HRA Agenda 06-07-1989AGENDA
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, June 7, 1989 — 7:OOPM
City Hall
MEMBERS: Chairperson Al Larson, Ben Smith, Lovell Schrupp,
Everette Ellison, and Tom St. Hilaire.
STAFF: Rick Wolfsteller, Jeff O'Neill, and 011ie Koropchak.
GUEST: Pat Pelstring, Business Development Services, Inc.
1. CALL TO ORDER.
2. APPROVAL OF THE HAY 5, 1989 HRA MINUTES.
3. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW AND ACCEPT THE TAR INCREMENT FINANCE
APPLICATION.
4. CONSIDERATION OF HRA ALTERNATIVES FOR TIF DISTRICT NO. 1-8
(NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY).
5. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW DAVID FICEW S REDEVELOPMENT HOUSING
PROJECT PIAN AND FINANCIAL PROPOSAL.
6. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW LEONARD BABINSKI AND/OR DONALD BABINSKI'S
REDEVELOPMENT HOUSING PROJECT PLAN PROPOSAL.
7. CONSIDERATION OF UPDATES: Pledge Agreement Relinglshment Between
City and the HRA.
Development Agreement Between Broadway
Square Limited Partnership and the HRA.
TIP District /2 Demolition Completion.
TIF District /4 TIP Guarantee.
8. OTHER BUSINESS.
9. ADJOURNMENT.
MINUTES
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Thursday, May 4, 1989 - 7:00 PM
City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Al Larson, Lovell Schrupp, Everette
Ellison, and Tom St. Hilaire.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ben Smith.
STAFF PRESENT: Rick Wolfsteller and 011ie Koropchak.
1. CALL TO ORDER.
Chairperson Al Larson called the HRA meeting to order at
7:05 PM.
2. APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 22, 1989 AND APRIL 4, 1989 HRA MINUTES.
Chairperson Al Larson indicated the March 22, 1989 HRA
minutes, agenda item 4. Consideration of Review TIF
Policies and Procedures did not include the HRA's rationale
for the approval of the Economic Development Program
Contract between the HRA and Business Development Services,
Inc. Corrections to the minutes shall include the HRA's
rationale for contracting with BDS. Inc. as 1) promote
and enhance greater exposure of the City of Monticello,
2) potential contacts or leads for the City of Monticello,
3) financially economical if TIF plan not approved, no
payment to BDS, Inc. if TIF plan is approved cost is passed
on through, and 4) a vin -vin situation for all parties
involved. Lovell Schrupp made a motion to approve the
March 22, 1989 HRA minutes with the addition of the
above named corrections, seconded by Everette Ellison
the minutes stand approved as corrected by a 4-0 vote.
Chairperson Al Larson suggested a report from City
Staff on the status and workability of the contract
with RDS, Inc, and a report on planned projects.
Lovell Schrupp made a motion to approve the April 4,
1989 NRA minutes, seconded by Al Larson, the minutes
stand approved as written.
3. CONSIDERATION TO HEAR MR. FICEK'S PROPOSALS FOR THE ELDERLY
TOWNHOUSE HOUSING CONCEPTS.
The HRA received a copy of David Ficak'o preliminary
proposal for housing redevelopment. The preliminary
proposal was prepared by Mr. Ficok after his visit to
Monticello where he was informed of the HRA'a goals,
HRA Minutes - 5/4/89
Page 2
3. CONTINUED.
elderly housing concepts, and toured the HRA's recommended
site locations. Mr. Ficek's prelimiary proposal included
the phased redevelopment of all six recommended site locations. Area
A). 20 single level towns and three singles. B) 16 two story
towns, C) 16 single level tows. D) 12 single level towns,
E) 8 two story tows and 4 houses and F) 48 two story tows.
Koropchak advised the HRA members of Pat Pelstring's
opinion of not recommending the NRA approve the developer's
three year exclusive right to all property in the redevelopment
district(s) or that the developer shall be deeded the parcels
for $1.00. The HRA general consensus that they were interested
to continue the process and interest of redevelopment with
Mr. Ficek, however, recommended the fine tuning of the
preliminary proposal to 1) the developer shall not have three
years exclusive right to all property in the redevelopment
district(s); 2) the developer shall not be deeded the parcels
for $1.00, however, will be given consideration inclusive of
the HM's TIF Policy Guidelines (The HRA may provide assistance
to the extent of the available project increment, to compensate
the business/developer to "equalize" the project to accepted
market standards; and 3) suggested Area A. proposed 20 single
level tows and 3 houses was too many units. The HM
members recommended Mr. Polstring prepare a preliminary
financial account for TIF assistance for the HM to better
understand their potential role/assistance in the redevelopment.
4. CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE HRA, THE EDA. AND THE CITY COUNCIL.
Tom St. Hilaire made a motion approving the resolution authorizing
the HRA to adopt the joint powers agreement between the HRA.
the EDA, and the City Council. The motion was seconded by
Everette Ellison and with no further discussion passed 4-0.
5. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW AND ADOPT RELEASING THE TAX INCREMENT
PLEDGE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HRA AND THE CITY OF MONTICELLO.
Administrator Rick Wolfeteller presented the HRA members
with a written copy of the Tax Increment Finance Districts
No. 1-1 through 1-7 estimated financial status and explained
the system. The approximate 2/1/89 districts balance, exclusive
of any elderly project coat paid in 1989, is $40,613. The
projected district balance as of 2/90, with the assumption
the pledge agreements between the HRA and the City Council aro
relinquished and reduced to moot statutorily requirements of
1052 loval of debt service coverage rather than the present
1502 level of debt servica coverage, is $111,101. Reports
dated May 4. 1989. Mr. John Groen of Holmes 6 Graven will
prepare the resolutions for relinquishing the pledge agreements
which haven't boon received at the City Hall therefore
Koropchak advised the NRA not to adopt the resolution but
to recommend the City Council review tho pledge agreement.
HRA Minutes - 5/4/89
Page 3
5. CONTINUED.
Lowell Schrupp made a motion recommending the City Council
review the Pledge Agreements between the NRA and the City
Council is preparation of relinquishing said agreements
by resolution adoption. The motion was seconded by
Everette Ellison and with no further discussion passed 4-0.
The Administrator further advised the HRA members that Springsted
Inc. did not advise refunding the current tax increment bonds
because in their opinion it did not satlsfythe statutory
requirement of realizing a 3% present value level of
savings. Also, the $260,000 bond issuance for the elderly
housing project may be a higher interest rate than originally
anticipated because of increase of interest rates and the
potential of this not being a tax-exempt bond. Holfsteller
will be consulting Jerry Shannon on this matter.
6. CONSIDERATION OF A NOTICE OF THE CITY'S JOINT GOVERNMENTAL
UNITS MEETING.
Koropchak noted to the HRA members that the date for the
joint meeting is Monday, June 5, 1989 at the new Fire Hall.
Chairperson Larson informed the members of last years
meeting being very positive and fruitful, and encouraged all
members to attend this meeting. An agenda will be
prepared by Jeff O'Neill with the meeting time and
mailed in advance to all involved individuals.
7. CONSIDERATION OF AN UPDATE OF HRA PROJECTS.
TIP District No. 1-8 - the Development Agreement between the
HRA and Northern States Power Company is being handled by
Pat Polstring. NSP'a original construction bids came in
over budget, they will submit for second bids, however,
have indicated a June beginning construction date.
TIP District No. 1-2 - the Development Agreement between the
HRA and Broadway Square Limited Partnership (Draft 01) was
completed and the developer not in agreement to provide 1) a Tax
Incremont Guarantee, 2) Letter of Credit, and 3) state the
Authority will turn over the site to the Redevelopor in a
roady-to-build condition. City Staff recommended to the
HRA that the development agreement include above named 1 and 2
items because those protect the HRA or City since the district's
bond issuance debt retirement to projected tax Increment is
very tight and because the first two projects (Metcalf and
Larson Office Complex and the River Parkview Apartment have
no development agreement or assessment agreements) which
HRA Minutes — 5/4/89
Page 4
7. CONTINUED.
means the HRA has no guaranteed amounts to retire the debt
service or any assigned minimum market values at this time
on any of the three projects developed by these redevelopers.
The River Parkview market value dropped from $920,000 in 1987
to $760,400 in 1988 (payable 1989). Taxes payable 1989 for
the Office Complex is $6,711 (TI 45,599) and for the River
Parkview is 416,504 (TI 412,514). Koropchak reported she
had contacted Doug Gruber, County Assessor, who would agree
on an estimated minimum market value for the proposed 28 -unit
elderly project at 4800,000 (4100,000 land and 4700,000 building)
which would generate an approxiate tax increment of 414,841 -
This in comparison of the District's total annual debt retirement
of 435,193.50 (Securities 44,285 and 430,193.50 for the $260,000
bond issuance at 9.252 over 18 years). And the City Staff
recommended the HRA not guarantee a ready -to -build condition
upon conveyance of the property because the City has no idea
of the property's past historical structures and uses.
The HRA general consensus was that the redevelopers need
1) not provide a Tax Increment Guarantee or Letter of Credit,
2) the redeveloper will agree to a minimum market value
of 4800,000 for the completed 28 -unit elderly project, and
3) the HRA will not guarantee the property in a ready -
to -build condition upon conveyance. The HRA's rationale
for this decision was 1) this redevelopment project has
been a long time goal, 2) the redevelopment project eliminates
blight, 3) the HRA approached the redevelopers with the
idea or concept, 4) the redevelopers have completed other
city projects and other PmHA projects, and 5) this HRA feels
they are not responsible for the lack of previous development
agreements and assessment agreements. however, does apprec lata
City Staff concerns.
UNDISCLOSED COMPANY - BDS, Inc. has prepared and Koropchak
delivered a financial proposal inclusive of TIF to this
company.
POTENTIAL SPEC BUILDING - BDS, Inc and Koropchak are working
with a company and developers for a possible leased spec
building. A financial proposal inclusive of TIF will be
prepared.
B. CONSIDERATION TO SET UP AN ESCROW ACCOUNT FOR RESTORATION OF
TOPEL'S WESTERLY WALL.
The party wall agreement between the Topols and the HRA has
been eltinquished with a ton foot casement granted to
Topele, Koropchak proceeded to open an interest bearing
escrow account at Wright County State Bank. Bank requirements
are a needed resolution indicating the signatures required
for tranaction. Lowell Schrupp made a oration to adopt the
bank resolution electing Fred E. Topol and Oliva M. Korope hat
as determined to be qualified to order payment of money and
withdraw funds from this organisations account. The motio2i
was seconded by Tom St. Hilaire and with no further discussion
passed 4-0.
HRA Minutes - 5i4/89
Page 5
9. OTRER BUSINESS.
Koropchak asked for the HRA opinion of interest to contact
the Bridgewater Telephone Company who plans to construct
a warehouse building on their West County Road 39 property
across from the City Maintenance Building. .The property
is zoned PZ -H. Building Offical Cary Anderson advised
Koropchak of the plans. Idea would be to use TIP to
equalize the land market value in property exchanges thereby
encouraging a utility warehouse in the proper zone. I-1 or
I-2. The HRA advised Koropchak to follow through with the
idea. The HRA thanked Rick Wolfsteller for his District financial report.
10. ADJOURNMENT.
Everette Ellison made a motion to adjourn the HRA meeting and
Lowell Schrupp seconded the motion, the HRA meeting adjourned.
�►:� �cGati o � �Q,.9�..
011ie Koropchak
HRA Executive Secretary
_ p�i.n���G:f F.�•s.<(d.r •i �.... � I ..,� i I — i - -- --j-- I !3i -j>; :�s►r� �;ut! L
_�_I.
_� -I - r
li
u 7. VV -
rg
- -- - -- --Diet s = Lr....-rf-_.:,�..r .' ��ff --- - - - - �r�r l -_ L..•dr srr_�d - - - -
I ,F--h c 10_T_IIC
e�..i_+r!C.-J-f
. I _:_a.t ��. (G�,.:.f) ,_..Df _ � _.� _ .rg'lP� ..j fgaxi�I .._ I ro w s/i•c 3r/:i nj _ _f /�:jrn.
nr-
s.<...-%_IIII0 v.v .sfvcr I I:s?s:y
_T- �:a••C_J.c_r� --- _•-- -_ � i�r'1 'J.S:SSy% uro-,��, I_ -. � � zY tvf�. 'Jrr_r.�`i_ Sr 7l; i�Y.r ,�. _- .1- � lr tcs
i t-I_
17 �. .-- ------ --- - --- r---�--�--IT-r I
17I _-- fry di. ••%/f1 --_-- } 117!1 � iVprl jrj:3+7-i i ..-. I-,!aie�P 6GPrL PO•rli _i'7(P,.:' '� + 1 �'v97+s
m' F. r..
(�. c .,.-► r) y.+ �u v� I • - 1 } - I- l - I I Za V (asi� ;'� 5), ir,
I Rte• �....I ,I I I -jwl _�
ar, fq r, /fir �..V Ad,-Ar�l•r ^/19 II 17o_,?fj 7.vJ/ �, +s I r7T�✓ S¢ec7 Jc 1r1 I Ha.7„r
I 1 l -
a pwaw. %yL 9/Io
n �A:rarr7t t Tr. x Pl•d.♦ Le ....., \ e Ur. yt
I� : r.
t / (I,or> `�I >IC�y>i '�•fi
/ Y i 9?lip 7' J aro
�- le•1r..,� I.-'y -� i:..„... /,.• ow c.ty.o,.,t� , ( � 1 1 , I h , I � I '
3. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW AND ACCEPT THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCE
APPLICATION.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND.
Please review the enclosed TIF application as prepared by
Business Development Services, Inc. and be prepared to
comment at the meeting.
4. CONSIDERATION OF HRA ALTERNATIVES FOR TIF DISTRICT NO. 1-8
(NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY).
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND.
A signed contract between the City of Monticello and Northern
States Power Company dated December 20, 1988 outlined the
transfer of a portion of Lot 4, Block 3, Oakwood Industrial
Park, from the City of Monticello to Northern States Power
and outlined the terms and conditions associated with the
City purchase of the existing NSP Service Center on West
County Road 39 for use by the City's Maintenance Department.
TIF District No. 1-8 was certified January 23, 1989 thereafter
has the Development Agreement between the HRA and NSP been
drafted.
At a recent meeting between Jerry Zimmer of NSP, St. Cloud Office;
Rick Wolfsteller; and myself did Mr. Zimmer explain that construction
bide for the proposed 5,544 aq ft metal (brick trim) office/
warehouse facility had gone out twice and in both cases the
lowest bids came in 1002 over NSP's budget ($296,000). In
comparison, the estimated minimum market value used for
TIF projections was $100,000 + leas. Mr. Zimmer outlined
NSP's three choices: 1) rebid for the third time, 2) delay
the project until 1990, or 3) find a developer to construct the
facility and NSP lease with option to purchase. Mr. Zimmer
also advised us that the vice president suggested to delay the
project this year.
The meeting ended with Mr. Zimmer to contact private developers
for potential build/leaso and Koropchak would chock out the
probability of the NRA to be the developer and lease with an
option to buy. Increment would be generated if the HRA lensed
the property to a private company. Mr. Pat Pelstring will
explain our alternatives at the meeting. Since the district
has been certified and with the assumption construction would
not be until 1990 the projects generated tax increment is
shortened to seven years. If you remember there was a
shortage of tax increment in the original TIF Plan which
generated increment for eight years, althorough the HRA
could suggest filling the gap by raising the cost of the
land.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
APPLICATION FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
I. APPLICANT
(a) Business name, address, telephone number:
(b) Business form (corporation, partnership, sole
proprietorship, etc.), state of incorporation or
organization and date of formation:
(c) If applicant is corporation, state officers, directors,
stockholders holding more than 5 percent of the stock
of corporation (state name, address and relationship to
applicant): (If Corporation is not formed, set forth as
much as possible concerning potential officers,
e
directors, stockholders.]
(d) If applicant is general partnership state general
partners and if limited partnership state general
partners and limited partners with more than 5 percent
interest in the limited partnership: (If partnership
is not formed set forth as much ns possible concerning
potential partners.)
(o) Name, address and telephone number of Applicant's legal
counsel and accountant:
(f) Brief description of nature of business, principal
products, etc.:
(g) Project employment:
Full Time
Part Time
2. Projected number of employees due to new project
(in two years):
a. Full Time
b. Part time
II. PROJECT
(a) Location (state street address and attach the legal
description of project site):
(b) Present ownership of project site. If project site is
not currently owned by applicant, describe arrangements
by which applicant intends Lo acquire or use site:
(c) Describe project: If project is a building or addition
to building, specify number of stories, square footage
by use, type of construction, acreage of land, related
parking facilities, etc. If project includes
equipment, describe equipment. If mixed land use,
describo project's physical dimensions by type of land
use.
` (d) Zoning/Compliance to City's Comprehensive Plan: I
(1) Preliminary building and site plans must be
submitted to Gary Anderson, Monticello Building
Official. For HRA review, they must be submitted
prior to setting a public hearing date on the sale
of public lands.
(2) What is the zoning status of project site?
(3) Is zoning status appropriate for the intended use!
(4) Will rezoning, zoning variance, or conditional use
permit be sought in connection with project^
(5) Is the property properly subdivided for the
intended use?
(6) Has site plan approval been obtained for this
project. If so, on what date by Planning
Commission By Council
(7) Final building and site plans including grading,
site drainage, landscnping and parking plans must
be submitted to the City prior to the public
hearing on the Tax Increment Financing.
(o) Estimated project related costs:
(1) Land acquisition: f
(2) Site development: t
(3) Building cost: f
(4)
Equipment:
S
(51
Architcctural and engineering fees:
S
(6)
Legal fees:.
S
(7)
Bond discount, fees to underwriter
and brokerage fees:
$
(8)
Interest during construction:
S
(9)
Offsite development cost:
$
(10)
Initial bond reserve fund:
S
(11)
Contingencies:
$
112)
Other (please specify):
$
Total
S
(f) Source of financing:
(1)
Industrial Revenue Bonds:
S
(2)
Tax Increment Bonds
=
(3)
Equity
S
(4)
Bank loan:
S
(5)
Other (list):
$
(g) Status of above financing:
(h) Please attach company financial statements as follows:
(1) Balance Sheets (three years Prior).
(2) Profit and Loss Statements (three years prior).
(3) Either projections (three years), or business
plan.
(i) Will project be occupied by applicant after completion?
If not, state name of future leaaces, and status of
4 commitments or lease agreements:
i
y (j) Namcs and addresses of architect, engineer, and general
contractor for project:
(k► Current real estate taxes assessed on project site, and
estimated real estate taxes on project site upon
completion of project:
(1) Project construction schedule (If project is to be
completed in phases, indicate by construction year
percentage of total project completion.):
(1) Construction start date ?
(2) Construction completion date ?
If phased project Year % Complete
Yenr % Complete
III. TAX INCREMENT BOND ISSUE
(a) Amount of project expenses requested by applicant to be
paid from proceeds of the tax increment bond issue:
(b) Proposed date that applicant expects tax increment bond
proceeds to be available to pay project expenses:
IV. MISCELLANEOUS
(a) Detail the status of any previous or current requests
which applicant, its principals or affiliates have made
to the City or to other municipalities for tax
increment financing:
I,
(b) If tax increment bonds issued for applicant by other
municipalities list issuer, bond title, date of bonds,
type of project, total project costs, etc.:
(c) Has applicant ever been in bankruptcy? If yes,
describe circumstances:
(d) Has applicant ever been convicted of a felony? If yes,
describe conviction and sentence:
(e) Has applicant ever defaulted on any bond or mortgage
commitment?
(f) Will any public official of the City, either directly
or indirectly, benefit by the issuance of the City's
tax increment revenue bonds for this project within the
meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 412.311 or
471.87? If so, specify:
(g) The applicant herewith submits a $2,000.00 refundable
deposit to the City. The full fee will be refunded if
the Development Agreement in executed and the land is
acquired. No fee will be refunded if the Development
Agreement is not executed and the land is not acquired.
The undersigned, (a) (the) of applicant, hereby
represents and warrants to the City that (he) (she) has carefully
reviewed this application, and that the statements and
information contained herein and submitted herewith are accurate
and complete to the best of the Undersign's knowledge and belief.
Dated:
(Applicant)
By:
(Signature)
Its:
The City reserves the right to require additional information and
supporting data from the applicant after the filing of this
application.
r, „
May 26, 1989
8wlrma Devolopm�t SuNaos die.
Ms. 011ie Koropchak
Economic Development Director
City of Monticello
P. O. Box 83 A
Monticello, MN 55362•
Dear 011ie:
I wanted to respond to two issues which we discussed earlier this
week. First, the city's Housing and Redevelopment Authority has
the ability to acquire land and develop buildings for use by a
private industry. The HRA, in turn could lease that building to
the business, such as the purposed NSP project.
The advantages for the HRA and NSP are basically that the HRH's
overall return in the project would be much less than a private
developer. Typically a lease would be structured by a private
developer at 120 percent of the anticipated debt services costs.
For instance if the annual financing coats for a project were
$10,000 a year, the lease would most likely be structured at
$12,0001 a thousand dollars per month). The addi tional $2,000
would be positive cash flow to be retained by the developer. The
HRA would not need as large of an override, although some level
of additional lease payment over and above debt service sh3uld be
structured. In addition, when the property's sold by the private
developer, the developer seeks to recover their initial equity
return and additional property appreciation. I would suggest the
HRA would be in a position such that they would only 'iave to
recover their initial equity investment.
There are several considerations which the HRA should understand
prior to commencing a project of this type. For your review
please consider the following:
I) Project, since it would constructed by a public
entity, it would be subject to public bidding.
2) The HRA would be responsible for some level of
initial equity investment in the project. I would
anticipate a minimum 10 percent, a more likely
figure is 20 to 25 percent. These funds could be
provided by Tax Increment Financing, however.
GM fPpIN06R0011 WA a SM M • MINMEAOM MN UM 0 PIIONM 61WYBMISI
Ms. 011ie Koropchak
May 26, 1989
Page 2
3) If the building is utilized fur private purposes
property taxes would be due and payable. This
would make the use of Tax Increment Financing
appropriate for the project.
4) HRA would end up issuing a bond to cover the
balance of the financing costs. This bond
would probably be issued by the HRA and
secured by a mortgage on the project. In
addition NSP would be required to sign a
minimum of a ten year lease to assure
appropriate re -payment. NSP could be given a
series of options to acquire the building in
the interim.
Our firm is very comfortable with this process and we would be
willing to provide additional guidance, should the HRA seek to
support this project by constructing the building.
I also wanted to provide additional information on the "pay-as-
you-go" process. Pay-as-you-go funding for tax increment is
becoming much more common. This process greatly reduces the
city's exposure as a bond does not have to be issued. The city
assistance is only provided to the developer after they pay their
annual property taxes. In addition the traditional "soft" costs
associated with the bond issue would not necessarily be
applicable.
I have included a summary of the pay-as-you-go process and
advantages prepared by Publicorp Inc. I can review this
information in greater detail with you, should you desire.
I trust that this memo addresses the two issues we discussed.
Feel free to contact me should ;you request additional
information.
Sincerely,
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC.
a&ix W. 62Z,& -
Patrick W. Pelstrinn
Vice President
PWP/Je
Enclosure
cc: J. O'Neil
R. Wolfseller
5. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW DAVID FICEK'S REDEVELOPMENT
HOUSING PROJECT PLAN AND FINANCIAL PROPOSAL.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND.
At the last HRA meeting the boara reviewed Hr. Lavin Ficek'n
preliminary proposal for elderly housing redevelopment on
the recommended site locations. The HRA recommended fine
tuning the proposal to incorporate 1) the developer shall
not have three years exclusive right to all property in the
suggested redevelopment district(s), 2) the developer shall
not be deeded the parcels for $1.00, and 3) suggested Area A.
proposed 20 single levels towns and 3 houses was too many
units.
Mr. Ficek, Pat Pelstring, Jeff O'Neill, and myself met on
May 31st to revaluate Mr. Ficek's proposal, to relate
the HRA recommendations, and to continue the process for
redevelopment. Mr. Ficek's had no objections to the
HRA's recommendations and plans were outlined as follows:
1) 1t was proposed that the developer negotiate and
acquire the properties (cost effective), 2) redevelopment
project O1 will concentrate on a portion of site location
Area A., 3) the developer's guideline density is 7 units
per acre (units of four), 4) BDS, Inc. will prepared
redevelopment district and/or economic district in
accordance with statutory requirements, and 5) BDS, Inc.
will prepare two alternative financial feasibility studies
for the HRA meeting.
Please remember the importance of confidentiality.
6. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW LEONARD BABINSKI AND/OR DONALD
BABINSKI'S REDEVELOPMENT HOUSING PROJECT PLAN PROPOSAL.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGOUND.
Pat Palstring. Jeff O'Neill, and myself mat with Leonard
Babinski on May 26th. Mr. Babinski was informed of the
HRA's policies and the HRA's quality elderly townhouse
concept; and was given a tour of the HRA's recommended
site locations.
Mr. Babinaki was somewhat reluctant of the redevelopment
project and expressed the need for a market feasibility
study. The following preliminary guidelines were set:
1) Market feosibility study - Developer.
2) Select site location interest - Developer.
3) Preliminary proposal - Developer.
4) Outlined preliminary financial feasibility study - BDS.inc.
5) Dotormino HRA's participation.
Mr. Leonard Babinaki will contact the Clty staff or Pat Poletring.
6. CONTINUED.
Pat Pelstring, Jeff O'Neill, and myself met with Mr. Donald
Babinski and his associate, Mr. Frank Kraemer on May 31st.
The same background was given as was to Mr. Leonard Babinski
".darer, Donald .ac highly interested in the red?vetorea"r
project. Mr. Pelstring advised city staff prior to the
meeting of Mr. Donald Babinski's standard upscale apartments,
his very cooperative business attitude, and a list of his
invested developments in Minnesota, South Dakota, and Florida.
Mr. Babinski's market niche is upscaled rental apartment
units, generally for cost effective purposes are of
40 unite. After viewing the recommended site location
Mr. Babinski earmarked his number one selection which
is non-competitive with Mr. Ficeks.
Mr. Babinski requested from city staff a list of unit rental cost in
Monticello. Mr. Babinski will prepare a proposal for the
HBA.