HRA Agenda 11-07-1990AGENDA
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, November 7, 1990 - 7:00 PM
' City Hall
Vl-
MEMBERS: Chairperson Al Larson, Ben Smith, Lovell Schrupp,
Everette Ellison, and Tom St. Hilaire.
STAFF: Rick Wolfsteller, Jeff O'Neill, and 011ie Koropchak.
GUEST: William Kemp, Helgeson Development Co, Inc., Sartell, MN.
Pat Pelstring, EDS, Inc.
1. CALL TO ORDER.
2. APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 5, 1990 HRA MINUTES.
3. CONSIDERATION TO HEAR CONGREGATE HOUSING CONCEPTS.
6. CONSIDERATION OF FOLLOW-UP ON THE GILLS PROPERTY CONCEPT.
5. CONSIDERATION TO HEAR IDC PLANS FOR AVAILABLE LEASEABLE
INDUSTRIAL SPACE.
6. CONSIDERATION TO HEAR OF NEW PROSPECTS.
7. CONSIDERATION OF ENCLOSED COST INFORMATION.
8. OTHER BUSINESS.
9. ADJOURNMENT.
IT
V
MINUTES
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
1A. Wednesday, August 1, 1990 - 7:00 P.M.
City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Al Larson, Lowell Schrupp, Tom
St. Hilaire, and Everette Ellison (tardy).
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ben Smith.
STAFF PRESENT: Rick Wolfsteller, Jeff O'Neill and 011ie Koropchak.
GUEST: Pat Pelstring, BDS, Inc.
1. CALL TO ORDER.
Chairperson Al Larson called the August HRA meeting to order
at 7:10 P.M.
2. APPROVAL OF THE JULY 11, 1990 HRA MINUTES.
Lowell Schrupp made a motion to approve the July 11, 1990
HRA minutes, seconded by Tom St. Hilaire, the minutes stand
approved as vritten.
3. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE HRA AND
BDS, INC.
Chairperson Larson stated the HRA and BDS, Inc. contract has
been in existance since October 1989 and as a good business
policy, contracts need to be evaluated periodically. Did
problems exists in cooperation between either entity? What
did the City benefit this year with or without the assistance
of BDS, Inc.? The HRA membcra recognized that RDS had no
part in the initial contact of recent dovelopers, however,
agreed that BDS played a significant role with the preparation
and presentation of the financial proposals. An excellont
presentation is a key factor for the community and is
good advortisemwnt.summarized one HRA member.
The staff and HRA expressed soma concerns on BDS's follow
through works Communications with devolopers and other portico
involved with the financial package, turn around time on
responso of telephone calls, and what do certain billing chargee
cover.
Specifically, the staff discussed the Topper's project and Tappor's
frustration with the timo for Fadoral/Stato funding approval
and tho difficulty in making contact with BDS personnel. Mr.
Polstring explained that the project was delayed becouso
first, the Small Business Development Loan was denied which mot the
y program criteria, however, in Mr. Palstring's opinion was a judgement
call made by one loan official. Secondly, the city's revolving
loan fund term policy (5-7 years M&E) didn't meet the
SBA Loan tegultam•ot as such, therebye, causing another delay.
HRA Minutes
8/1/90
Page 2
V
3. CONTINUED.
Mr. Pelstring explained that BUS, Inc, has experienced rapid
growth (eleven personnel) plus the partnership split leaving
BDS with an insufficient amount of senior staff capabilities.
With Mr. Pelstring's travel time, continued meetings, and
forty to sixty calls per day doesn't allow him the time to
return all telephone calls within 24 hours. Mr. Pelstring
considers Monticello as one of his major clients. HRA
members believe in quality not quantity.
Staff asked for an explanation for services covered in the
$850.00 Development/Assessment Agreement. Mr. Pelstring
responded the charges cover the negotiating time spend
with a developer and city bond counsel to determine the minimum estimated
market value, TI guarantee amount, letter of credit amount, etc.
BDS chargee $3,850 for the preparation and drafting of a TIF
Plan and charges a $75.00 per hour fee for service after receipt of a
letter of intent from a developer for preparation of SBA
loans or time spend with David Ficek, as examples. However,
Mr. Pelstring stated some of these coats are written into the
SBA loan and EDA administration fees may be recovered under
TIP.
Tom St. Hilaire made a motion recommending the HRA and staff
continue the contract with BDS and evaluated their performance
In six months relating to the concerns of improved communications
and returned telephone calla. Additionally, the billing
charges should be defined to allow for a clearer understanding.
The motion was seconded by Lovell Schrupp and with no further
discussion passed 3-0. The HRA thanked Mr. Pelatring for
his work on behalf of the City and felt the money expended
to BDS was worth the successful recruitment of two quality
companies.
4. CONSIDERATION TO HEAR PRELIMINARY CONCEPT FOR POTENTIAL
USE OF TIF (ECONOMIC DISTRICT) FOR ERIC BONDHUS PROJECT.
Everette Ellison arrived at the HRA meeting.
Koropchak reported on Lake Tool. The company is currently
located at 22015 Industrial Blvd in Rogers where they lease
a 4,200 eq ft facility. The company designs, engineers. and
does custom tooling for injection molding. The company is four
years old and to a partnership among three brothers. Eric
Bondhus is a brother of John Bondhus. The company has six
employees and does not plan to increase their employment immediately.
The employees are comprised of four Bondhus brothers and
Ir I two nephews. All machinery and equipment currently in—house is
paid for (not vortifiod at this point). The company is looking
to purchase their own facility. On July 17, Eric Bondhus and
Rick Wolfeteller viewed the old Fire Hell. appraised at $93,000.
HRA Minutes
8/1/90
Page 3
4. CONTINUED.
The building in a B-4 zone would require a conditional use
permit. Jeff O'Neill and Koropchak visited the existing
facility in Rogers on July 24. The company is interested
in availability of financial assistances and a community
with full amenties. The City has suggested the use of
TIP for the acquisition of one of the city owned smaller
lots (pay-as-you-go assistance) and discussed the GMEF
loan. The company would construct a metal 5,000 sq ft
office/design room and manufacturing facility.
If an Economic District can be created under new Statutory
law, is the HRA interested in the preliminary concept
of the Bondhus project therebye recommending the use of
TIF. The HRA recommended staff to pursue the recruitment
of Lake Tool and the use of TIF for the acquisition of
land (pay-as-you-go assistance) and secondly, to pursue the
purchase of the old Fire Hall if so desired by the company.
5. CONSIDERATION OF RESEARCHED INFORMATION TO WHETHER THE CILLE
PROPERTY AREA CAN QUALIFY FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A TIF
DISTRICT.
Koropchak presented the HRA with written information of the
three Gills parcels and the Katzmarek parcel: '90 taxes,
delinquent taxes, acreage and EMY. building size and ENV, special
assessments, map of the outlined area, and criteria for
the establishment of a TIF Redevelopment District. A 25 year
Redevelopment District can legally be established as the
parcel consist of necessary x of building which meet the
blight teat. The property is toned R-2 (single and 2 family
residents), with a conditional use permit a 4-plax or
8 unit townhouse is allowable. At this time, stsff is unaware
of an interested developer. Gille's property has at least one
underground storage tank and delinqent taxes. Katzmarek's
property to in the flood plain but buildable upon adequate
elevation.
Chairperson Larson informed the HRA that several people had inquired
if the HRA was investigating the property as to the
requirements for contaminated soils tooting or to assist
in finding a developer. City Administration felt the Katzmarek
property would require condemnation before the owner would be
willing to sell.
The HRA agreed that the property would be considered a blighted area
and they would act as a facilitator to research the criteria necessary to
give the property a clean bill of health. To research the
required soil testing, the EPA tooting methodology for a certified
closure report, to chock with Mr. Cillo on hie plana for selling
and/or tank removal, and to assistance in finding an interested
developer. The HRA is not interested as being a property title holder.
BRA Minutes
8/1/90
Page 4
�l
b. OTHER BUSINESS.
Mr. Pelstring advised the BRA and staff since the City of Monticello
receives no state aid therefore no LGA and HACA payments are
necessary on new created TIP Districts, the City can offer approximately
352 more TIP assistance than other communities which is a reverse
from Monticello's low capacity rate generating an approximately 202
less amount of increment than other communities.
7. ADJOURNMENT.
The HBA meeting adjourned at 8:50 P.M.
011ie Koropchak
BBA Executive Secretary
MINUTES
MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, September 5, 1990 - 7:00 PM
City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Al Larson, Ben Smith, Lowell
Schrupp, Everette Ellison, and Tom St. Hilaire.
STAFF PRESENT: 011ie Koropchak
STAFF ABSENT: Rick Wolfsteller and Jeff O'Neill
1.
CALL TO ORDER.
Chairperson Al Larson called the BRA meeting to order
at 7:00 PM.
2.
APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 1, 1990 HRA MINUTES.
Lowell Schrupp made a motion to approve the August 1, 1990
HRA minutes, seconded by Tom St. Hilaire, the minutes were
approved as written.
3.
CONSIDERATION TO HEAR FOLLOWUP ON THE GILLS PROPERTY.
Koropchak presented to the HRA members with guidelines necessary
for the removal of underground storage tanks and estimated
costs for both tank removal and soil boring tests. The
three (at least) tanks on the Gllle property would need
to be removed for redevelopment and for FHA financing.
It was Mr. Brad Larson suggestion to have soil borings
completed first to determine possible soil contami-
nation as this may determine the decision whether to
or not to proceed with this project.
Chairperson Al Larson reiterated the HRA position on this
project, the HRA will serve as the facilitator between a
willing developer and a willing seller in assistance of
providing the property will a clean bill of health. The
properties discussed include the Gills parcels and the
Katsmarek.
It was recommended that Chairperson Al Larson, Brad Larson,
and Koropchak meet to discuss the HRA's position of assistance
to the potential interested developer. The intent is
to have the developer contact the property owners on land
price negotiations and to return to the HRA with level
of assistance needed.
4.
CONSIDERATION OF AN UPDATE ON TIP PROJECTS:
a) Eric Bondhus - the company continues to look at other
site locations, as Mound and Msplo Grove. Still
interested in Monticallo, the company feele they have
ample time to research other possibilities as their
HRA Minutes
9/5/90
Page 2
4. CONTINUED.
lease expires in 1991.
b) Undisclosed company - Koropchak informed the NRA members
of an inquiry from a consultant firm representing a
client interested in siting an industrial location.
The inquiry requested the completion of an eight
page questionaire plus maps, zoning ordinances, etc.
Individuals with expertise in the area of the
question helped complete the questionaire and to this
date no response as been heard from the consultant.
The consultant request no telephone contact by
communities.
c) Leaseable space - Koropchak briefly ran the preliminary
concern and idea of the IDC's regarding the lack of
leaseable industrial space in Monticello. The initial
reaction of the HRA was it didn't seem very practical.
Spy �Q idea was to have building and site plans approved
by the Building Inspector, a TIP Plan prepared and
distributed, find a willing developer, and obtain
an option for a designated industrial site. The
HRA would be committing funds of $3,800 for the
preparation of a TIP Plan with Pay -As -You -Go
Assistance.
d) Muller Theatre Expansion - Koropchak informed the HRA
of the theatre expansion plan which would add two additional
screens and approximately 500 seats. The project lacks
necessary funding and inquiry was made on the availability
of TIP. Koropchak responded that duo to Legislative action
the Minnasota Statutory now are more restrictive on the
use of TIP, however, hasn't taken away the tool. To
consider the use of TIP for the project would moan to
include the Stokes parcels as this is the substandard
parcol, however, the original condition of the building
wouldn't meet the now TIP definition of "substandard".
Also, Huller's funding is for acquisition of real estate,
construction (improvements and expansion) of real estate,
and for machinery and equipment, not, for demolition to
eliminate blight or substandard buildings. The developer
plane to seek GMEP funding.
5. OTHER BUSINESS.
Ito HRA inquired if Pat Pelstring and Rick Wolfeteller had
mot to dofine the BDS. Inc. billing process and to clarify
the hourly charges. Koropchak responded not to the beet
of her knowledge.
HRA Minutes
9/5/90
Page 3
5. CONTINUED.
Koropchak presented the Community Venture Network brochure
as prepare by and for BDS, Inc. As a member of the CVN,
Monticello, a community with business investment funds or
loan funds, could benefit from the professional managed
services provided by BDS, Inc. The purpose is to "match"
prospects with member communities. Identified prospects
are new, start-up technology companies seeking smaller
grant funds to complete product feasibility and marketing
analysis; "development stage" companies with existing
product lines, but seeking expansion capital; and business
acquisitions, now business owners seeking additional
equity or expansion capital to complete the purchase of
successful, existing companies. The community members
would meet at least every two months and potential
ptospects would give a 30 minutes presentation. Cost
to the comunity is an annual membership fee of 15,500.
Additionally, a "placement fee" of 10% of the first 150,000
of community investment, and 2% of all funds over 150,000,
but only if the community makes a decision to fund.
The HRA wasn't interested in the concept as BDS. Inc.
does consider Monticello as a major client, therebye, with
'4- the understanding BDS, Inc. will supply Monticello with
prospect leads. Also, the HRA didn't see the benefit
of the concept compared to the cost.
6. ADJOURNMENT.
The HRA meeting adjourned at 8:10PM.
QA , K".0a,
011ie Koropchak
HRA Executive Secretary
C
HRA Agenda
11/1/90
Page 1
3. CONSIDERATION TO HEAR CONGREGATE HOUSING CONCEPTS.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND.
In keeping with the HRA goal: 'To research the need for
congregate housing. I have invited Mr. Bill Kemp of
Helgeson Development Company, Inc.. 520 First Street
Northeast, Sartell. MN 56377. (612) 255-0085, to
the HRA. Upon calling Barb Schvientek, Hospital
District Executive Director, was Mr. Kemp's name
obtained. The Helgeson Development�Cggpeny has
completed some 1,500 elderly housingaprojects across
the state. Previously, Mr. Kemp was a member of a
RRA for ten years.
Barbara Schwientek expressed the Hospital Boards position:
They are not willing to finance a congregate housing
project because the market surveys conducted indicated
that the demand at market rate was insufficient and
they could not justify the tax payers money to subsidize
the project. They would endorse private development and
would cooperate in providing the necessary services.
This presentation is meant to be informative and no
j action by the HRA is necessary.
6. CONSIDRATION OF FOLLOW-UP ON THE GILLS PROPERTY CONCEPT.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND.
Information will be provided at meeting, since I'm
unable to make contact with Mr. Brad Larson prior to
mailing of this agenda.
8
HRA Agenda
11/7/90
Page 2
5. CONSIDERATION TO HEAR IDC PLANS FOR AVAILABLE LEASEABLE
INDUSTRIAL SPACE.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND.
Back in September, the HRA was presented with a very
preliminary concept of the IDC's concern and plan to fill the
gap of unavailable leaseable industrial space in
Monticello. In all due respect to the HRA's opinion that
the plan wasn't very practical, I ask the HRA to review
the IDC's plan as new and more detailed information is
available. Mr. Pat Peletring will be present to answer
any of your questions on the use of TIF.
Attorney Tom Hayes concerns:
1) To avoid political issues offer the concept plan to
more than one developer. (Use a bid type process).
2) If a lease between the developer and the lessee is for
ten years (life of the district), it might stand to
reason that the leasee may be in a position to
own their facility.
3) Otherwise—, good concept.
Gas Veit and Tom Gowleski of Shingobee, Inc., Pat Pelstring,
and Koropchak have met to discuss preliminary concept. The
enclosed letter addressed to Mr. Schultz was drafted and
mailed to Pat Polstring for review and comment, and hasn't
been mailed to Mr. Schultz or any other developer. Also,
enclosed are Mr_ Pelstring's co®onts.
The HRA would need to approve the IDC's concept prior to
any official agreements with devolopers as the TIF Plan
as prepared by BDS. Inc. would be at a cost of $3,850
and Development Contract at a cost of $850 with no
guarantee of a leasee. Mr. Palstring suggests an upfront
cost to a developer to cover those costs.
Please read the enclosed letter which was prepared as
a starting point and is subject to adjustment and Pat
Polstring's commonts and suggestions. I will FAX this
information to Bob Disko of Holmon 6 Craven for his
review and comment. At present, MbP Transport has two
7,200 aq ft bayis available for lease in Monticello.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTION.
1. Approve the IDC's concept.
2. Deny approval of the IDC's concept.
RRA Agenda
11/7/90
Page 3
5. CONTINUED.
C. SUPPORTING DATA.
1) Preliminary letter drafted by developers.
2) Comments from Pat Pelstring.
3) More information will be provided at the meeting.
6. CONSIDERATION TO NEAR OF NEW PROSPECTS.
a) 1.2 million aq ft distribution center.
b) Aroplax
c) Eastey Enterprises, Inc.
d) Circuit Technologies, Inc.
e) Undisclosed company
Dear Mr. Schultz:
The Monticello Industrial Development Committee has concerns
about the lack of available industrial space for lease in
Monticello. This concern may be a relief for some communities,
however, the reverse affect is that Monticello turns away
interested industrial businesses looking to relocate and
expand. Although, we can not guarantee any of those
businesses would have located in Monticello nor can we
guarantee our existing industrial facilities will remain
occupied in the future. The IDC has implemented a positive
approach to research a plan to resolve their concern.
The plan is not to construct a facility but to have pre -plane
approved and ready for construction, in other words, Monticello
could offer a new leaseable facility within approximately
three months (construction time) to an interested industrial
business prospect.
The plan under research is to have optional square footage
building plane pre -approved by the City Building Inspector.
Building plane would have interior flexibility and would
meet the Minnesota Statutory requirements for establlehment
of a Tax Increment Finance Economic District. A developer
would be assisted through a TIF Pay -As -You -Co Plan which
would be a direct reduction of rent costs.
Although the plan is in its infancy stage and the TIF concept
plan hasn't been reviewed or accepted by the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority or the City Council, we anticipate
a Preformanco Agreement would be entered into between the
HRA and the developer prior to any expenditures by either
party.
Responsibilities of the Developer may be to:
1) Draft three building plane for a 13,000, 20,000, and 25,000
square foot manufacturing/offico facility.
2) Draft site plane including parking, landscaping, drainage,
and elevation, etc.
3) Plans reviewed and approved by the City Building Inspector.
4) Obtain a land purchase option or commitment letter from
j the land owner for the designated industrial site location.
l 3) Facility to be of concrete.
+i-�iatzm -vf a ton year lease with option to purchase.
Mr. Schlutz
Page 2
7) Credit-vorchy industrial business expanion which will
create new jobs.
8) Must be willing to enter into a Development Contract.
9) Project must meet City Zoning and Building Amendments.
And the HRA's responsibilities may be to:
1) Authorize Business Development Services, Inc. to prepare
a TIF Plan for the establishment of an Economic District.
2) BDS, Inc. will distribute TIF Plan to all necessary
taxing jurisdictions for thirty day notice to comment.
3) HRA will approve TIF Plan.
4) TIF Plan will be a Pay-As-You-Co Assistance with a
reduction in rent costs.
5) Authorize the preparation of a Development Contract.
The Preformance Agreement would consist of an agreed upon
expiration date.
Based on the IDC's plan, would the Winkelman Building Corporation
like to be considered as the developer for such a project? If
you have any questions, please call me at (612) 295-2711 or METRO
333-5739. Please consider this project as the IDC would
appreciate a response.
Duane, I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
CITY OF MONTICELLO
011ie Koropchak
Economic Development Director
1:/01/90 10:59 6127869034 MltESS DEVELOPHE11T SEPVIIMS PA, -!;E 01
Busium M-Atopment SWACes, h►c.
MEMORANDUM
TO: ollie Koropchak, City of Monticello
FROM: Patrick Pelstring, • President
DATE: November 1, 1990
RE: TIF/SPEC BUILDING PROPOSAL
I have had an opportunity to review the letter to Mir. Schultz at
Winkelman Corporation as you roquested. I wanted to respond to the
issues you identified.
This letter is consistent with our previous discussion, in terms of
recruiting a developer to construct a speculative building in tbs
Konticollo Industrial Park. As we discussed, you have suggested
that all the prep work in teras of building design, architactural
and the development of the TV plan would be completed to serve as
an attractive marketing approach to rocruit new industry.
This approach is consistent with our discussions to assure that the
autticient flexibility is left in the cuilding deign to suit the
proapeat's nude. The major advantage of this approach is that it
will accelerate the project timetrame for a• new prospect by at
least -60 - Oo days.
The use of Tax Increment financing will be tied to the land
acquisition and site development costs of the dovoloper. The
development incentive, however, will be in the tors of a •leaso"
write down for the banstitt ing industry. These two criteria are
critical to justify the use of the Tax Increment Financing.
4
r
11/01/90 10:59 6127869034 MVESS C£VELOP4£!!i SEPVI-;ES P403E 02
d
TIP/Spec Building Proposal
November 1, 1990
Page 2
The most important aspect for the use of Tax Increment Financing
for this project will be to establish the •incentive• for the
ultimate occupant of the building. We must be very careful to
assure that the use of Tax Increment Financing does not increase
the developer's return. Instead, the City's participation must be
structured only to provide marketing/recruitment assistance.
overall, let me review the key TIP issues:
1) The City's commitment would be structured as pay as you go
assistance to the developer. As a result, this would
reduce/ eliminate the need for specific letters of credit or
developer guarantees.
2) A mechanism must be developed to assure that the City can
verify the lease right down on a dollar -for -dollar basis with
the pay as you go assistance.
2) Appropriate assurances out be obtained from the developer on
the intended and ultimata manufacturing/warehouse use of the
facility. This will assure strict conformance with existing
Tax Increment Financing statutes. I am assuming that this
project will Qualify only as an Economic Development District.
a) Overall assistance must be tied to actual land acquisition and
sits development ousts. Me can utilise a •net" present value
approach to capitalise these costs.
S) I would expect that we would develop an addendum to the
Development Agreement to be executed by the occupant
acknowledging the City's assistance and verifying the project
representations.
e) The use of an Assessment Agreement would be optional by the
developer. At a minimum, we should reach an understanding of
the anticipated valuation with the County.
I would expect that the ultimate Development Agreement would be
*pro-n*9otiated• with the developer but not approved or executed
untiltheoccupying business is identified. This will serve the
`► providettthe opportunitytoconduct the necessary essary verifications.cand will
1!/01/90 10:59 6127869834 BUSIiESS C£vELOPWJIT SEPVICES P4Z 0 3
TIP/Spec Building rropecal
November 1, 1990
Page 7
This approach to the development project is being considered at a
very opportune time. Development activity in the Twin Cities has
slowed considerably, and as a result, you should expect a
substantial amount of interest from area developers. As such, you
may wish to enhance the project from the City's perspective by
asking for an initial commitment fee from the developer (i.e,
95,000 - 810,000). This will assure that the City's cost for the
project would be reimbursed if the developer fails to perform.
It would be important to solicit multiple bids for the project and
negotiate a not to exceed construction cost and lease rate with tho
developer. In the current market, you should expect variances in
construction costs and seek to negotiate the lowest coat for the
benefitting business.
Finally, the development proposal should require direct
participation by the developer in marketing the project. I would
anticipate that the City would take the lead but the participation
by the developer should increase the likelihood for the project's
success.
criteria for the selection of the developer should include:
1) Competency/experience. Demonstrated, successful history of
the development of similar size projects.
9) Clear identification of project manager and review personal
background.
3) Design criteria. I would recommend that the proposed project
design should be somewhat enhanced to encourage additional
quality growth within the industrial park.
a) Cost competitiveness. The developer should commit to not to
exceed construction costs and lease rates.
5) Developer participation — project marketing. The IDC should
review and determine the commitment ant he part of the
developer to actively participate in the marketing of the
project and the City of Monticello.
�il/O1/90 10:59 6127869034 BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PAGE 04
TIP/spec Building Proposal
November 1, 1090
Page 4
Z trust that this response to the issues raised in your fax of this
past Monday. I would be happy to meet with you or the IDC to
review these issues in greater detail.
PMP/ld
14
r
BUSINESS
DEVEL"NT SERVICES, INC EDA
H0LM�6
GRAVEN
CLIENT
TIF PLAN
DEVEL AGREEMENT LOANS OTHER HAYES BANK
DEVEL
AGREEMENT
MOD. OF HRA DISTRICTS 2/89
37.1 hours @ ;75.00
;2,782.50
MISC
111.03
SUBTOTAL
;2,893.53
TIF POLICIES 8/89
6.25 hours @ ;75.00
; 468.75
1.50 hours @ ;65.00
97.50
MISC
117.00
SUBTOTAL
; 683.25
D FICEK HRA HOUSING 8/89
25.90 hours @ ;75.00
;1,942.50
7.7 hours @ ;75.00 12/89
577.50
9.9 hours @ ;75.00 2/90
742.50
SUBTOTAL
;3,262.50
MANTEQ 10189
13.8 hours @ ;75.00
;1,035.00
MISC
125.42
SUBTOTAL
;1,160.42
MARTIE'S 2/90
9.7 hours @ ;65.00
S 630.50
10.75 hours @ ;75.00
$ 806.75
SUBTOTAL
$1,436.75
1.90 hours ; $120.00
5/90
;228.00
SUBTOTAL
;228.00
TOTAL TIF $1,664.75
EASTEY 10/90
21.75 hours @ ;75.001
631.25
SUBTOTAL
1,631.25
NEW PROJECT
.30 hours @ 1120.00
36.00
8/90
.30 hours @ ;120.00
36.00
9/90
SUBTOTAL
T7770
TOTAL
BDS,Inc. ;11,067.70 H&C
;300.00
LOANS OTHER EDA (GKEF) TOTAL
92,156.25
42.00
91.743.75
91,443.75
(9468.75)
x=5.385. T5 BDS, INC . $10,085-15
H&G 92.091.75
91.309.10 91.309.10
91,680.00 91,680.00
950.00 --50-00
915,216.60
TOTAL TIF DISTRICT 1-9
TAPPER'S
TIF PLAN
DEVEL AGREEMENT
BDS, INC.
SBDLP 2/90
28.75 hours @ 975.00
MISC
SBDLP 3/90
23.25 hours @ 975.00
TIF DISTRICT 1-9 4/90 $3,850.00
DEVEL AGREEMENT
9850.00
OMNI 5/90
19.25 hours @ 975.00
MOD DIST 1-9
6.25 hours @ 975.00
(HRA REFUSED)
SUBTOTAL 93,850.00
9850.00
HOLMES a GRAVEN
5/90
4.0 hours @ 9120.00
9480.00
1.0 hours @ 9115.00
115.00
MISC
9.60
7/90
8.7 hours @ 9120.00
91.044.00
MISC
53.90
8/90
3.10 hours @ 9120.00
372.00
MISC
17.25
SUBTOTAL
92,091.75
NO BOND COST AT THIS TIME
TOM myES
CMEF DOCUMENTS
WRIGHT COUNTY STATE BANK
ESTIMATED SERVICE COST �*
7 YEAR X 12 MONTHS X 920.00
COUNTY CERTIFICATION OF TIP
SPRINGSTED. INC.
NO SERVICE COST ON BOND SALE AT THIS
TIME
LOANS OTHER EDA (GKEF) TOTAL
92,156.25
42.00
91.743.75
91,443.75
(9468.75)
x=5.385. T5 BDS, INC . $10,085-15
H&G 92.091.75
91.309.10 91.309.10
91,680.00 91,680.00
950.00 --50-00
915,216.60
TOTAL TIF DISTRICT 1-9
TIF PLAN
BDS. INC.
TIP 12/89
7.5 hours @ $75.00
MISC
STATE PROGRAM 10/89
5.0 hours @ $75.00
TIF 2/90
9.65 hours @ $75.00
MISC
SIF 3/90
14.55 hours $ $75.00
TIP Plan 1-10 4/90 $3.850.00
4/90
TIP 5/90
.50 hours @ $75.00
MISC
SUBTOTAL 3,850.00
HOLMES 6 GRAVEN
4/90
W/PP
5/90
5.8 hours @ $120.00
MISC
6/90
.20 hours @ $120.00
MISC
7/90
8.2 hours @ $120.00
MISC
8/90
6.7 hours @ $120.00
MISC
10/90
MISC
SUBTOTAL
NO BOND BALE AT THIS TIME
COUNTY TIP CERTIFICATION
TOTAL TIP DISTRICT 1-10
SPRINGSTED NO BOND BALE AT THIS TIME
REMKELE Ei-,)EERING
DEVEL AGREEMENT LOANS OTHER EDA (GMEF) TOTAL
$562.50
41.00
$375.00
$723.75
42.00
$1.091.25
$ 850.00
$ 37.50
35.00
850.00 $2.908.00
$216.00
$ 696.00
16.50
24.00
7.50
$984.00
17.50
$804.00
25.00
$ 80.40
$2,870.90
50.00
BDS.INC. $7,608.00
NAC
$2,870.90
$10,528.90
i THE LINCOLN Cb�ANIES
TIF PLAN DEVEL AGREEMENT
BDS, INC.
4/90
CITY TIF DISTRICT 1-1
$3,850.00
DEVEL AGREEMENT
$850.00
SUBTOTAL
$3,850.00
$850.00
HOLMES & GRAVEN
11/89
9.3 hours @ $102.00
$948.60
MISC
74.50
12/89
3.0 hours @ $102.00
$306.00
2/90
.20 hour @ $120.00
$24.00
3/90
.30 hour @ $120.00
$ 36.00
5.0 hours @ $115.00
575.00
4/90
7.9 hours @ $120.00
$ 948.00
29.5 hours @ $115.00
3,392.50
MISC
138.50
5/90
1.2 hours @ $120.00
$144.00
MISC
47.41
6/90
2.0 hours @ $120.00
$240.00
MISC
30.80
7/90
$560,000 BOND SALE
$2,000.00
MISC
29.40
SUBTOTAL
$8,934.71
WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITOR
TIP Certification
50.00
SPRINGSTED, INC.
Service cost for Bond Sale
$14,677.20
TOTAL CITY TIP DISTRICT 1-1
TOTAL
BDS, INC. $4.700.00
H&G
$8,934.71
50.00
$14,677.20
$28,361.91
'k -
September 28, 1990
Dear HRA Member:
The October HRA meeting scheduled for Wednesday.
October 3, 1990, will not be held because of the
lack of business agenda items. The next scheduled
HRA meeting is Wednesday, November 7, 1990.
For your information: Brad Larson, HRA Chairperson
Al Larson, and myself mat on September 21 to discuss
the HRA's interest to serve as a catalyst to market
the Fred Cille property (obtain a property clean bill
of health through appropriate soil testing and under—
ground storage tank removal) and to find an interested
redeveloper. Brad Larson expressed an interest as a
willing rodoveloper and will determine the level of
assistance required from the HRA to make the project
workable.
Sao you in November. Happy Halloweentl
Sincerely,
CITY OF MONTICELLO
011ie Koropchak
HRA Executive Director
PROJECT: Fred Gille Property
Tank Removal and Testing
A. At least one underground storage tank (gasoline).
B.
Tank pumped dry and filled with sand (some 20 years ago).
C.
Three islands: diesel, regular and supreme (vas a cut/rate
gas station along old Highway 152).
D.
Gille intersted in selling, less clean up costs.
E.
Tank not registered with the PCA.
F.
Tank not recorded at the Courty Recorder.
G.
Removal of tank must be by a certified contractor (have list).
H.
Notify PCA 30 days in advance of removal (10 days).
I.
Notify fire marshal for site inspection.
J.
Bring lots of plastic for possible soil contamination.
K.
Environmental Testing firm - Tank Closure
a) Examine tank for holes.
b) Observe for gasoline odor.
c) H -N -U meter, field instrument used to detach contamination.
d) One soil sample below center of each underground tank if less
than 10,000 gals. Two feet below tank and above water table.
One soil samples at each and of each underground tank if more
than 10,000 gals.
One soil sample under each dispenser island removed.
a) if no evidents of a and b, hole may be filled.
f) Soil teat send to lab, if contaminated, remove soil.
Then soil borings would be taken, where and how many
to be determined.
L.
Funds available for contaminated cleanup if these guidelines are
followed. (Maximum of one million dollars).
First $10,000 after tank removal, owner's responsibility.
thereafter up to 95% costs fundable for soil remodiation.
M.
If PCA guidelines are followed, the Environmental firm will
complete a closure report mailed to the property owner.
Filed with PCA and used in land transactions.
N.
FHA requires underground storage tanks to be removed.
PCA - John Aho 643- 3447
Property Transfer - Jano Boarboon - 643-3455 FHA
re
American Engineer Testing - Julio Drosal - 659-1302
Germundsen Companies, Inc. - Brian - 422-1696
Fred Gille - 558-6999
WkvQrr44 ; w r
Brad Larson suggested to do soil borings first to determine if
contaminated and to determine the HRA's interest to proceed.
BRAUN TESTING
Jeff Elliot - testing for construction (footings. etc.)
Gary Trout 1-253-9940 Environmental testing
Estimated costa for 6-8 soil borings
lab analysis
report
Phase I Property audit (history) $1,800 - $1.900
Phase II Soil boring (lateral and vertical)
1. Tank location (they subcontract out, dollars unknown)
tank in basin area or some behind building
2. Estimated Cost Drill (2 days, 20 feet x 8 holes) $2,800
Environmental Technician 145 per hr 1,000
Equip rental 120 per hour (HUN Meter) 320
Chemistry (5 samples x 1130) 800
Report 1,500
16,400
Estimate between 15,500 - 16,500
�CCnev�' w j..a• �\O.oO'O
14
i COST ESTIMATES:
American Engtineer Testing - $48.00 per hour for technician
$75.00 per day for H -N -U meter
Generally - $600 - $1,000
1-2 hours of technician's time (site and mileage)
one tank removal testing
paper and report work
lab teat
$120 for each additional lab test
Germundsen Company, Inc. - guested the tank may be 2,000 - 6,000 gals
One tank removal, pump concrete removal, disposal of tank, permit,
and restoration.
Under 10,000 gale without sand $5,000 •%e .eoo
with clean sand $1,000 additional
with contaminated sand $2,000-KK3,000 additional
His estimate for environmental complete closure report $800 - $2,500
SUGGESTED: Each tank under 10,000 gals would need one soil teat
bOne soil teat for each of three dispenser islands
(diesel, regular, and supreme).
11.566
4