Inl&19S1 Roo""
Tu Ral8 - T1F
TIiX 1'l.a19 - C\lrNM I._I R~18
Tu Rate - sta18 ProP<<ty Till
l\4arkll Valua Tall Rall!
PIO
15S01OC!2090
15501 Q06Ol070
155010052.071
15501 005213'
Phase
1
1
1
1 (Parkins)
BASE VALUE INFORMA TION
~"'rklIl
K:~~~kdOwn? Valij.
Y. 91.;;!OC
YK 21,m
Y lIS 34,600
Yes 30,600
NO. 7419
P. 2
0.0000'14
t.ooO%
1.11aooa FtllZan illlltll
1...'M" PlIY 2002
unooo Pay:too:t
0.00.07 pay 2002
Tu
Capacity
',8Z4
~~
682
2,114
Pay 2003 MV
"ay 2DOS tIN
CUlT8rltly EJcerrlpt
Pay 2003 MV
SublOral
17T,800
5.llS4
5.05~
Eilimilte Only
To'-l Orl"inal MilrMlVelul
17T,600
CIoo$l RII.:
HIlmailBad ~178.00D
l1ornlli...d <$76.000
"'pallrlMnl
ApanmenI4(d)
~rnrnerclal ~11$O.DOO
CornrnarClal 0:5150.ooD
Onginal Tilll Cil~lly (When use I' chln""d);
PRomCI V ALl)]'. INFORMATION
1.0000% Pay 04
1.0000% Pay04
1.2500% p.y a.l
1 2500% Pay 04
2,0000% Pay 04
1,5000% Pay D4
$,0$4 Pay 2004
Rad'm,lQpmlnl
Typa 01T1IX InCrlrnlllll Di6tricl:
Type or Unll$~r MY Per TDlaI Ma"* TaIBI Till E~ Total v.lr Yla'
Pro'l;l rd. \Jni~s.f. Villua CaClllcilY Tax Rail Taxes-Est Oonstructod PilYlble
"lUll 1- oewn",.rolill U,OOl lUll 1I"1&,1" ""71 4.D't'% 115,171 2001 aocMl
T~181 U..llOO UI8.1ao 1D.912 1115.171
SUMMARY
TolilJ AnnUli Till IntlW!IlInt ...lter Adrnin.
411,114
I'lll\llIred ~y Ehierl- ~.Io. OnIJ
tiltun02O,
NOV, 7,2002 12:01PM
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
NO, 7419
p, 3
.
at)' of Monlic:dlo
Rtdevelopaent Dilbict No. 1.11
Block S2 Portion - Phase [ Only
TAX INCREMENT CASlJ Fl,oW
s"rn/.Anllllil Sla18 ...ud~r Sami-Annual O~mulallVll PI'i.' '-N- '"'A~-'
PiRIOO iiGINNING 01'01' Tax It al Ntl Tp NN PERIOD ENDING
M vr. Incremenl -0.31% -10.00% Incremen 700% y~ 11'I. Yr,
08.01 ;2003 02-01 2 4.
02..01 2004 5,054 5.05" 0 0 0 0 0 0 08-01 2004
0~1 2003 5,054 5.054 0 0 0 0 0 0 02..01 2.005
02-01 2005 5,05' 5<l,972 45,i1l1 25,714 (95) (2,SB2) 23,OS7 20.798 0.5 O&.Ql 2005
0&-(11 2004 5,05' 50,972 45,9111 25,714 (95) (2,582) 23,057 40,ea9 1.002..01 2005
OMl 2006 5.06. 50,972 45,918 25,714 (95) (2,~) 21,067 80,302 1 5 0&-01 2006
08-01 2005 5,054 SlI,II72 45,916 25,714 (95) (2.562) 23,057 79,059 2,002..01 2007
02-01 2007 5,054 50.972 45,9'S 25,71-4 (95} (~S82) 23,057 97,18:t 25 0&-(11 2007
08-()1 2006 5,054 50.972 45.91a 25,714 (95) (2,562) 23,057 114.692 3.0 02-01 20Da
O:2..m 2008 5,054 50,972 45,1111 ::I.5.t14 (DS) (:<.562) 23.057 131.609 3.5 OS.01 2008
0&-01 2007 5,054 50,972 4!l,D111 1S.714 (llS) (2,562) 23,057 147.955 4,0 02-01 2009
02.01 2009 5,054 50,972 45,9'9 25.714 (9S) (2,582) 23,057 183,746 4.5 08-01 2009
06.01 2008 5,054 SU72 45,111& 25,714 (95) (2,562) 23.051 1711,007 5.0 02-01 ::1.010
02-01 2010 5,054 50,972 45,1118 25,714 (95) (2.56:<) 23,057 "3.749 5.50S-tll 2010
08-tll 2009 5,054 50,972 45,918 :i5,714 (DS) (2.56:<) 23.057 207,994 i,O 02-tll 2011
02-tll lOll 5,054 50,972 45,S18 25,714 (85) (2,562) 23,057 221,756 1.5 09.01 2011
08-01 2010 5,0!54 50.97;2 45,111. 25,714 (lIS) (2.$02) 23.057 23!,CS3 7.002-tl1 2012
02.01 2012 5.054 50,972 45,915 25,714 (85) (:<.S62) 23,057 247,901 7,5 OS-tll 2012
0&-01 2011 $.054 50,972 45,91. 25,714 (95) (2,552) 23.057 260,314 8.002..0' 2012
02-01 2013 5.05" 50,972 "5,918 25,71" (8:1) (2,582) 23,o!7 272,307 8.5 08-tl1 2013
0&-01 2012 5,05" 50.972 45,818 25,714 (lICl) (2,552) 23,057 283,&85 9.0 02..Ql 201"
02-01 2014 5.0154 50.972 45,S18 25,714 (85) (2.552) 23,0!I7 295.091 9.5 09-tll 20,4
08-01 2013 5,CS" 50.972 "5,S18 2$,714 (lICl) (2,582) 25,061 305,108 10.0 02.01 2015
02..01 2015 5,054 5D.972 45,918 25,71" (95) (2,562) 23,057 316,359 1 D,S 08-01 2015
08.01 ~014 5,054 50,1172 45,918 25,714 (95) (2,552) :23,067 326,457 11.002..01 2016
02-01 2016 5,054 50,972 45,918 25,714 (116) (2,562) 23,057 3118,214 11.5 08-01 2016
08-01 2015 s,0S4 50,872 45,'18 25,714 (95) (2,562) 23.057 345,640 '20 02.01 2017
02.01 2017 5,054 50,972 45,S18 25,714 (95) (2,562) 23,057 354.74S 125 08-01 2017
08..01 :t01S 5,054 50,972 45,S18 25,714 (95) (2,562) 23,057 363,548 1 ',0 02.01 201S
02-tll 2018 5,054 50.972 45,918 25,714 (95) (2,562) 23.057 372,050 135 0&-01 2018
08-0i 2017 S.OSIo 50,972 45,916 25.71" (95) (2,562) 23,057 380.265 14,002.01 2019
02.01 2019 5,054 50,972 45,'18 25.71. (95) (2,5e2) 23,057 38U02. 14.5 08-01 2019
08-01 2018 5.054 50.972 45,918 25,714 (95) (2,562) 23.057 395,570 15002-01 2020
02-tl1 2020 5,054 50,972 45,918 25,714 (95) (:<.562) 23.057 403,'2i0 115.15 08001 2020
08-01 2019 5,0!04 50,'72 45,911i1 25,714 (lIS) (2.562) 23,057 410.438 18.0 02.0' 2021
02-01 :t021 5,054 50,972 .015,911 :25,714 (115) (2,562) 23,0157 417,355 18.5 01l-01 2021
08-01 2020 IS 0154 0972 45S18 25714 iI5 5 23 057 424 037 17.0 02-01 20
olllls 874 79 :5,23 87 104 0 783 939
presenl Valuel from 8/1102 4 902 ,1,750 -47,11 4:<4. 037
~~"j_"''''__ oIlly....."""'_.._ .....................11&0,..;_ "'Ill"..,. ""....., ............. "'"1""l''''Y'''''I1'-...oI u...."" ........,.,..~odI_
. : EHLERS
I .1I1~0,"Tl5 '"0
.
Il1NnC201
MClco..ol
Pnlpalll4 by E111O!S. EdlIlle6 On'l
.
.
.
5b)
HRA Agenda - 12/4/02
Consideration to hear proiect update by Sawatzke.
On November J 5, Sawatzke and Koropchak met to review a TIF schedule for a mixed-
use development for Block 51. This schedule ran similar to the Johnson TJ F schedule.
Ilowever, after further research of pare cis lying within TTF District No. 1-22, it was
diseovcred the Gustafson parcel lies within TTF District No. 1-2 and the Sawatzke parcel
lies within TTF District No. 1-22. Tn order to enlarge the geographic boundaries of TI F
District No. 1-22, this had to occur prior to June 30, 2002. The dilemma can be resolved
by removing (decertifying) both parcels from their respective districts and creating a
Rcnovation and Rencwal District. This district has a IS-year life duration and would
allow the developer time to negotiate acquisition of the Gustafson parcel. Attachment A.
is a revised TIF Schedule based on a 2004 spring construction date acceptable to the
devcloper. Attachmcnt 8. documentation qualifying the proposed R&R District.
Sawatzkc will be at the I-IRA meeting to advise the commissioners of his continucd work
with his proposed contractor and preparation of estimated project costs.
.
.
.
2003
Nov-Dec,2003*
Nov-Dec, 2003
February, 2004*
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
May 2005
* I IRA meeting
Mixed-Use Development, Block SI
TI F Schedule
Pat Sawatzke, Developer
Tnterior inspection of Gustafson and Kjellberg property.
Remove parcels horn current TI F Districts.
Authorize creation of the Renovation and Renewal TIF District.
Developer and HRA agree - Pal Sawatzke, Developer.
24,000 sq ft of useable space - three story building with underground
parking. First floor commercial and second and third residential rental.
Estimated Markct Value of Land and Building _____.
Execution of Preliminary Development Agrecment and $5,000 deposit.
Approval by liRA on lcvel of pay-as-you-go TI F assistance to Developer -
_______ NPV (eligible cost).
Commence Construction May, 2004.
Bond payment begins August 1. 2006 and ends no later than February 1,
2021.
Devcloper providcs legal description of parcels.
Direct Kennedy & Graven to prepare the Contract for Private
Redcvelopment. (Ollie)
Execution of Contract for Privatc Redevelopment by the HRA and
Developer. Minimum estimated market value of land and building,
$_____. Council approves TIF District.
Developer provides evidence or construction financing and building, site,
parking, and DAT approvals. District celiified at County.
Issuance of demo permit. Developer provides proof of evidence of
buildcr's insurance.
Issuance or Building permit.
Certificate of Occupancy
Developer provides proof of evidence for payment of eligible TIF
expenditures including copy ofa current appraisal of the developer's
property and copy of purchase agreement with Gustafson.
THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE A SCIIEDULE FOR PLANNING COMMISSION, BUILDING
AND SITE, AND DAT APPROVALS. Site review is held each Thursday at 1:00 p.m. All
approvals would be necessary by April, 2004.
.
.
.
RENOVATION AND RENEWAL DISTRICT
QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
Proposed Sawatzke - Block 51 Mixed Use Development
Parcels 155-010-051110 (Sawatzke) and 155-010-051111 (Gustafson)
155-010-052130 (Kjellberg)
*
Parcels that make up 70% of the district are improved. '1'0 be considered "improved" at
least 15% of the parcel's area must contain improvements.
Findings:
Sawatzke parcel - Lot size 5,625 sq ft, building size 1,600 sq ft', 28.44% improvements
Gustafson parcel - Lot size 14,835 sq ft, building size: house 928 sq ft and porch screen
128 sq ft, detached garage 520 sq ft, storage bldg 160 sq ft, and driveway 2,000 sq ft for a
total of 3,736 sq ft. 25.18% improvements.
Kjellberg parcel - Lot size 7,395 sq ft. building size 4,086 sq ft = 55.25% improvements.
100% of parcels within the district are improved.
.
201Y<l of the buildings need be structurally substandard. A building is not substandard ifit
complies with building codes or could be brought up to code at a cost of less than 15% of
the cost of a comparable new building on that parcel. This determination must be made
by an interior inspection unless access cannot be med to the structure or there is enough
evidence supporting that the building is structurally substandard.
findings:
Three buildings x 20% = .6% or I building need be structurally substandard. (Gustafson
house)
. Another 30% of the buildings must require renovation or clearance to remove conditions
such as inadequate street layout, incompatible land uses, or obsolete buildings not
suitable for improvement or conversion to other uses (that is a lesser standard of blight).
findings:
'l'hree buildings x 30% = .9% or 1 building must require renovation or clearance to
remove conditions such as obsolete buildings not suitable for improvement or conversion
to other uses. (Kjellberg renovation)
Needs interior inspection and cost comparison by Chief Building Official.
.
.
.
HRA Agenda - 12/4/02
5e)
Consideration to hear summary of Darking reQuirements for redeveloped area.
With the consideration of proposed Phase I and rI of Johnson's projcct (which includes
removal of Springborg building) and the proposed Sawat7-ke 3-story structure with
underground parking, Planner Consultant Steve Gritttnan calculated thc parking
requirements. Counting the parking lot and Walnut Street as oiT-street publie parking
and using the 60% rule, the parking requirements are met. However, Steve did not havc
avaj 'able the square f(Jotage of the existing buildings on Bloek 51 to calculate into thc
mix or formula. With the existing building included, it would appcar Johnson would
need to contributc to the parking fund and Sawatzke close to brcak-even.
Assuming an exccuted Preliminary Devclopment Agreemcnt for Phase I with Johnson
and a Lettcr of Intent from Sawatzke, the HRA nceds to focus on rcdcvelopment of public
parking area (lot and Walnut Street.) It is the recommcndation of the Planner Consultant
that Walnut Street not be opened at West River Street and to erea1:e a pedestrian
sidewalk/ramp and art sculpture at River Street. This a decision of the Council. The
HRA has five options to consider: A. Weigh the cost to acquire the Springborg building
for 14 parking stalls (bctter access and view). B. Ofa parking deck for long term nccds
versus surf~lce parking. C. Or leave as is and resurface. Approximatc cost to develop
surtnce parking. $] ,500 pCI' stall and to develop parking ramp (deck), $10,000 per stall.
Option AI. 110 stalls x $1,500 = 110 installs $165,000 surface parking, Springborg
stays. Option A2. (] 24 stalls x $1,500 = $186,000) + acquisition and relocate Springborg
(cst. $400,0(0) = 124 stalls $586,000 surface parking, Springborg gone. Option B 1. (4X
stalls x $10,000 = $480J)OO) + (110 X $1,500 = $165,000)'= 158 stalls $645J)00 dcck
parking, Springborg stays. Option 82. (48 stalls x $] 0,000 = $480,000) + ] 24 stalls x
$1,500 =0. $186,000)+ acquisition and relocate Springborg (est. $400,000) = 172 stalls
$1,066,000 deck parking. Option C. 122 stalls x $1,500 = 122 stalls $] 83.000, resurface
as IS.
Another consideration, the Public Works Director has indicated the need to rcplace the
water/sewer line along Walnut Street between I3roadway and River Street which may be
timely with thc 2003 Broadway project. Eligible TIF expenditures include public
improvements, lights, parking, pavcrs if spencl within the district. The HRA has about
$500,000 NPV of available tax increment within 'I'll" District No. ] -22 givcn no parcels
become tax exempt. Other revenue source: Parking Fund.
0:. ·
-' -
\ , r'"\ -Q......s...' \1"0. ~ \.C),~ ~ \ d ...0-. os ?-
~ -:l. g ~ ~ \,;) ~ <;.:t... .
~-~ \.,.)&~" ~ ~
.
.
.
6.
Consideration to authorize payment of HRA bills.
Recommend payment.
w.'\\
(" ~ b y-- ""^
CI~
~^~
(0,';1
1
HRA Agenda -J2/4/02
(y- ..... ~ ,'- ~
.
~ ~ \ \.
.
.
.
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
200 South Sixth Street
Suite 470
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 337-9300
November 15, 2002
Statement No. 54144
30.YO
U~S?'D'
City of Monticello
?\ ~ ~
Accounts Payable
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
Through October 31, 2002
MN190-00099 TIF District 1/30/2002 Housing TIF 45.00
Total Current Billing: 45.00
I declare, under penalty of I. IS
account, claim or dem IS just and correct
and that no part . as been paid.
Signature of Claimant
1219:35
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC.
763287717121 P.12I2/1216
November 26J 2002
Ms. Ollie Koropchak. Economic Development Director
City of Monticello lIRA
505 Walnut Street. Suite 1
Monticello,:MN 55362
Re: ConstrUcti~n Pay Voucher No.1
Change Order No. 1
Front Sueet Site Grading
City of Monticello Project No. 2001-06C
WSB Project No. 116Q..46
Dear Ms. Koropchak.:
Please find enclosed ConstrUction Pay Voucher No.1 in the amount of $91,379.55 and
Change Order No. 1 (each in triplicate) for the above-referenced project for your review
and signature. The change order accommodates the rubble removal and overages in the
common excavation. select granular borrow. and grobbing items. and reflects a net increase
of $29,186.00 to the original contract amount. The pay voucher does inclUde payment for
the change order at this time.
If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact me at (763)
287&7190.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
~A.WtAM
Bret A. Weiss. P.E.
City Engineer
Enclosures
cc: Veit & Company, Inc.
sb
Millneapolis' SJ:. CIQud. Equal opportunftY'f~S/nO!lc;",J/q\""'CO/l"a...'"
NOU-26-21211212 1219:36
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC.
763287717121 P.12I3/1216
Vouc:her No.
. Project:
1
Date:
Period Ending:
October 30, 2002
Ootober 31, 2002
front Street SIte Grading
City of MomlCOUO Project No. 2D01..Q8C
WSB Project No. 116Q.46
COntractor:
VeJt & Company, Inc.
14000 Vllt Place
Roger., UN 66374
Contrect Date:
Completion Date:
June 27. 2OD2
July 19. 2DD2
Work Started:
Work Completed;
Original Contract Amount
Total Additions
Total Deductions
Total Funds Encumbered
Total Work Certified to Date
Less Retained Percentage
LeIS Previous PayrT\8nts
Total Payments lnel. lhi& Voucher
Balance Carried Forward
Approved for Payment This Voucher
$67 ,S1 3.00
$29.186.00
$0.00
$97,099.00
5.00%
SGEI.189.00
54.809.45
, $0.00
S91,379.55
55,719.45
591.379.55
ADDrovals.
. W$B . ANOC:lltes..lnc. .
In accordance with fIeld observation. as performed in accordance with industJy standards. and based on our professional opinion, the
materials installed are uti.factory and the work properly performed in accordance with the plans and specifications.
The total work 8etimated to be completed 8S of October 31. 2002 Is as Indioated herein and ~ hareby r8CXlmmend payment I
100"
of'''"'''''''''. . . , .
S;gnod: S_:~k.W~
CoMtruction Obaerver ProjllCl Manager/Engineer
VeJt II Comp.ny, tnc.
This Is to certify that to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. the'quantities and values of work certified herein is a fair
approximate eatimate fot the periOd covered by this voucher.
Contractor:
Signed:
Title:
Date:
City of Montleello HRA
Checked by:
.App~d tor Payment:
Authorized Representative
Date:
.
Date:
F:\WPWfNln.....m!.raIl$lr. Gr.fllnll VollGhotlVQ1..(;gnr
NDU-26-2002 09:36 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC. 763287717121 P.12I4/0b
i
. . i
~:! ... N fIJ . m .. .... 01 CII .
.~;~ I i i_ i ll~ I ~ ll~l;. CJi i
- i III
;1 .&&11;;: :.~aAa .... ~
Ii 1 t
QI- -
{; I
~- ~l--~~ ~ ~ ~ -g""'" ,--".-
~t . ~ ~ lii!
- 2 I .... I I -11= I
a ... .
i;.ll;.~'l ~~I ~ ~ ~ II:
C! e
,#; t. : J ; R ; I
:e-
~i .1&:1;. i i~~i! i
..I...
IS
If-- i1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g g 8 8
Ii
~ . ... = 8 .. 8 .. ..!!~
, , C't. _I
: .. III
" ,
~. I' I. i ;i ; ~ i ; ~ ~qi~i1 I
.. :! X g:s
, ! i ! lOAa:lfli ~ fIt.. "'l.-:'
....... ' J 411;A! Gi
U) .
.- (Q t} .
..J Q -
- I ~ ll~;~. ! S 8 ~
--
ctS "' g.
...... . ~ Ii . _:~i :.~tl
. .~~ :i ':;; 19
8~ :it ~ l!l ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ 8 -;
1 i
.: fi 8 I ~ ~ I I :: ..
CD '.' 0
~ ~ ~
(.) ::i
a; i ltl )0 !S )0. Ii: ~ e ~ ~
:::::J ! ~ ~ () u ~ ~ 8 :::l I-
0 :::l ()
> ...J
~
i
i
IIX
l! ... !!
C!' ... ....
. " $ ~ a
, Cii!l2
... .... p.
'at 0:'5-
, 13 ~ It
... 0 ~
" 5 ~ lI)
. ltuit
i
J
1i
.
Q
~
2 I ~
J ~ ~~~
E. )0 :::l
Z ~":2
Q ~~!W'
~ i z ~ C!3 U
OIl II! i I!l ~ ~
;m8;~;
. t
ej
.i~
z
;; ~ i I a I
"\ "I " . uI
- Iii ~ 8 a
2 N N lIi ~
]
{!.
-CIln...ltlfOi 1
.::,
I ~
rIi! a:
i z i
c g ...
;iteS i
,.~= 0
~~~I!l r:
w~~~ .!
El!l ~ ~ III 0
I ~ ~ 'r:! e - ~
Iii: () Iii e ci Ii:
z 'S
~ -~~I ~
, i2il &
! CIlNNti J
~ '.. 'i
a~""CIl~! :5
. .
s:: C
j2
7632877170 P.05/06
'"'-
Front Str..t Site Grading
City of Monticello Project No. 2001-GIC
18 Plllloct No. 11ea.46
HER:
October 30, 2002
CONTRACTOR:
City of MonUcello HRA
505 Walnut Street, Bulbi 1
IIIgntlcollo, UN S5362
Volt & COmpany, IIlG.
14000 Velt Pllce
Aog.., UN 55374
YOU ARE DIRECTED TO MAKE THE FOlLOWING MODIFICATIONS IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION:
During the ellCawtion of the site, mlecellaneous building NbCle waG uncovered and wu required to be properly disposed.
THE FOLLOWING CONTRACT QUANTITIES ARE MODIFIED AS SHOWN ON THE An-ACHED DETAIL.
The common excavation and granular borrow quantities were increased tel account tor the higher &mDunts of 1op&OII that were found
during construction.
Additional trees were required tg' be grubbed within the commucUOn IImll&.
see ATTACHED DETAil FOR QUANTITIES AND COSTS.
IT IS UNDERSTOOD Tl'tAT THIS CHANGE ORDER INCLUDES ALL ADDmONAL COSTS AND TIME EXTENSIONS WHICH ARE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE.
OR FORM ASSOCIATED WITH THE WORK ELEMENTS DESCRIBED ABOVIi.
CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE:
CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIME:
ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE:
~IOUS CHANGE ORDeRS: NO. _ TO_
_TRACT PRICE PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE ORDER:
NET INCREASE/DECREASE OF THIS CHANGE ORDI!R:
CONTRACT PRICE WITH ALL APPROVED CHANGE ORDER~
$67,913.00
$0.00
$67.913.00
$29,188.00
$87.oeg,QO
ORIGINAL CONTRACT TIME;
NET CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS:
CONTRACT TIME PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE ORDER:
NET INCREASE OF CHANGe ORDER:
CONTRACT TIME WI1l1 APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS
7/1912002
NONE
7/1912002
NONE
7/19/2002
R~~ Waiu
am^" W~P.E.' p,q..._
APPROV\iD BY:
WSB & ASSOCIATES. INC,
ENGIN~ER
VEil & COMPANY, INO.
CONTRACTOR
APPROVED BY:
~I~~
MAYOA
,,!r,.-S/Oz. '
DATE
.
II:IWl'wtMf1~..GrMIt/II ~1
NOU-26-2002 09:37
WSB & RSSOCIRTES INC.
7632877170 P.06/05
:1" I ~: ,"'\' ~ ~", . I_I....!.._:.' \1 -, ~_,'r,<I, ~I I'. I" ~.j'" I:'.:, 'I \r~..-I-,. , :"~' "1' ';1'"'" II II 11'1~:~~~,h'~-'
It. . L. "l'! <I .. ,-' l I I' . .,. II' j 1 '4L 1 ~1'r.JL. 1 .. .( ..1:r.1
I . II ,.J ,.1 , ..'j '\ 1 1:_' ,~~, -\... I ,'I,ull I ~"'r','II'lll"'''': "'''~'}~''Il;- I .....j':. j';
J.J......:...l__II__ _~_.,~ _I _ __~ ~_. _"'.l._./"}.~_L.J" ----'-..- . ~_t.. _ __~~. '_D:t..:c..!~"""'\'__(_.'i l.~___I....._ __.J__....l..IL.l--"-.---Ll.__1, .,.;j~.ll.l...._~
. Front Slnlet SIte Grading
CIty of N1onllcello Project No. 2001008C
WSD ProJect No. 1180-48
ADDED QUANTITIES:
~nded
Item No. Mat. No. DelcrlpUon Qty Unit Price Amount
RUBBLE REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL LUMP SUM $8.214.00 $8.214.00
2 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION 2.898 CUYD S1.50 $4,347.00
3 2105.522 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW 2,S86 CUVO $5.00 $13,325.00
4 2101.507 GRUBBING '1 TREE 5300.00 $3,300.00
TOTAL ADDED QUANTITIES $29,186.00
.
.
F:IWPWrM11......oeIlSb fJ#fIIIJtIIJ ""''''''''1'1I:'11 rw.u
TOTRL P.06
.~ NOV-25-02 MON 4:35 PM
;~ ...., . I I( 11;~r~tl.N'{
:....
..
.
.
.
PUBLIC WORKS
,,,....
FAX NO. 16122713272 p, 1
,.-. -" ....... ............". .-.-""""".",. -......... '~~ .r...... ...~J~...~.'tM~;~!o.'tI__~:I'.
(lHiN) 11 25' (~/. i'''I: '')t- ..:-:- I j : \~~I i~~). 'i ).':J~'.~'I"~,,,'~"; 10
,",<;.(,r.li." FltJ: IlJolEJ 7671
'r" --!!Jr.'- .:h)k....~__.
,~~''CaPi.LJ7'{ -hk:tt~uIl6 co.
ri~ll,~f.,. "
,
P[,'.;7"":"'i6'~-llj-3l1Z_ .
\-.---~ ~
01 JY
o
c ~ Xl
~XE
Cl .-
c.l~2
~ . >,
CI) ,2 'f
-~
r:I) C :3
\1109
:::iu
11)--
_o.c
~. 1:'.i?
~c:i~
~t,J.l/
:!: ~~;~.~ i'~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !
ut'-u~~;::}~"!.r::.f1
~ .....Qo....fQ;.....~
r--'
~ll e~ ~8a
c,:,~SI-8~.....~;;d.
..!.'is'io~So''!.;;~
4.J......... ,..,
-
~
I~ ~ ~ 88 ~ ~ ~ ~ ;
~'l!!e NO/OrIlr<
::l <"l fli
--.
w:Jfo;:!c!~-
v#l"J/II"II"I"",,, ,.__., _
Q
~j~;;~~~~~
Ai' , ~.8 g g g ~ g
u><~t-~~~~~~
$l!5!-'lDCDlD~N
______, __ _ W.'_
"i!~S~~g8$
CD lCC~!~ '~.W;~
~
<[ I'i9"2~~g~o
Ea .., 0'"
~II)I>-Ul>-U.UJ
::i..J~V..:.JV"".:J
g ! K~
.~ ~ . !II
~li ~I,I~~
~jS 8~~
\.... E ts~i
~ fSl'...
i ~w~i!
r; ;:
.::tI_NfII"t.....6.()C08
~..
\~
",. ~ .1',,:,:--:,
d {) (fl'.'"
t:,.
C) .~ "-~
S-
O "') y< - '.,
.+. '>. '. ~...
<:.. ..
.-- ~ s.~
... '5" ~
g () .lo,.
,.., ..... s ~
:g Q <5 ~
;; -
~
....- ... "'" ~
I;; ~~ '+- =:::.
5 '\)
---
Iri' "'"
il \. ~
- 1",)
l') J;
.:)
-s
"'" ......
0.:5)
- - \V
..:..
':.. _C::
"!!. '\-'
.~
-
8.
...,
~
..:
fD
w
I-
S~~
j)-s
!~t
I~ J J
In
~
~
:I
"ii
ofi
..
>- )0 ~~
<.)0
! l
~~ ~ ::r
"':Q c;S .....
u
: ~ i
Iii 3
III
.9 ~
i i
~ i
IJ~ i
Cll II) =>
ii
8
~
~
LII
g
~
u
'",j
-"
<~
..-- - -
>->- )0 >- li ~~
vu vu
i i ii 1 ! ~
'" ,.... g~ ! ~~
- eo.
..so ....c;s ...... d<d
-~
u
I
'6 Ill!
., .1
i x ~ i
I I ~ s oe ~
;;; 1$ j
OJ ~
... .. ~ '2
S 5 ..... ~o. CI.l ::l
~
~
~
0;)
<;
il
/,/)
.
.
.
HRA AG r,~NDA - 12/4/02
7.
Economic Devclopment Reoort.
TIF District No. 1-21 (Lake Tool) - WHL Enterprises purchased the Lake Tool property on
November 18, 2002. Mark Ruff ran numbers for assigning the Contract or declaring the Contract
null and void. The buyer and seller agrecd to rctire the liRA's debt. Attachment A. is thc
payment to the II RA for the outstanding deficicncy and outstanding loan amount ($21,734).
Additionally, the liRA will received tax increment from the County from delinquent taxes paid
in-full at time of closing. According to the County, the] IRA will receive the delinquent tax
increment in January, 2003, Once the HRA has received the dollars, the Contract should be
declared null and void and then consider deccrti1ication of the District.
November 22 recorded the Contract for Private Development for Front Porch and CMHP and
Assessment Agreements for the Hans Hagen project. EMV per unit $190,000 January 2, 2003.
Also recorded a quick claim deed from the HRA to the City for the ""fhe Park" along Front Street
and requested transfer of dollars ($78,000 appraisal) to TIF District No, 1-22. Attachment B,
Have received evidence of construction financing and insurances from Central Minnesota
Housing Partnership, Construction was stopped November 17 due to the 1irst 4-5 basements
placed at an angle not parallel to Minnesota Street which would result in the ninth home
infringing near the rear alley driveway. Plans to re-do. HRA does not reimburse City for permit
fees until all II units have received a certificate of occupancy,
I lave calls in to AME Ready Mix and Aroplax for appointment flW BRE visits,
Comp Plan Task Force - Staff and consultants met November 7. Engineer consultant showed
options fCH" interchange design in the area of Orchard Road and 1-94, It was noted the County has
plans to redo or update the County Road 75 bridge over the railroad tracks, It was estimated the
need for approximately 20 acres for a diamond interchange at an estimated total cost of between
4-6 million dollars. Construction 10 years. Need contact person relative to future need and use
of lanel surrounding the Plant (llave contact names). Need base data or GIS data on property
owners, acreage, and wetlands (John Glomski, NW A Consultants working on this).
IDC October Minutes and last four BRE Visit Summaries were mailed to the Planning
Commission and City Council.
Chadwick Parcel - On November 13,2002, a developer met with O'Neill and Koropchak
inquiring about the Chadwick property for possible purchase and/or development. He noted his
conversation with Mr. Pfeffer who stated property north of Chelsea Road was not for sale and
property south of Chelsca Road fc)r sale in 10 acre or largcr parcels. Recognizing the need for
available 5-7 acre industrial parcels is of interest to this developer. He was given a copy of the
Otter Creek Crossings Business Park - Description of Approved Concept Stage PUD.
.
HRA AGENDA - 12/4/02
Paumen Property located in northwest corridor - for those of you who attended the Planning
Commission open house on the Comp Plan Amendment, a developer presented a concept sketch
for development of the 268 acres lying north of County Road 39 and east of Silver Springs Golf
Course. I n the land use map of the Comp Plan, the land use is residential and industrial split by
proposed Chelsea Road alignment. At staff review, the suggested road alignment is a 500 to 600
fC)()t depth between proposed Chelsea Road and 1-94 1'i:lr industrial use.
Negotiations underway to sell the Industrial-Business Campus 13-acres along East 7 Street.
Talked with proposed buyer.
UMC - construction about a month behind. Preparation of Loan Agreements for State and FDA
funds under way. Business Subsidy Public Hearing scheduled flJr December 9,2002.
Production Stamping to begin construction in spring.
Attending the North by Northwest Market Update sponsored by University of St. Thomas and
Minnesota Business Journal, November 22, a.m. only.
Visited with Keith Kjellberg again. Interested in fixing up building inside and outside next
spring rlw rental. No tenant at this point. I nquired to funding hom EDA.
. Perhaps future TIF District for Custom Sheet Metal relocation.
.
Attachment C. - Copy of eheck received from Aroplax for the final payment of the Tax
Increment Deficiency Clause.
The City was notified of the Annexation Court Ruling on November 15. The Court ruled in
favor of the City, in other words, annexation by ordinance. The Township has 30 days to appeal
the ruling. The amended City Comp Plan Land Use Map would prevail.
Attachment D. is a copy of the terms of HRA commissioners. At the first meeting in January,
the City Council appoints or re-appoints those commissioners whose term expires December
2002. Commissioner Andrew's term expires this year. Steve, do you agree to serve another 5
years'?
2
--NOyNOV 15 '02 0' .
.1.1' L\J\JL lu,4:,~~,PM Cnr.QE t:lONn~s:c..h-9ES ~T1 o..(.,~,
. ~
fUl\l1lE DEfiCIT ~SUNlING ~L UNPAID TAllI!S ARE RiaCEIVIlD IN 2DDZ
Prelim, Actual
A"sllilt:lle Oeficlency Scheduled surplus Cumul. Interest Cumul.
T1F Payment Payment (OtIftc:lt) Deficit 8.25% Oeflclt
AU9-g9 0 .0,071 -6,071 -5.071 _5,011
Feb-OO 3,671 1,500 -5,071 0 .5.071 _5.071
Aug-OO 7.052 .6,071 1,981 -31090 .3,090
Feb-01 3.482 -5,011 -1.689 -4.679 4,679
Au9.Q1 0 -5,011 -6,011 _9,750 -9,750
Feb-02 3.704 0 -5.071 -',367 ..11,117 _11,117
Aug-02 2.500 .6.071 ~21~7' -,a,688 ..459 _14,141
Feb.Q3 8,460 Q ~5,O71 3,389 ~10,758 .584 .11,341
NQ 7673 P.~,4/5
-j\ "-t-\ (I \ -
v
\. e
Ci\l ...O-~
," _--:c\1 -
\LO~-c<r
Q c"'-~'--~
aD '
-\... c-cC \\6
("('\ l5"{~
\~<::;- \-~\
~ . -+ ~ ~o"
~~
'-o~
y..'Q'M
~~ Outa~l'\dil'lg deficiency - end of 2002.
outstanding loan after deficiency & taXes
Total owed wIth nO further TIF after 2002
lAW
-11.$41
~10.393.
-21,734
').\"?7- 'b\O'\\
I
SMITH, PAULSON, o'DONNELL
& ASSOCIATES P.L.C.
LAWYER TRUST ACCOUNT
P.O, BOX 668
MONTICEllO, MN 55362-0668
WELLS FARGO BANK MINNESOTA. N.A.
MONTICELLO
MONTICEllO, MN 55362
17+910
11/18/2002
"'
(~
o
7339
;,
(:\
PAY TO THE
ORDER OF
Twenty One Th d $ **21,734.00
_ ousan Seven Hundred Thirty-Four and 00/100********************************
Monticello HRA
MEMO
Hoglund 24879
11100 ?j j Ii III I: 0 Ii .0000 . Ii I: 2 Ii 0 000 -580
.
(i1
DOLLARS ~:
'.
'I,)
.
"
"
_......~~
M'
.
.}..L~ \ t - \& - 0 '::l-
CITY OF MONTICELLO
VOUCHER l\~ Oa f.Jy..... ~.
Payee:
o Recurring
o Manual
'\=t> \.0 t9- tea '-t 0 Disb. Ck. Batch
C~tJ"V- Lo+ \cI\.~Q~
~~ C;~
Pay by:
/
/
Check No.:
D Needs CC Approval
Vendor No.:
Statement!
Invoice No:
--\A o-v-o ~
~ Du \ S
~~ 0 ':L
DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENSE
.
Acct. No.
Amount
Oescriotion
Project
Code
'"'\"0 ~
?\~.
DO-o
...
.
TOTAL: $ ~ <b . 0 ~ V
~~~J .~
voucher.wk4: 04/04/97
.
~~~(.,h.
C
.
AROPLAX CORPORATION
TOTAL .n.MOUNT
5,371.18
.
.AROPLAX
. CORPORATION
200 Chelsea Road, Monticello, MN 55362
030590
30590 1 07 2002
PAY THE AMOUNT OF:
Five Thousand Three Hundred Seventy One and 18/100 US Dollars
~
** ***5 37 ..
75-1045
919
PAY
TO THE
ORDER
OF
CITY OF MONTICELLO
HOUSING & REDEV. AUTHORITY
505 WALNUT STREET, SUITE 1
MONTICELLO MN 55362
STEARNS BANK N.A.
4191 2nd Street South
8'1'" ~01
II- 0 30 5 gO II- I: 0 g * g * 0 .... 5 5 I: II- 2 * 0 88 g * II_
.
\
.
.
.
~1-\G.~,^
2002 ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS ~ .
Official Depositories:
Newspaper:
Housing & Redevelopment Authority:
(5-year staggered terms)
Planning Commission:
(Assuming 3-year staggered terms)
Health Officer:
(I year)
Acting Mayor:
(1 year)
.Joint Commissions:
Community Education
fire Board
Library Board:
(3-year staggered)
Attorney:
Planner:
Marquette Bank Monticello
Chief Financial Ot1icer - authorized to designate
other depositories fl.)!' investment purposes
only.
Monticello Times
1. ~~\\ ~~\ '<:"
2. Steve Andrews
3. Dan Frie
4. Brad Barger
5. Darrin Lahr
*:ii: till seeLins a~pl iC'iPlts
1.
2.
Robbie Smith
Richard Carlson
Rov Popilek
Rod Dragsten
Dick Frie
'>
.J.
4.
5.
River Place Physician Clinic
Clint Hcrbst
12/2006*
12/2002
12/2003
12/2004
12/2005
12/2003
12/2004
12/2004
12/2002
12/2002
ROl!er Belsaas
Rick Wolfsteller and Brian Stumpf
1. Tom Parker 12/2002
2. Gordy Jacohson 12/2003
'> Jeanette Lukowski 12/2002
.J.
4. Jim Maus 12/2003
5. Diane Herbst 1 2/2004
Dennis Dalen of Olson, Us set & Weingarden
Northwest Associated Consultants (Steve Grittman)