IEDC Agenda 04-05-2016AGENDA
INDUSTRIAL&ECONOMICDEVELOPMENTCOMMITTEE(IEDC)
Tuesday,April5th,2016–7:00a.m.
BoomIslandRoom,MonticelloCommunityCenter
________________________________________________________________________________
Members:SteveJohnson,JoniPawelk,WayneElam,LukeDahlheimer,DickVanAllen,Jim
Johnson,DonRoberts,TimO’Connor,DarekVetsch,DonTomann,OllieKoropchak-
White,JasonKisner,MariLouMcCormic,AndrewTapper
Liaisons:JeffO’Neill,AngelaSchumann,MayorBrianStumpf,LloydHilgart,MarcyAnderson
1.CalltoOrder
2.ApproveMinutes:
a.March1st,2016
3.Considerationofaddingitemstotheagenda
4.Reports:(VerbalReports)
a.EconomicDevelopmentReport
b.TAC
c.CityCouncil
d.ChamberofCommerceandIndustry
5.Considerationtoreviewupdatefromindustriallandinventorysub-group(VerbalReport)
6.ConsiderationoffinalcommentsonNorthwestMonticelloInterchangeLandUseStudy
(VerbalReport)
7.Considerationtoadopt2016IEDCActionStatement
8.Considerationofareportfrombusinessandindustry(VerbalReports)
9.Adjournment.(8:00am)
MINUTES
INDUSTRIAL & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE (IEDC)
Tuesday, March 1, 2016 – 7:00 a.m., Boom Island Room, Monticello Community Center
Present: Steve Johnson, Joni Pawelk, Wayne Elam, Dick Van Allen, Don Roberts, Tim
O’Connor, Darek Vetsch, Zona Gutzwiller, Ollie Koropchak-White, Jason Kisner,
Mari Lou McCormic
Absent: Luke Dahlheimer, Jim Johnson, Don Tomann
Other: Jeff O’Neill, Angela Schumann, Brian Stumpf, Marcy Anderson, Duane Northagen,
(WCEDP)
1. Call to Order
Steve Johnson called the meeting to order at 7 a.m.
2. Approve Minutes
JONI PAWELK MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 2ND,
2016 IEDC MEETING. OLLIE KOROPCHAK-WHITE SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED 11-0.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda
None
4. Reports
Economic Development
o Master’s 5th Avenue development proposal to allow ground floor multi-family
residential housing in the CCD:
Planning Commission review of land use applications
EDA review of TIF Management Plan
City Council
Chamber of Commerce & Industry
TAC
o Transportation improvements underway
5. Consideration to review information on industrial land inventory
Don Tomann, Mari Lou McCormic and Wayne Elam will review industrial land supply,
capacity and future inventory within the context of the City’s long-range goals for
industrial development, and prepare a recommendation for IEDC consideration.
IEDC Minutes: 3/01/16
2
6. Consideration to review the draft Northwest Monticello Interchange Land Use
Study
Angela Schumann outlined the conceptual land use analysis for the “interchange planning
area” in Northwest Monticello prepared by NAC. She pointed out that the study would
provide a baseline of information for future comprehensive planning efforts. She noted
that Option 4 detail would be provided as it becomes available. Schumann invited IEDC
members to submit any comments related to the study by email.
7. Consideration of 2016 IEDC Action Statement planning
Schumann asked that the committee members complete and return the action statement
planning worksheet provided by March 15th. She indicated that IEDC feedback would be
incorporated into a draft 2016 Action Statement to be presented at the April meeting.
8. Consideration of a report from business and industry
Staff provided an overview of a recent Xcel Energy report which addressed the
following:
Facility investments
Longevity of facilities
2030 Monticello licensing
Running beyond licensing with current investments
Risk and cost associated with nuclear causing questions
Providing baseload energy-nuclear
Requested support politically: “Breakfast and Politics” event, jobs and other
social and economic factors
9. Adjourn
DAREK VETSCH MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:08 AM. DICK VAN
ALLEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 11-0.
Recorder: Kerry Burri ___
Approved:
Attest: _____________________________________________
Angela Schumann, Community Development Director
£¤10 £¤10
Æÿ25
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5!(81
§¨¦
94
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(3 9
!(106
!(37!(1 3 1
0 0.5 10.25
Miles-
June 9, 2014Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright County, and WSB & Associates. Land Use Plan
Amended by City Council Resolution 2014-062, June 9, 2014
Legend
Places to Live
Places to Shop
Places to Work
Places to Recreate
Places for Community
Downtown
Mixed Use
Interchange Planning Area
Urban Reserve
Infrastructure
Rivers and Streams
Public Waters Inventory
Wetlands (National & Public Waters Inventories)
Potential Greenway
Potential Interchange
Future Bridge
Existing Arterial or Collector Road
Proposed Arterial or Collector Road
Powerline
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Destination for Innovation
1.
5.
9.
3.
7.
11.
2.
6.
10.
12.
4.
8.
PID
Updated: 8/2015
Owner Size (Acres)2013 TaxesZoning
John Uphoff
juphoff@wsbeng.com
(763) 267-2942
Properties for Sale
Guided Industrial
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping,
Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Legend
Privately Owned Properties - Guided Industrial
City Owned Properties - Guided Industrial
1.2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
155-194-000-010City of Monticello 10.87 $0.00I-1
155-191-000020City of Monticello 1.83 $0.00I-1
155-223-000010City of Monticello 5.28 $0.00I-1
155-194-000010City of Monticello 4.99 $0.00I-1
155-194-000020City of Monticello 6.67 $0.00I-1
155-171-000050City of Monticello 16.1 Dev$0.00I-1
155-194-000040City of Monticello 5.01 $0.00I-1
155-185-000010
155-171-000060
City of Monticello
City of Monticello
2.32
13.67
$0.00
$0.00
I-1
A-0
155-018-003020Kenneth & Teresa Spaeth 4.39 $4,452.00I-2
John Uphoff
juphoff@wsbeng.com
(763) 267-2942
Properties for Sale
Guided Industrial
155-143-001020 Monticello Industrial Park Inc
Schultz & Schupp LLC
7.25
1.18
$4,164.00
$3,302.00
IBC
I-1155-038-001060
Northwest
I-94 Interchange
Study
March, 2016
Land Use Options
City of Monticello
N o r t h w e s t A s s o c i a t e d C o n s u l t a n t s , I n c .
Introduction
This report is written in support of the land use plan component of the
Northwest Monticello Interchange Study, an effort to document and analyze the
potential for interchange locations with Interstate 94 serving the northwest
portion of the community. The study includes two such potential locations
(County 39 and Orchard Road), and examines whether one or the other of
these locations, or both, or neither are justified, and how their addition to the
area would impact the regional transportation system.
The area is currently included in the Monticello Comprehensive Plan, but is
designated for future study. The Plan does not direct any specific land use.
Project Location Map
The land use component addresses how alternative locations for an
interchange would affect land use projections and assumptions, as well as how
those growth expectations would be expected to impact interchange viability.
As noted above, with two potential locations, there are four possible scenarios:
Orchard Road or County 39 interchanges alone, both interchange locations, or
neither location.
Process
The project commenced with a round of interviews and discussion with staff,
and members of various city official groups, including the City Council,
Planning Commission, Economic Development Agency, and the Industrial and
Economic Development Committee. Meetings were held during mid-December
of 2015. These groups raised a number of potential issues and goals for the
interchange study, including a wide ranging assortment of options and land-
use related impacts.
In addition to the interviews and focus group discussions, staff undertook an
inventory of existing land uses and land use regulations in the study area. The
study area includes land within the Monticello Orderly Annexation Area, as
well as portions of the west side of the City of Monticello.
Existing Land Use. Within the Orderly Annexation Area, the predominant land
use pattern is agricultural, although limited areas have been developed with
rural-residential neighborhoods. Such neighborhoods lie near both proposed
interchange locations, and will be affected by either interchange construction,
traffic, and/or connections to the local transportation network. Near the
Orchard Road location is a scattered collection of rural commercial uses,
including a landscape nursery.
Monticello Comprehensive Plan – Future Land Use Map
The Bertram Chain of Lakes regional park, currently under planning and
development, lies at the southwest edge of the study area. It is connected
directly to the potential CSAH 39 overpass location along that County Highway.
It is also expected to be connected to the Orchard Road overpass, pending long-
term development of the area and needed collector road additions.
Within the City limits, the Xcel nuclear generating plant lies at the northwest
edge of the study area, near Orchard Road. The Orchard Road location also
connects to a ballfield complex and other urban land uses on the west side of
the community.
The County 39 location includes the west terminus of Chelsea Road, which
serves as a collector road south of the I-94 through much of the community.
Land uses in this immediate area include business and industrial uses south
of the freeway, and low to mid-density residential uses east of the freeway. At
the northeast corner of County 39 and freeway lies the Monticello Country
Club golf course, specifically its driving range and parking lot area.
Project Area Aerial Photo - Google
Land Cover. Within the study area, the land cover is comprised of the
developed area mentioned above, including a large area of agricultural
production area in the MOAA. The area also includes a number of wetland
complexes, and a few larger areas of extensive tree cover. Otter Creek drains
the Bertram Chain of Lakes park area near the County 39 overpass.
Natural Resources Inventory – Minnesota Land Cover Classification System
Source: WSB
Most significantly, the City has identified (in its Natural Resources Inventory) a
natural resource corridor that transects the study area from southeast to
northwest. The City’s Parks and Open Space Plan utilizes this resource as a
major preservation and pathway corridor as a future development route for
recreational purposes.
Parks and Pathways System Plan
Source: NAC
Issue Identification.
The purpose of identifying issues of the various alternatives is to ensure that
the City’s long-range planning for transportation and land use make adequate
consideration for as many issues as possible. This phase of the study found
the following issues to be considered in developing land use scenarios:
Infrastructure Issues
Utility infrastructure investments currently in place
Utility infrastructure capacity, and limits of service area
Regional transportation network for connection to new roadways –
what is in place, and what new needs would be
Potential river crossing options
Park and Pathway planning and corridors – preservation and
enhancements
Options and impacts for farther or longer-range interchange
locations and connections
Land Use Issues
Existing rural residential areas north of CSAH 39 near 94
Existing rural residential area south of Orchard Road along
Cameron
Existing urban residential area east of 94 along Golf Course Rd
Proximity of Monti Golf Club to interchange at 39
Proximity of Xcel plant to Orchard Road interchange
Proximity of Xcel ballfields to Orchard Road interchange
Land ownership patterns – Xcel, banks, bankrupts, few large
owners with new development interests v. many small owners with
existing development
Proximity and/or gateway to BCOL
Development/redevelopment of Osowski/nursery area
Transitions to rural areas at perimeter
Balancing and/or impacts of added C/I on other existing C/I in
other areas of City – pros and cons
Impacts of potential solar farm development
Possible impacts from Sherburne County RR development
Environmental Issues
Otter Creek route and floodway impacts
BCOL buffering and impacts
Natural Resource corridor through former Silver Springs site
Protection of prime natural wetland area(s)
Drainage ways through Silver Springs area
Significant tree cover near Orchard Road interchange area
Potential impacts on Mississippi River?
Public Policy Issues
Potential economic development aspects – new development v.
traffic distribution impacts
Timing and impacts on development of other locations with future
payments for other infrastructure (CSAH 18 interchange; Fallon
Avenue; etc.)
Growth management policy impacts – pace and quality of
development, etc.
Policies and Principles
Upon completion of the Issues Identification, NAC has worked with city officials
and staff to establish plan priorities and goals for City growth, land use, and
transportation in the Interchange Study Area. A Policy Plan that identifies
these stated goals along with policy statements aimed at achieving these goals
will be produced.
The goals and policies will be formatted to complement the structure of the
current Comprehensive Plan, however, formal Comprehensive Plan
amendments would occur once final agency decision are made related to the
development of new interchange locations as a separate project.
The published policies will give the community a solid, defensible basis for
approving or rejecting proposed development requests. Similarly, prioritizing
the City’s resources can best be accomplished when the goals are clear. The
policies and principles guiding the land use analysis are as follows:
Maintain Comprehensive Plan preferences for high-quality development
in all categories
Address transitions between land uses
Address traffic generation impacts on existing development
Address long-term impacts of no-interchange option
Plan for more extensive Comp Plan amendment process pending outcome
of Interchange Study recommendations
Account for land use intensity impacts of Natural Resource conditions
Prep future plan for financial impacts, including collateral infrastructure
demands
Concept Planning
With the establishment of the relevant land use policies, the study process
undertakes an analysis to develop land use plans for the various alternative
interchange locations.
It should be noted that all configurations are for illustration purposes only, and
do not represent final locations, actual interchange design options or other
design aspects. The intention is merely to identify the impacts of an
interchange in the general area shown on the concept plan.
The land use quantities exempt rights of way, significant environmental
features (including the natural resources corridor) and wetlands from the land
supply calculations. There may be other factors that would affect the actual
developable land supply.
Concept Plan 1
This concept shows a proposed configuration of the Orchard Road interchange
location. The land use pattern identifies a concentration of commercial land
uses near the interchange on both sides of the interstate. An interchange in
this location supports the potential for connection to a Mississippi River
crossing providing access to and from Sherburne County. The river crossing
option is purely conceptual at this point, and significant additional study
would be necessary to determine the feasibility of such a plan.
Medium density residential adjoins the commercial area to the west, and the
bulk of the area is shown as low density residential. An area of industrial
would lie adjacent to the freeway along a new collector road that parallels the
interstate. It is anticipated that land use patterns south of County 39 would
remain largely as they are currently planned.
Net land use quantities total as follows:
Low Density (Single Family) Residential: 1,040 acres
Medium Density (Attached) Residential: 146 acres
Commercial: 193 acres
Industrial: 103 acres
Concept 1 supports a gross development area of approximately 1,985 gross
acres, with about 1,482 net developable acres. Areas excluded from the gross
acreage include major existing or planned rights of way, wetlands and
floodplains, areas of significant environmental value, and the natural resources
corridor identified in the City’s Natural Resources Inventory.
The land use plan anticipates strong pressure for commercial development
near the Orchard Road interchange, including an absorption of land for
commercial purposes to the east/north of the interchange. With the opening of
this area for commercial, industrial uses currently planned for the south
Highway 25 area of the City would become the primary industrial growth
location. Option 1 shows an area of industrial – likely “business park” types of
uses, along the Interstate 94 frontage.
Mid-density residential is shown in transition surrounding the commercial area
at the interchange. Some of this may be comprised of higher-density
development capitalizing on freeway access. Lower density residential
development would occupy the remainder of the growth area. This plan
anticipates a growth potential of approximately 2,300 single family homes and
1,150 attached residential units in the Concept 1 subject area.
Concept Plan 2
This concept shows a proposed configuration at the County 39 interchange
location. The land use pattern identifies a concentration of commercial land
uses near the interchange on both sides of the interstate. The greatest change
in current pattern would be an expectation that the rural residential area near
the interchange location would see pressure to redevelop in a commercial
pattern. Medium density residential adjoins the commercial area to the west
along County 39, and the bulk of the area is shown as low density residential.
An area of industrial would lie adjacent to the freeway along a new collector
road that parallels the interstate. It is anticipated that land use patterns south
of County 39 may see additional pressure to extend the current industrial
pattern as well.
Net land use quantities total as follows:
Low Density (Single Family) Residential: 769 acres
Medium Density (Attached) Residential: 115 acres
Commercial: 44 acres
Industrial: 155 acres
Concept 2 supports a gross development area of approximately 1,370 gross
acres, with about 1,083 net developable acres. Areas excluded from the gross
acreage include major existing or planned rights of way, wetlands and
floodplains, areas of significant environmental value, and the natural resources
corridor identified in the City’s Natural Resources Inventory.
Commercial development would again be clustered around the interchange
area. However, due to existing development patterns and environmental
conditions, along with proximity to the Highway 25 commercial corridor, this
plan assumes that a much lower level of pressure for commercial acreage
would occur.
A slightly expanded industrial corridor is foreseen between the County 39
interchange and the Orchard Road overpass, relying on the parallel collector
pattern, but without pressure for commercial at Orchard Road, as in the
pattern shown in Concept 1.
The distances to the interchange location constrict the likely development area,
at least in the foreseeable future, thus, residential growth areas are less, and
primarily driven by proximity to the Bertram Chain of Lakes park area, less so
by interchange access. The land use patterns anticipate approximately 1,690
single family homes, and 900 attached units, a total of 2,590 units.
Concept Plan 3
This concept shows a proposed configuration of both the Orchard Road and the
County 39 location. The land use pattern identifies a concentration of
commercial land uses near both interchange locations on both sides of the
interstate. It is likely, with this scenario, that the Orchard Road location would
also support a significant increase in industrial land uses, which in turn would
support additional commercial not anticipated with either of the first two
concepts. As with Concept 1, the Orchard Road interchange accommodates
the potential for a connection to a river crossing location, in the event such a
project were to occur.
Medium density residential adjoins the commercial area to the west along
County 39, and the remainder of the area is shown as low density residential.
An area of industrial would lie adjacent to the freeway along a new collector
road that parallels the interstate.
Net land use quantities total as follows:
Low Density (Single Family) Residential: 940 acres
Medium Density (Attached) Residential: 126 acres
Commercial: 247 acres
Industrial: 303 acres
Concept 3 supports a gross development area of approximately 2,246 gross
acres, with about 1,616 net developable acres. Areas excluded from the gross
acreage include major existing or planned rights of way, wetlands and
floodplains, areas of significant environmental value, and the natural resources
corridor identified in the City’s Natural Resources Inventory.
With both interchange locations in place, a greatly expanded service area is
foreseen, extending farther west and northwest. The plan anticipates
occupying much of the Orchard Road area with commercial, and an expanded
industrial pattern to the north. Commercial uses are anticipated in the County
39 area, due to the nature of interchange land use pressure.
This pattern would likely have a significant impact on other areas in the city
currently set aside for these land uses. It is possible that some of the areas
proposed for commercial might be suitable for industrial as well. These
decisions would need to be examined at the time the City considers more
formal Comprehensive Plan amendments and zoning patterns.
This Concept anticipates a residential growth area accommodating
approximately 2,070 single family units, and 980 attached units.
Concept Plan 4
Concept 4 is a “no interchange” option, and examines the likely development
scenario if access to the interstate remains as is, with the only interchanges at
TH 25 and CSAH 18. This land use pattern would consist primarily of
residential land uses. Due to restricted major access to the east, requiring the
use of County 39 to any point in the City’s commercial areas, commercial
and/or industrial uses in the area would be highly limited.
The primary draw to the area would be residential proximity to the Bertram
Chain of Lakes park area. This land use feature would be attractive primarily
to a residential development pattern. The land use pattern anticipates single
family residential to be the dominant land use, with medium density along
County 39, north of the park.
Net land use quantities total as follows:
Low Density (Single Family) Residential: 919 acres
Medium Density (Attached) Residential: 73 acres
The gross development area in this concept is similar to Concept 2, nearly
1,300 acres, but slightly less net developable acreage, at 992 net acres. Areas
excluded from the gross acreage include major existing or planned rights of
way, wetlands and floodplains, areas of significant environmental value, and
the natural resources corridor identified in the City’s Natural Resources
Inventory.
As noted, the land use pattern is exclusively residential. Total unit count
would be approximately 2,020 single family units and 570 attached units. This
pattern is dominated by single family residential due to the lack of support for
either retail or job-related land uses in close proximity. The higher density
development is, as with both commercial and industrial land uses, less
attractive without convenient access to the interstate.
Summary
Four land use scenarios are included in this analysis of potential patterns of
development in the northwest Monticello area. The analysis focuses on how
the construction of freeway interchanges in either, or both, or two locations
would impact the growth and development potential in the area. As noted in
the text, there are likely to be impacts of any of these land use patterns on
other planned development in the City. The eventual adoption of land use
plans and controls will need to anticipate those impacts and make adjustments
appropriate to each impacted area.
The purpose of this study is to provide a basis for the development of
transportation modeling as the City works toward federal and state
consideration of new interchange development in Monticello. While a case can
be made for alternative patterns to those shown in this study, it is believed that
the Concept Plans provide a reasonable expectation on which transportation
planning can occur. As the interchange decisions become clearer, more
detailed land use planning will be necessary.
The four scenarios studies result in the following aggregate land use
projections:
Concept 1
(Orchard
Road)
Concept 2
(CSAH 39)
Concept 3
(both
Orchard and
CSAH 39)
Concept 4
(no
interchange)
Gross Acres in
interchange reach
1,985 1,370 2,246 1,295
Net Developable
Acres in reach
1,482 1,083 1,616 992
Single Family Net
Acres (Units)
1,040
(2,300)
769
(1,690)
940
(2,070)
919
(2020)
Medium Density
Net Acres (Units)
146
(1,150)
115
(900)
126
(980)
73
(570)
Commercial
Retail/Service
193 44 247 0
Industrial/
Business Park
103 155 303 0
Bertram Lake
Birch
Long Lake
Mud Lake
Unnamed
First Lake
¬«25
Interchange Map Option #1
Legend
Proposed Roads
Existing Roads
Concept Greenway (1000 Ft. Corridor)
Wet Areas (Lakes, Rivers, Wetlands)
Parcels
Source: NAC, Inc., WSB & Assc., Wright County
Proposed Land Uses
Commercial
Industrial
Medium Density Residential
Single Family Residential
City Boundary
Existing Land Uses
Commercial
Industrial
Parks and Open Space
Single Family Residential 1,499 Ac.Medium Density Residential 223 Ac.Commercial 248 Ac.Industrial 116 Ac.
Gross Land Use Acres:
Net Land Use Acres (excludes wet areas, greenway & ROW, but incorporates land where existing roads may be removed):
February 8, 2016
0 0.5 10.25 Miles Ü
Mississippi
Riv er
§¨¦94
Single Family Residential 1040 Ac.Medium Density Residential 146 Ac.Commercial 193 Ac.Industrial 103 Ac.
Interchange Area
94
39
AETNA
75
25
9 0 T H
BROADWAY
120TH
127TH
RIVER
4TH
3RD
CHELSEA
ELM
6TH
PINE
C
A
M
E
R
O
N
BRIARWOOD
7TH
CEDAR
10 0 TH
SCHOOL
LINN
DUNDAS
M
A
R
V
I
N
MAPLE
WALNUT
PARK PLACE
PRAIRIE
SANDY
GOLF COURSE
EDMONSON
110TH
119TH
5TH
SAVANNAH
1 1 6 T H
A
F
T
ON
DALTON
97TH PRESCOTT
MI
N
N
E
S
OTA
DEEGAN
H
E
D
M
A
N
102ND
R E D F O R D
PALM
SANDBERG
I N N S B R O O K
ALPINE
C
H
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N
FRONT
W
E
S
T
O
N
FAIRWAY
PINE ST TO WB I94
W O O D S I D E
VINE
FA R M S T E A D
99 T H
KEVIN LONGLEY
PINE ST TO EB I94
SPRUCE
BRENTWOOD
HILLTOP
HILLCREST
MATTHEW
CRAIG
OTTERCREEK
HAYWARD
M
A
R
V
I
N
E
L
W
O
O
D
OAK
1 2 4 T H
OAKWOOD
KAMPA
CROCUS
LOCUST
KENNETH
DARROW
SU
M
MIT
OAKVIEW
LOCUST
CEDAR
VINE
RIVER
94
5TH
7TH
DALTON
MINNESOTA
25
RIVER
Bertram Lake
Birch
Long Lake
Mud Lake
Unnamed
First Lake
Interchange Map Option #2
Legend
Proposed Roads
Existing Roads
Concept Greenway (1000 Ft. Corridor)
Wet Areas (Lakes, Rivers, Wetlands)
Parcels
0 0.5 10.25 Miles Ü
Source: NAC, Inc., WSB & Assc., Wright County
City Boundary
Existing Land Uses
Commercial
Industrial
Parks and Open Space
Single Family Residential 940 Ac.Medium Density Residential 123 Ac.Commercial 123 Ac.Industrial 184 Ac.
Gross Land Use Acres:
Single Family Residential 769 Ac.Medium Density Residential 115 Ac.Commercial 44 Ac.Industrial 155 Ac.
Net Land Use Acres (excludes wet areas, greenway & ROW, but incorporates land where existing roads may be removed):
Proposed Land Uses
Medium Density Residential
Single Family Residential
Commercial
Industrial
§¨¦94
Mississippi
Riv er
¬«25
Interchange Area
94
39
75
A
E
T
N
A
BROADWAY
25
9 0 T H
120TH
127TH
4TH
RIVER
3RD
CHELSEA
ELM
6TH
PINE
C
A
M
E
R
O
N
7TH
BRIARWOOD
10 0 TH
CEDAR
LINN
M
A
R
V
I
N
DUNDAS
MAPLE
WALNUT
PARK PLACE
PRAIRIE
SANDY
GOLF COURSE
110TH
119TH
5TH
SAVANNAH
EDMONSON
1 1 6 T H
A
F
T
ON
DALTON
PRESCOTT
MI
N
N
E
S
OTA
H
E
D
M
A
N
PALM
SANDBERG
I N N S B R O O K
R E D F O R D
ALPINE
C
H
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N
FRONT
W
E
S
T
O
N
FAIRWAY
PINE ST TO WB I94
W O O D S I D E
VINE
99 T H
KEVIN LONGLEY
PINE ST TO EB I94
SPRUCE
BRENTWOOD
HILLTOP
HILLCREST
MATTHEW
102ND
CRAIG
OTTERCREEK
HAYWARD
M
A
R
V
I
N
E
L
W
O
O
D
OAK
1 2 4 T H
OAKWOOD
KAMPA
CROCUS
LOCUST
CHESTNUT
KENNETH
DARROW
SU
M
MIT
OAKVIEW
LOCUST
CEDAR
VINE
RIVER
94
5TH
7TH
DALTON
MINNESOTA
25
RIVER
Bertram Lake
Birch
Long Lake
Mud Lake
Unnamed
First Lake
Interchange Map Option #3
Legend
Proposed Roads
Existing Roads
Concept Greenway (1000 Ft. Corridor)
Wet Areas (Lakes, Rivers, Wetlands)
Parcels
§¨¦94
¬«25
Mississippi
Riv er
Source: NAC, Inc., WSB & Assc., Wright County
Proposed Land Uses
Commercial
Industrial
Medium Density Residential
Single Family Residential
City Boundary
Existing Land Uses
Commercial
Industrial
Parks and Open Space
February 8, 2016
0 0.5 10.25 Miles Ü
Single Family Residential 941 Ac.Medium Density Residential 127 Ac.Commercial 249 Ac.Industrial 303
Net Land Use Acres (excludes wet areas, greenway & ROW, but incorporates land where existing roads may be removed):
Interchange Area
Single Family Residential 1,235 Ac.Medium Density Residential 140 Ac.Commercial 405 Ac.Industrial 466
Gross Land Use Acres:
94
39
75
A
E
T
N
A
BROADWAY
25
9 0 T H
120TH
127TH
4TH
RIVER
3RD
CHEL SEA
ELM
6TH
PINE
C
A
M
E
R
O
N
7TH
BRIARWOOD
10 0 T H
CEDAR
LINN
M
A
R
V
I
N
DUNDAS
MAPLE
WALNUT
PARK PLACE
PRAIRIE
SANDY
GOLF COURSE
110TH
119TH
5TH
EDMONSON
SAVANN AH
1 1 6 T H
A
FT
ON
DALTO
N
PRESCOTT
MI
N
N
ES
O
TA
H
E
D
M
A
N
PALM
SANDBERG
I N N S B R O O K
R E D F O R D
ALPINE
C
H
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N
FRONT
W
E
S
T
O
N
FAIRWAY
PINE ST TO WB I94
W O O D S I D E
VINE
99 T H
KEVIN LONGLEY
PINE ST TO EB I94
SPRUCE
BRENTWOOD
102ND
HILLTOP
HILLCREST
MATTHEW
CRAIG
OTTERCREEK
HAYWARD
M
A
R
V
I
N
E
LW
O
O
D
OAK
1 2 4 T H
OAKWOOD
KAMPA
CROCUS
LOCUST
KENNETH
DARROW
SU
M
MIT
OAKVIEW
LOCUST
CEDAR
VINE
RIVER
94
5TH
7TH
DALTON
MINNESOTA
25
RIVER
Be rtram Lake
Birch
Long Lake
Mud Lake
Unnamed
First Lake
¬«25
Interchange Map Option #4
Legend
Proposed Roads
Existing Roads
Concept Greenway (1000 F t. Corridor)
Wet Areas (Lakes, Rivers, Wetlands)
Parcels
Source: N AC, Inc., WSB & Assc., Wright County
City Boundary
Existing Land Uses
Comm ercial
Industrial
Parks and Open Space
March 1, 2 016
Mississippi
Riv er
§¨¦94
0 0.5 10.25 Miles Ü
Proposed Land Uses
Medium Density R esidential
Single Fam ily Residential
Single Family Reside ntial 1,172 Ac.Med ium Density R esiden tia l 1 23 Ac.
Gross Land Use Acres :
Net Land Use Ac res (excludes w et areas, gre enw ay & R OW, but incorporate s land where existing roads may be re move d):
Single Family Reside ntial 919 Ac.Med ium Density R esiden tia l 7 3 Ac.
No Build
Bertram Lake
Birch
Long Lake
Mud Lake
Unnamed
First Lake
¬«25
Interchange Map Option #1
Legend
Proposed Roads
Existing Roads
Concept Greenway (1000 Ft. Corridor)
Wet Areas (Lakes, Rivers, Wetlands)
Parcels
Source: NAC, Inc., WSB & Assc., Wright County
Proposed Land Uses
Commercial
Industrial
Medium Density Residential
Single Family Residential
City Boundary
Existing Land Uses
Commercial
Industrial
Parks and Open Space
Single Family Residential 1,499 Ac.Medium Density Residential 223 Ac.Commercial 248 Ac.Industrial 116 Ac.
Gross Land Use Acres:
Net Land Use Acres (excludes wet areas, greenway & ROW, but incorporates land where existing roads may be removed):
February 8, 2016
0 0.5 10.25 Miles Ü
Mississippi
Riv er
§¨¦94
Single Family Residential 1040 Ac.Medium Density Residential 146 Ac.Commercial 193 Ac.Industrial 103 Ac.
Interchange Area
94
39
AETNA
75
25
9 0 T H
BROADWAY
120TH
127TH
RIVER
4TH
3RD
CHELSEA
ELM
6TH
PINE
C
A
M
E
R
O
N
BRIARWOOD
7TH
CEDAR
10 0 TH
SCHOOL
LINN
DUNDAS
M
A
R
V
I
N
MAPLE
WALNUT
PARK PLACE
PRAIRIE
SANDY
GOLF COURSE
EDMONSON
110TH
119TH
5TH
SAVANNAH
1 1 6 T H
A
F
T
ON
DALTON
97TH PRESCOTT
MI
N
N
E
S
OTA
DEEGAN
H
E
D
M
A
N
102ND
R E D F O R D
PALM
SANDBERG
I N N S B R O O K
ALPINE
C
H
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N
FRONT
W
E
S
T
O
N
FAIRWAY
PINE ST TO WB I94
W O O D S I D E
VINE
FA R M S T E A D
99 T H
KEVIN LONGLEY
PINE ST TO EB I94
SPRUCE
BRENTWOOD
HILLTOP
HILLCREST
MATTHEW
CRAIG
OTTERCREEK
HAYWARD
M
A
R
V
I
N
E
L
W
O
O
D
OAK
1 2 4 T H
OAKWOOD
KAMPA
CROCUS
LOCUST
KENNETH
DARROW
SU
M
MIT
OAKVIEW
LOCUST
CEDAR
VINE
RIVER
94
5TH
7TH
DALTON
MINNESOTA
25
RIVER
Bertram Lake
Birch
Long Lake
Mud Lake
Unnamed
First Lake
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping,Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Interchange Map Option #2
Legend
Proposed Roads
Existing Roads
Concept Greenway (1000 Ft. Corridor)
Wet Areas (Lakes, Rivers, Wetlands)
Parcels
0 0.5 10.25 Miles Ü
Source: NAC, Inc., WSB & Assc., Wright County
City Boundary
Existing Land Uses
Commercial
Industrial
Parks and Open Space
Single Family Residential 940 Ac.Medium Density Residential 123 Ac.Commercial 123 Ac.Industrial 184 Ac.
Gross Land Use Acres:
Single Family Residential 769 Ac.Medium Density Residential 115 Ac.Commercial 44 Ac.Industrial 155 Ac.
Net Land Use Acres (excludes wet areas, greenway & ROW, but incorporates land where existing roads may be removed):
Proposed Land Uses
Medium Density Residential
Single Family Residential
Commercial
Industrial
§¨¦94
Mississippi
Riv er
¬«25
Interchange Area
94
39
75
A
E
T
N
A
BROADWAY
25
9 0 T H
120TH
127TH
4TH
RIVER
3RD
CHELSEA
ELM
6TH
PINE
C
A
M
E
R
O
N
7TH
BRIARWOOD
10 0 TH
CEDAR
LINN
M
A
R
V
I
N
DUNDAS
MAPLE
WALNUT
PARK PLACE
PRAIRIE
SANDY
GOLF COURSE
110TH
119TH
5TH
SAVANNAH
EDMONSON
1 1 6 T H
A
F
T
ON
DALTON
PRESCOTT
MI
N
N
E
S
OTA
H
E
D
M
A
N
PALM
SANDBERG
I N N S B R O O K
R E D F O R D
ALPINE
C
H
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N
FRONT
W
E
S
T
O
N
FAIRWAY
PINE ST TO WB I94
W O O D S I D E
VINE
99 T H
KEVIN LONGLEY
PINE ST TO EB I94
SPRUCE
BRENTWOOD
HILLTOP
HILLCREST
MATTHEW
102ND
CRAIG
OTTERCREEK
HAYWARD
M
A
R
V
I
N
E
L
W
O
O
D
OAK
1 2 4 T H
OAKWOOD
KAMPA
CROCUS
LOCUST
CHESTNUT
KENNETH
DARROW
SU
M
MIT
OAKVIEW
LOCUST
CEDAR
VINE
RIVER
94
5TH
7TH
DALTON
MINNESOTA
25
RIVER
Bertram Lake
Birch
Long Lake
Mud Lake
Unnamed
First Lake
Interchange Map Option #3
Legend
Proposed Roads
Existing Roads
Concept Greenway (1000 Ft. Corridor)
Wet Areas (Lakes, Rivers, Wetlands)
Parcels
§¨¦94
¬«25
Mississippi
Riv er
Source: NAC, Inc., WSB & Assc., Wright County
Proposed Land Uses
Commercial
Industrial
Medium Density Residential
Single Family Residential
City Boundary
Existing Land Uses
Commercial
Industrial
Parks and Open Space
February 8, 2016
0 0.5 10.25 Miles Ü
Single Family Residential 941 Ac.Medium Density Residential 127 Ac.Commercial 249 Ac.Industrial 303
Net Land Use Acres (excludes wet areas, greenway & ROW, but incorporates land where existing roads may be removed):
Interchange Area
Single Family Residential 1,235 Ac.Medium Density Residential 140 Ac.Commercial 405 Ac.Industrial 466
Gross Land Use Acres:
94
39
75
A
E
T
N
A
BROADWAY
25
9 0 T H
120TH
127TH
4TH
RIVER
3RD
CHEL SEA
ELM
6TH
PINE
C
A
M
E
R
O
N
7TH
BRIARWOOD
10 0 T H
CEDAR
LINN
M
A
R
V
I
N
DUNDAS
MAPLE
WALNUT
PARK PLACE
PRAIRIE
SANDY
GOLF COURSE
110TH
119TH
5TH
EDMONSON
SAVANN AH
1 1 6 T H
A
FT
ON
DALTO
N
PRESCOTT
MI
N
N
ES
O
TA
H
E
D
M
A
N
PALM
SANDBERG
I N N S B R O O K
R E D F O R D
ALPINE
C
H
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N
FRONT
W
E
S
T
O
N
FAIRWAY
PINE ST TO WB I94
W O O D S I D E
VINE
99 T H
KEVIN LONGLEY
PINE ST TO EB I94
SPRUCE
BRENTWOOD
102ND
HILLTOP
HILLCREST
MATTHEW
CRAIG
OTTERCREEK
HAYWARD
M
A
R
V
I
N
E
LW
O
O
D
OAK
1 2 4 T H
OAKWOOD
KAMPA
CROCUS
LOCUST
KENNETH
DARROW
SU
M
MIT
OAKVIEW
LOCUST
CEDAR
VINE
RIVER
94
5TH
7TH
DALTON
MINNESOTA
25
RIVER
94
39
75
A
E
T
N
A
BROADWAY
2590TH
120TH
127TH
4TH
RIVER
3RD
C
HELSE
A
ELM
6THPINE
C
A
M
E
R
O
N
7TH
BRIARWOOD
10 0 T H
CEDAR
LINN
M
A
R
V
I
N
DUNDAS
MAPLE
WALNUT
P
A
R
K P
L
A
C
E
PRAIRIE
SANDY
1
1
0
T
H
116TH
AFTON
D A L T O N MINNESOTA
RIVER
CEDAR
94
7 T H
Be rtram Lake
Birch
Long Lake
Mud Lake
Unnamed
First Lake
¬«25
Interchange Map Option #4
Legend
Proposed Roads
Existing Roads
Concept Greenway (1000 F t. Corridor)
Wet Areas (Lakes, Rivers, Wetlands)
Parcels
Source: N AC, Inc., WSB & Assc., Wright County
City Boundary
Existing Land Uses
Comm ercial
Industrial
Parks and Open Space
March 1, 2 016
Mississippi
Riv er
§¨¦94
0 0.5 10.25 Miles Ü
Proposed Land Uses
Medium Density R esidential
Single Fam ily Residential
Single Family Reside ntial 1,172 Ac.Med ium Density R esiden tia l 1 23 Ac.
Gross Land Use Acres :
Net Land Use Ac res (excludes w et areas, gre enw ay & R OW, but incorporate s land where existing roads may be re move d):
Single Family Reside ntial 919 Ac.Med ium Density R esiden tia l 7 3 Ac.
No Build
IEDCAgenda:03/02/16
1
7.ConsiderationtoAdopt2016IEDCActionStatement.(AS)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
TheIEDCOrganizational&MembershipGuidelinesrequiresthattheIEDCadoptanAction
Statementeachyear.
AdraftActionStatementhasbeenpreparedusingthefeedbackreceivedfromworksheets
providedtotheIEDCmembers.
Theactionstatementhasbeendividedintotwoprimaryobjectiveareas:AttractingJobsand
CreatingJobsandTaxBase.Actionstatementswithineachobjectiveareaareprioritized
basedontherankingssuppliedbyIEDCmembers.Individualactionitemsundereachaction
statementarenotprioritized.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.Motiontoadopt2016IEDCActionStatement.
2.Motiontotableforfurtherdiscussion.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
StaffrecommendsadoptionsubjecttoanymodificationsapprovedbytheIEDC.Theplan
developedisreflectiveofthedirectionprovidedbyIEDCmembers.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
2016ActionStatement,Draft
MonticelloComprehensivePlan–Chapter4-EconomicDevelopment
INDUSTRIAL&ECONOMICDEVELOPMENTCOMMITTEE
2016ACTIONSTATEMENTWORKSHEET
MissionStatement:TheMonticelloIEDCwilladvocateindustrialandeconomicgrowthwithin
theCityofMonticellobypromotingawarenessandcommunicationeffortsonbehalfofthe
businesscommunity.
Objective Goal:
TheIEDCisdedicatedtobeingpro-activeinfollowingtheguidelines objectivesandpolicies
establishedintheMonticelloComprehensivePlan.ItistheintentionoftheIEDCtoworkwithin
theareasidentifiedbelowassupportingobjectivesandactions.
Objective:RetainingJobs
1.EncouragebusinessretentionwithinMonticello.
a.BusinessretentionvisitsbyIEDCmemberstolongstandingbusinessinthe
communitytohelpgrowstrongerrelationshipsbetweenourbusinessesandCity
Hall.
b.DiscusstheneedsofbusinessesfordevelopmentofaRetentionActionPlan.
c.MarketandpresentvariousprogramsavailableviathecityandEDA.
2.RecognizethecontributionsofMonticellomanufacturersthroughorganizationof
andparticipationinindustry-relatedevents.
a.ContinueIndustryoftheYearBreakfast.
b.AssistindevelopmentandpromotionofatourofMonticelloIndustrial
Businesses.
c.FocusonManufacturingweek2016andtour.
3.EnhanceWorkforceDevelopmentthroughpartnershipswithlocaleducators,
businesses,organizationsandagencies.
a.StrongerparticipationwiththeMonticelloSchoolDistrictingrowingtheir
initiativetobringbusinessesintotheclassrooms
b.Basedontheneedofthebusinesses,partnerwithkeyleadersofourlocalbusinesses,
educatorsandotherstodevelopandexecuteaWorkforceDevelopmentPlan.
c.Explorewaysbusinesscanbringrelevancetoeducationalclasses&programs.
4.Promotecommunications&engagementwithMonticellobusinessesandprospects
a.CreateandhostaMonticellobusinessroundtableeventwhichwillofferbusinesses
aplatformfordiscussion.
b.Facilitate“IndustrialRoundTables”.
Objective:CreatingJobs&ExpandingtheTaxBase
1.Supporttherecruitmentofbusinesswhichfurtherthegoalsandobjectivesforthe
communityasguidedbytheComprehensivePlan.
a.Assessthecurrentmarketingmaterialsandplan.
b.AssistinexecutionordevelopmentofanewMarketingPlan.
c.Respondinatimelymannertoinboundcommunications.
2.ContinuetoleadtheCityinmovingforwardkeytransportationprojectswhich
supporteconomicdevelopment.
a.ParticipateintheTransportationDaythroughtheMinnesotaChamberandlobby
onbehalfoftheMonticellocommunitytohelpcitystaffbringattentiontoour
localtransportationneeds.
b.Developaneedsbasedtransportationprioritystatementforlobbying/support
purposes.
c.Encouragekeytransportationprojectswhichimproveproductdeliveryfor
businesses,suchasinterchange,freeway,andbridgecrossingprojects.
d.Identifyspecificbenefitsofa3rdinterchangetobusinessesand/orcommunity.
3.EvaluateandproviderecommendationstotheCityregardingindustriallandsupply
andavailability.
a.Morefrequentlyevaluatecurrentpropertyinventoryandusesfortheseproperties
asagroupwiththeobjectivetobettermarkettheseproperties.
b.Assess Industrial Land availability for jobs with income levels to support families;
1.Totalacreagewithdevelopedinfrastructure,zoned,andavailabletopurchase
andthemaximumacreageofacontiguous,buildablelot.
2.Totalacreagewithundevelopedinfrastructure,zoned,andavailabletopurchase.
Ownercontactinformation.
3.TotalacreagepreservedinLandUsePlanforfuturedevelopment.
c.AssessaccessibilitytoInterstate94andStateHighway25andutilitycapabilities
4.SupportcommunityqualityoflifeinitiativeswhichenhanceMonticello’sobjectives
forhighqualitydevelopmentacrossthelandusespectrum,includingresidential,
commercial,industrialandcivicuses.
a.SupportandencouragethedevelopmentoftheBertramChainofLakesRegional
ParkandrecommendthedevelopmentofapathwayconnectiontoMonticello
Businesses.
b.PromoteCentraCareHealthMonticellotoindustrialbusinesses.
c.DevelopavisioningworksheettogetIEDCmembersviewsonresidential,
commercialandindustrialneedsandchallengestobringtolightneededfuture
planningandordinancechanges.
d.Identifyneededprioritiessuchashotelsandrestaurants.
e.Reviewandcoordinatepublicandprivateactionswithparksandtrails.
5.Continuetoproviderecommendationsinanadvisorycapacityonlandusematters
relatingtoindustrialandeconomicdevelopment.
a.ProvidecommentsontheNWMonticelloInterchangeLandUseStudy.
b.KeepinformedonthestatusoftheMonticelloNuclearPlantasitrelatestotheNW
InterchangeLandUseStudy.
c.Thinkoutsidetheboxoncurrentplan.
d.Sponsornetworkingindividuallyandinsmallgroupsforinput.
6.Facilitateregionaldevelopmentinitiatives.
Economic Development | 4-12008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Ideally, the Comprehensive Plan does not have an Economic Development
chapter. The Land Use Plan would be sufficient to channel market forces
to meet the development objectives of the community. In reality, certain
development needs cannot be met without public intervention. The
Economic Development chapter of the Plan focuses on the aspects of
Monticello’s future that require particular attention and action by the City.
These actions include:
f Attracting and retaining jobs
f Expanding the tax base
f Enhancing the economic vitality of Downtown
f Facilitating redevelopment
Attracting and Retaining Jobs
The creation and retention of jobs is one of the most important objectives
for Monticello. Jobs, particularly jobs with income levels capable of
supporting a family, are key to achieving many elements of Monticello’s
vision for the future.
f Jobs attract residents to the community. Jobs will pay a critical role in
creating the type of “move up” housing sought by the City.
f Jobs provide the income needed to support local business and
government services.
f Retention of businesses promote community stability by keeping jobs
and residents in Monticello.
The Community Context chapter of the Comprehensive Plan contains a
section on Employment. This section contains data about employment in
Monticello and of its residents. Among the key findings in this section are:
f While the community added nearly 5,000 people between 2000 and
2010 according to the U.S. Census, it only added 1,430 jobs according
to the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW). In 2010,
the community had 6,992 jobs according to the QCEW but 7,093
people in the labor force according to the Census.
4Economic Development
Chapter Contents
Attracting Jobs ............................4-1
Expanding the Tax Base ............4-3
Enhancing Downtown ...............4-5
Facilitating Redevelopment .....4-7
Development Strategies ...........4-7
4-2 | Economic Development City of Monticello
f The U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic
Studies’ OntheMap website shows that in 2010
4,597 people leave the community each day to
work, while 3,849 people come into the community
to work. Only 835 both live and work in the
community.
f Approximately 15% of residents in 2010 are
employed within the community. This has dropped
from 18% in 2002.
f As shown in Figure 4.1, 2012 data from the
Minnesota Department of Employment and
Economic Development (DEED) on their
mnprospector.com website shows that Monticello
is made up of a wide range of small to medium
sized employers. Only 10 employers have more
than 100 employees. Over half have fewer than
four (4) employees.
f Workers for Monticello businesses come primarily
from Monticello and the surrounding region.
Nearly 75% of people working in Monticello live in
Monticello, adjacent townships, or other places in
Wright and Sherburne counties (2010 OntheMap).
f Nearly 40% of Monticello residents work in
Hennepin County, with the largest percentage in
Minneapolis, Plymouth, and Maple Grove. Another
15% work elsewhere in Wright County, including
Buffalo and St. Michael.
f The 2007-2011 American Community Survey
(ACS) Census reported a mean travel time to work
of 28.5 minutes. This is up from the 2000 Census
travel time of 24 minutes. The mean travel time in
the 2007-2011 ACS was 29.7 minutes for Wright
County and 24.5 minutes for the region overall.
Background Reports
The City of Monticello conducts studies and assessments
as needed to help guide its economic development
efforts. The findings and recommendations of these
studies are summarized below with the most recent
provided first.
2010 Business Retention and Expansion Research (BR&E)
Report
Monticello’s Business Retention and Expansion (BR&E)
program was initiated by the City of Monticello, the
Monticello Chamber of Commerce and Industry,
DEED, and the University of Minnesota Extension. It
was also sponsored by over a dozen local businesses.
Through the BR&E program, 60 businesses were
visited. Findings from the visits and data analysis found:
f 78% of the visited businesses were locally owned
and operated.
f 20% of businesses were in manufacturing, 18% in
retail trade, and 13% in other services.
f The businesses employed over 1,600 full-time and
975 part-time employees, with a trimmed average
(an average where the low and high were discarded
to prevent skewing) of 15.38 full-time employees,
slightly down from 15.52 three years ago. The
firms also had a trimmed average of 7.76 part-time
employees, up from 6.96 three years ago.
f Most full-time employees are in manufacturing,
food and beverage, retail trade, and medical, while
part-time employees are in medical, retail trade,
and tourism/recreational services.
f Survey results indicated that the medical industry
is the highest employer in Monticello, followed by
retail trade and manufacturing.
f Businesses in the community are fairly stable with
about half expecting some type of change.
The BR&E identified four strategies aimed at helping
businesses become more profitable. Each strategy
was accompanied by a list of potential projects
intended to be ideas for the community to explore.
The implementation of the projects is intended to be
a collaborative effort among the various sectors of the
community. The four strategies identified included:
Number of
Establishments by SizeNumberPercent
1-4 Employees 25452.05
5-9 Employees 9719.88
10-19 Employees 6413.11
20-49 Employees 428.61
50-99 Employees 214.30
100-249 Employees 71.43
250-499 Employees 20.41
500-999 Employees 10.20
Figure 4-1: 2012 Total Establishments by Size
Economic Development | 4-32008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
f Improve Business Retention and Expansion
Through Technical and Development Assistance.
f Improve Labor Force Availability and Productivity.
f Improve Infrastructure to Help Move Goods,
Customers, and the Labor Force More Efficiently.
f Improve and Promote the Quality of Life in
Monticello.
During the 2013 comprehensive plan economic
development update process, it was noted that the 2010
Business Retention and Expansion Research strategies
were similar to the 2008 Development Strategies. The
review process identified the need to continue similar
strategies into the future.
Preceding the development of the 2008 Comprehensive
Plan an assessment was conducted by St. Cloud State
University to determine whether a bioscience park
should be established in Monticello. At that time the
bioscience industry was an economic development
focus statewide. While the attraction of a bioscience
business is not a particular focus of Monticello today,
there are findings of that study that can be useful to
consider in the overall development of economic
development strategies for the community.
Some of the Monticello’s strengths for attracting
businesses included:
f Land availability (compared to Metro Area).
f Access to major highways (I-94, U.S. 10 and STH
25).
f Regional growth of employment base.
f Development of local fiber optic system.
f Proximity to universities.
f Overall location.
f Expansive park system.
f Monticello Community Center.
Recommended business development activities that
apply to the attraction and retention of all businesses
include ensuring that there are sites suitable and
attractive to potential businesses available and ready
for development. The community should continue to
explore and establish partnerships with a variety of
stakeholders that can work together to support business
attraction and retention. This includes the identification
of funding sources which may be an incentive for
businesses locating in Monticello. When available the
City should participate in special tax zones that have
been made available at the state and federal level to
support business development and retention.
Expanding the Tax Base
A traditional objective of local economic development
planning is the expansion of the property tax base.
Under the current system of local government finance,
property taxes are the largest source of city revenue.
For this reason, it is an important aspect of economic
development planning in Monticello.
Understanding the Property Tax System
Effective strategies to promote the growth of the tax
base require a clear understanding of the property tax
system.
Property Valuation
There are three forms of property valuation. The
foundation of the property tax system is Estimated
Market Value. This amount is the value of a parcel
of property as set by the County Assessor. In some
circumstances, the State Legislature limits the amount
of Estimated Market Value that can be used for taxation.
These adjustments result in the Taxable Market Value.
The value used to calculate property taxes is Tax
Capacity. Tax Capacity Value is a percentage of Taxable
Market Value. The percentage factors are set by the
State Legislature and vary by class of property.
Changes in the Tax System
Traditional economic development theory seeks
commercial and industrial development as a means of
building tax base. Historically, the system supported
this approach. A dollar of estimated market value of
commercial-industrial property carried a higher tax
capacity value than residential property. Over the past
twelve years, tax “reforms” by the State Legislature have
changed this situation.
4-4 | Economic Development City of Monticello
Industrial Retail Office Single Townhome Apt
Acres 10 10 10 10 10 10
Coverage 30%30%30%3 6 12
Development (SF or Units)130,680 130,680 130,680 30 60 120
EMV per SF or Unit 65 80 100 400,000 250,000 150,000
EMV 8,494,200 10,454,400 13,068,000 12,000,000 15,000,000 18,000,000
Tax Capacity 169,134 208,338 260,610 120,000 150,000 225,000
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
IndustrialRetailOfficeSingleTownhomeApt
Ta
x
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
V
a
l
u
e
Figure 4-3: Tax Capacity Comparison
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,00
1997 19981999200020012002 to 2012
Ta
x
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
V
a
l
u
e
Figure 4-2: Changes in Tax Capacity Value - Commercial/Industrial
Economic Development | 4-52008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
The chart in Figure 4-2 shows how legislative changes
have reduced the tax base created by commercial-
industrial development. This chart is based on the
tax capacity value for $3,000,000 of Taxable Market
Value. The legislative changes in the rates used to set
tax capacity mean that this property produced 56% less
tax base in 2012 than in 1997.
This trend takes on additional meaning when compared
to other classifications of property. Figure 4-3
compares the tax capacity value for the primary forms
of development in Monticello. The valuations in this
chart are based on assumptions about the density
of development and estimated market value of new
development. Changes in these assumptions will alter
the results.
This chart clearly illustrates the current reality for
economic development strategies. All forms of
development contribute tax base to the community.
It is risky placing too much weight on one type of
development for tax base growth. In addition, cities
do not control the critical elements of the tax system.
Changes in the system lead to unanticipated results at
the local level.
Tax base growth has implications that are unique
to Monticello. The chart in Figure 4-4 shows the
distribution of taxes payable in 2011. Utilities, likely
largely Xcel Energy, contributes about one-third of
the City’s taxes, while both commercial/industrial and
residential uses contribute 28% each.
Enhancing Downtown
Maintaining a successful Downtown is an important
element of the economic development plan for
Monticello. Downtown is a key business district
providing goods, services, and jobs for the community.
Downtown is unlike any other business district because
of its unique role in Monticello’s identity and heritage.
The Land Use chapter describes plans, policies, and
strategies related to Downtown Monticello. Downtown
is part of the Economic Development chapter because
of the likelihood that city actions and investments
will be needed to achieve community objectives for
Downtown. This intervention may include:
f Public improvements to provide services or to
enhance the Downtown environment.
f Provision of adequate parking supply.
f Acquisition of land.
f Preparation of sites for development.
f Removal of other physical and economic barriers
to achieve community objectives.
These actions may require the use of tax increment
financing, tax abatement, or other finance tools
available to the City.
In 2011, the City of Monticello conducted a retail market
study for Downtown Monticello. The report, Embracing
Downtown Monticello, has been incorporated in the
Comprehensive Plan as an appendix and serves as a
resource for the implementation of the Comprehensive
Plan. The study included many components including
an identification and analysis of existing businesses,
evaluation of shopping areas that are competition for
Downtown, a survey of customers, delineation of the
trade area, and the establishment of market demand
for various businesses.
Figure 4-4: Distribution of 2011 Taxes Payable
Public Utility
9,707,817
50%
Residential Homestead
3,470,090
18%
Commercial/Industrial
4,787,530
24%
All Other
1,614,256
8%
4-6 | Economic Development City of Monticello
Some findings of the study included:
f Downtown Monticello enjoys a strategic location
between the Mississippi River and I-94. This
focuses traffic on TH-25 resulting in traffic counts
higher in Downtown than south of I-94
f Due to physical barriers created by the Mississippi
River and I-94, about one-third of Downtown and
secondary trade area shoppers must pass through
Downtown Monticello to reach the shopping areas
south of I-94.
f Downtown has the largest concentration of
shopping goods stores and restaurants.
f Downtown’s trade area population was estimated at
93,500 in 2010 and is projected to have an annual
growth rate of 2.2%.
f Monticello’s large anchor stores (Cub Foods,
SuperTarget, Walmart, and Home Depot) create
a secondary trade area. The population of the
combined Downtown and secondary trade areas
was 127,190 in 2010.
f CentraCare Health System, with 25 beds and 600
employees has established Monticello as a regional
medical center.
f Increased residential development stimulates
increased commercial development. The recent
economic conditions have slowed residential
development, thus resulting in reduced tenant
demand for retail space.
f Additional retail space in Downtown Monticello
can be supported by the trade area population. A
range of store types can be considered including
shopping goods, convenience goods, and food
establishments. Downtown’s existing wide variety
of services limits potential future opportunities.
However, market research indicates that Monticello
could support additional medical practices.
Figure 4-5: Embracing Downtown Monticello Primary and Secondary Trade Areas
Economic Development | 4-72008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Facilitating Redevelopment
The Comprehensive Plan seeks to create a place where
land use plans, policies, and controls work together
with private investment to properly maintain all
properties in Monticello. It is recognized that this
approach may not succeed in all locations. Despite
the best plans and intentions, properties may become
physically deteriorated and/or economically inviable. In
such places, city intervention may be need to facilitate
redevelopment and prevent the spread of blight. This
intervention may include:
f Acquisition of land.
f Preparation of sites for development.
f Construction or reconstruction of public
improvements.
f Provision of adequate parking supply.
f Remediation of polluted land as needed.
f Removal of other physical and economic barriers
to achieve community objectives.
These actions may require the use of tax increment
financing, tax abatement, or other finance tools
available to the City.
Development Strategies
The following strategies will be used to implement
the Comprehensive Plan in the area of Economic
Development:
1. The City must use the Comprehensive Plan
to provide adequate locations for future job-
producing development (Places to Work).
2. The City should adhere to the Comprehensive Plan
to encourage stable business setting and promote
investment and expansion of facilities.
3. The City should coordinate utility planning
and manage other development to ensure that
expansion areas are capable of supporting new
development in a timely manner.
4. The City will continue to work with existing
businesses to maintain an excellent business
environment, retain jobs, and facilitate expansions.
5. In addition to assisting business seeking to locate
in Monticello, the City should actively target and
market to businesses which will be a supplier,
customer or collaborative partner to existing
businesses within the community.
6. The City should target and market to businesses
which would benefit from Monticello’s utility and
communications infrastructure.
7. The City will work with the CentraCare Health
System to ensure the retention and to promote the
expansion of health care services in Monticello.
8. The City will use the Comprehensive Plan to
maintain and enhance the quality of life in
Monticello as a tool for attracting businesses and
jobs.