Loading...
HRA Agenda 10-07-1987AGENDA MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, October 7, 1987 - 7:OOAM City Hall Members: Lovell Schrupp, Kenneth Maus, Ben Smith, Al Larson, and Everette Ellison. 1. CALL TO ORDER. 2. APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 2, 1987 HRA MINUTES. 3. CONSIDERATION TO MODIFY THE CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN BOUNDARIES. 4. CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON COMPARATIVE ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES. 5. CONSIDERATION OF UPDATE ON THE MONTICELLO FORD PROPERTY. 6. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW A LETTER REGARDING THE MONTICELLO RIDGEMONT APARTMENTS. 7. OTHER BUSINESS. 8. ADJOURNMENT. MINUTES MONTICELLO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, September 2, 1987 - 7:OOAM City Hall Members Present: Acting Chairperson Lovell Schrupp, Ben Smith, Al Larson, and Everette Ellison. Member Absent: Kenneth Maus. 1. Call To Order. Acting Chairperson Lowell Schrupp called the HRA meeting to order. 2. Approval of the August 5, 1987 HRA Minutes. Ben Smith made a motion to approve the August 5, 1987, NRA minutes, seconded by Everette Ellison. Minutes approved. 3. NRA Welcomes Everette Ellison as a New Member of the HRA. Acting Chairperson Lowell Schrupp welcomed Everette Ellison as a new member of the HRA and thanked him for his acceptance to serve on a branch of the City government board. 4. Consideration to Modify the Finance Plan for Tax Increment Redevelopment District 06. Modification O1 of the finance plan for Redevelopment District 06 included an increase of $53,000 to the original estimated project budget. The increase was due to the soil corrections made along Sixth Street and the sever interceptor easement. The duration of the 25 year district is more than sufficient to cover the increased cost based on the original projected annual tax increment. Ben Smith made a motion for the HRA to adopt the resolution for Modification 01 of the finance plan for Tax Increment Redevelopment District 06 and requested the City Council to sat a public hearing data for the purpose of modification of the said finance plan. Seconded by Al Larson, the motion carried 4-0. The HRA members agreed they would like to view the final site plans before the approval of a future finance plan. 5. Consideration to Review Other Community's Estimated Market Values and to Review School District 0882 Budget. The authority accepted the information received from Doug Gruber, County Assessor, stating that other Wright County city's estimated market values increased 102, 152. or 202 in 1985. The authority also received the rationale of the increase to the 1987 school district mill rata. The members requested the City Administrator obtain the school district's 1986-87 and 1987-88 budgets and thereafter will invite Supt. Shelly Johnson to a meeting if clarification is necessary. HRA Minutes - 9/2/87 6. REPORTS. The HRA accepted the reports on the Monticello Ford, Inc., Downtown Rehabilitation, and the IDC Revolving Loan Fund. The authority inquired about the status of the I%I building, and Koropchak reported the property was in a redemption period and a Minneapolis bank will acquire the property at the end of November, 1987. One member asked if the City would consider the property for their maintenance building. 7. Other Business. None. 8. Adlournment. Ben Smith made a motion to adjourn the HRA meeting, seconded by Everette Ellison, the meeting adjourned. � IT-\- ke�-oIFIJ� Olive M. Koropchak Director and Executive Secretary Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority HRA Agenda - 10/7/87 3. CONSIDERATION TO MODIFY THE CENTRAL MONTICELLO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN BOUNDARIES. A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND. The Central Monticello Redevelopment Plan was adopted in November, 1982 under the provisions of the Minnesota Statute, Section 462, and the boundaries were modified in late 1985 to include Blocks 38 and 39. This being acceptable because boundaries adjoined and the small sized parcel was considered a blighted area with unused structures. Rick Wolfateller and myself have received two lettere of inquiry from Jim Boyle and Gladys Hoglund, respectively, to include their designated properties within the Central Monticello Redevelopment Plan. Mr. Boyle's request includes 160 acres of industrial zoned land and 30 acres east of County Road 118 zoned as R -PUD. Mrs. Hoglund's request includes 72.5 acres of industrial zoned land east of the Bondhus Company and south of the railroad tracks. The Planning Commission and the City Council, recently, amended the zoning map to down zone the Boyle property from Il and I2 to a combination of 82, B3, and 11 in the area of the new middle school. The City staff being open to both party's request to make available the city's financial incentive tool known as tax increment financing. However, in a last minute conversation with Mr. Robert Disks, Attorney for Holmes 6 Graven, this would be prohibited by the Minnesota Statute, Section 462.421. Legislature amended the said statutory in 1987; thereafter, leaving the HRA or the City no justification to amend the Redevelopment Plan boundaries. Mr. Dicke is mailing me a copy of the 1987 amended portion of the statute. His alternate suggestion is for the City Council to establish a Monticello Development District under the provisions of Minnesota Statute, Section 472A. The City Council could designate the HRA to administer the program. After I receive information on the creation of such a development district, city staff will make appropriate recommendations to the City Council. Therefore, with the late information from Mr. Dicke, the HRA need not consider the modification of the Central Monticello Redevelopment Plan boundaries. However, please consider the concept of the requests. No alternative actions or staff recommendations. D. SUPPORTING DATA. Exhibit A. - current boundaries of the Central Monticello Redevelopment Plan. Copy of Mr. Boyle's letter Copy of the map showing the Boyle's 160 acres with the amended down sono. Copy of Mrs. Hoglund's Letter Copy of the map showing the Hoglund property. solo 18..4X�w5�lra!, .So.:Ir9-fos► .9'eol4dolw: <�.ryw.aasQs4 /psi/ass..x>r� Today is Monday September 14, 1987 Mr. Rick Wolfsteller City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, Minnesota 55362-9245 RE: Tau Increment District Dear Ricks We now request to have the existing Tar. Increment District expanded inclusive of all properties in the 160 acre Industrial Park that we are now developing. The approximate 30 acre parcel. east of County Road 118 should also be included. Our planning is to complete the extension of Chelsea Road and sewer thru this parcel neut Spring. After numerous contacts of potential users and Joint venture partners, it in apparent we will need these benefits to develop a successful park. Sincerely, Jim Boyle JB/kb cc Lynn lark .► � ,�•, .. ' ;�,1 ' � .. ' • ' tea• •" - ' .•+ �'j�,j(1- ,, ".`*.,._ 1 `• \. �,� � \ , i . tea' _.--�•^ `^j'-..,,, ,` � `'- _� „ � :`:. NO- 94 .04 Ap— ' e •� •`.�„'� � S 1 'rte u 4 tL u September 30, 1987 Ms. 011ie Koropchak Director of Economic Development 250 E. Broadway Monticello, Mn. 55362 Dear Ms. Koropchak, I would like to request that the 72.5 acres which I own in Monticello, bordered by I94 on the south, Dahlheimer Distributing on the east and County Road 75 on the north, be included in Monticello's tax increment district. I understand that this will be addressed at the October 7, 1987, HRA meeting. Please keep me informed on this matter. Thank you. Sincerely, Gj4 dys oglu 14 HOME KEY, INC. SW of 1.946 H"25 PO Bo, 160 momxdro. Nilnesou 55362 Mllro�16126133i 9311E E Homm Kce 16121 2952638 TRENT ANDERSON RMTOR• fear Olka 15 kWpWfte v Ow Ma Opna n . � _� � _ ` `• � � 1 � _\\fir— �—�::;�;;; 4. OutlLne(approximete)7 / property size I ` t I ,e acris '. 10 I i 2 1 5 94/ I © 0.41 vp, '• i 19 " 16 r g 17 : i BRA Agenda - 10/7./87 4. CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON COMPARATIVE ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES. A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND. Rick Wolfateller, City Administrator, obtained the following information from County Assessor Doug Gruber. The latest study shoved that County wide from 10/85 to 9/86, 31 sales of commerical/industrial property took place and the market values were approximately 89Z of actual selling price. Individual M.Y. to selling price 0 of Sales City Z of 1 Buffalo 1102 2 Cokato 1012 1 Delano 1112 Actually sold for less than market value 3 Howard Lake 1022 4 St. Michael 822 4 Monticello 71.52 5 Annandale 592 Actually sold for more than market value Monticello's four individual sales were: Market value Selling price b Silver Fox Motel $1,087,000 $1,450,000 Contra Sota $ 52,900 $ 114,000 Figenshau Bldg. $ 111,400 $ 120,000 Poierer Drug $ 40,000 $ 60,000 Commerical comparison examples In Buffalo and Monticello, based on per dollar of square footage (building only). Holmquist's McDonald's Johnson's main floor office 4,198 sq ft 5,265 sq ft 27,356 sq ft 1,628 sq ft $55.00 $22.00 x$30.00 x$20.00 $230,900 $115,830 $820,680 $3,256 Total $823,936 Maus Foods McDonald's Johnson's 34,400 sq ft 4,288 sq ft 8,520 eq ft x $30.00 $50.00 $14.87 $1,031,800 $214,400 $124,200 A copy of School District 1882 budget has not been obtained at this point. I HRA Agenda - 10/7/87 5. CONSIDERATION OF UPDATE ON THE MONTICELLO FORD PROPERTY. A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND. The contract for deed was executed the morning of September 15, 1987, between Monticello Ford, Inc. and the Monticello HRA. The HRA purpose being to purchase and the demolition of the property for the enhancement of future new development. It was my understanding that the HRA planned to demolish the building as soon as possible providing no additional costs (goal December 1987). John Simola, Public Works Director, was designated to prepare the specs for the demolition; however, at this point, preparation of specs has not begun. Mr. Simola and Gary Anderson, Zoning Administrator, inspected the said building and concluded that a common wall is not shared with the 0"Connor building; however, if the 0"Connor chimney was damaged during demolition the HRA would need to repair it. My question La: Does the HRA want the building demolished by December, 19877 Two other factors come into play: 1) Is Metcalf and Larson interested in building another elderly project which would generate additional tax increment and would the planning commission and city council approve the necessary rezoning inorder to proceed with such a project (rezone from B-4 regional business to PZ -M performance zone -mixed). 2) If the City would apply for and be awarded a Community Development Block Grant to purchase and demolish additional properties as 0"Connor, Stelton, and Jones. This project would have to be a community needs project and the properties need to qualify as alum or blight in accordance with the Minnesota Statutes. If awarded a grant the monies would not be allocated until August 1988. Again, the question remains: Does the HRA want to proceed with the demolition as first planned or wait until other options are explored which may reduce total demolition cost if the total area was demolished at one time? If the CDBG was a- warded the immediate need for rezoning would not exist unless an housing project was anticipated. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS. 1. Proceed as initially intended, demolition of Monticello Ford property by December, 1987. 2. Demolition as planned or delay demolition to further explore the intent of Metcalf 6 Larson and explore the opinions of the planning commission and the city council to rezone this area from B-4 to PZ -M. 3. Demolition as planned or delay demolition to further explore the possibilities of a CDBG for said property acquisition and demolition. HRA Agenda - 10/7/87 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION. The Finance Plan Modification 61 reads that the HRA plane for the demolition of said blighted property by the end of December, 1987. To conform with the Modification Plan and the unknowns of the future development at the present time, I recommend the HRA proceed as planned and continue further explorations. The City Administrator has no recommendation at this time. D. SUPPORTING DATA. None I HRA Agenda - 10/7/87 Q 6. CONSIDERATION TO REVIEW A LETTER REGARDING THE MONTICELLO RIDGEMONT APARTMENTS. A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND. This is an information item only to share with you the letter I received from Mr. Slininger of the Farmers Home Administration. At one of our previous HRA meetings, Ken Spaeth inquired about the possibilities of a voucher system (Section 8 Housing Assistamce) being established by the HRA. Mr. Spaeth was interested in purchasing the Ridgemount Apartments and as an incentive to purchase would like-the'.assurance that the property would maintain the status of low income housing. The HRA's consensus was to proceed with a voucher system if low housing needs were verified but not for the purpose as an incentive for one to purchase property. To my :knowledge, Mr. Spaeth has not continued with his inquiry. No alternative actions or staff recommendation given. D. SUPPORTING DATA. Copy of the letter from Mr. Slininger. I I United States j Department of Agriculture Farman Moms Adminiiillration 3700 W. Division St. Suite 112 St. Cloud, MN 56301 612-255-9111 September 24, 1987 Monticello Housing 2 Redevelopment Auth. 250 East Broadway Route 4, Box 83A Monticello, MN 55362 Dear Sirs: We are required to notify all Agencies who could be of assistance to displaced tenants caused by a prepayment of the Borrower's loan with Farmers Home Administration. Monticello Apartments (Ridgemont Apartments, Monticello) have requested to prepay their loan. Enclosed is a copy of the letter we sent to each tenant for your information. We appreciate any assistance you can give these tenants who have general inquiries and in finding other subsidized housing if need be. Sincerely, WILLIAM M. SLININGER District Director oncl ►aew �1oIM Ae�b • w earl 400swry (WAV. �j eoorrsewr+.ro�r00adiee e.ew.rawear..ems,oe NM 371JU W. U.vision 5%. Suite 11'2 St. Cloud, MN bb3U1 ti12-1�5-9111 CERT V IEU MAIL RETURN RECEIPIRLOUESTEU September '2:3, 1!iV NOrICE OF OWNERS INTLNT TU PWEPAY TO: lenants of Ridgemont Apartments,' Monticello On or about January 10, 1588, the owners of Ridgemont Apartments plan to pay their FmHA loan in full, and remove the housing from the FmHA program. If FmHA can accept the payment, rental rates may no longer be subsidized by FmHA, and it is anticipated that rents may change to approximately %350 for a one bedroom unit and $365 for a two bedroom unit. You would not be affected by these increases until the date your final lease expires, the above date, or the date of prepayment, whichever occurs last. You may apply for a letter of priority entitlement to be placed on the waiting list of any FmHA-financed project in the country for which you quality. You will have up to bO days prior to the date your final lease expires, the above date, or the date of prepayment, whichever occurs last, to apply for this letter and it will be valid for 60 days after issue. If you are currently receiving rental assistance (RA), you are eligible to receive WA at the project to which you are moving, and the project to which you are moving is eligible to adm ntrter RA, the RA will continue when you move to the new project. If you choose to remain in your present apartment and pay the higher rent, with or without outside subsidy, you may not be evicted without good cause. Sea the attachment for other FmHA projects in this area and the size of their units. Other agencies which may be able to offer you housing or help to Lind you other housing are: The Department of Housing and Urban Development, 220 second Street South, Minneapolis, MN 55401, W121 34y-9000 and The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, 400 Sibley St., ,Suite :300, St. Paul, MN b5101, (612) 296-7bUU. I In accordance with Title V of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended, tenants as well as the government may seek enforcement of the provisions under whieh an FmHA Multi -family housing loan may be prepaid. All equal opportunity provisions apply to the issuance of the letters of priority. If you have any questions or wish to apply for a letter of priority, please write or call: Mr. William Slininger, District Director Farmers Home Administration 3700 West Uivision tit., Suite 112 St. Cloud, MN 5bSOI (612) 255-'.1111 'Al-4ir.-A Y WILLIAM M. SLININGER District Uirector attachment 11 C.ily 4 KnuAL MONTICELLO, MN 65382.9246 ..ate r September 14, 1987 Pna»161212954711 Metro let 21 333-5739 Mayor. Arne Ormmno cny Co,nCe: Oen B�enpen Fran Few Dear Mr. Robert Smoot: wow FW .mak Ma:ee4 It was brought to my attention on Friday, September 11, 1987, that there is some misunderstanding between Monticello Ford, Inc., A b B Trim, and the City of Monticello regarding Amraresasmr: the date the property at 249 West Broadway, Monticello, Tan mem Minnesota, shall be vacant. Fwmme OVOCW. Pock Weeneen In hopes to clarify this matter, the purchase agreement mjam � between the seller (Monticello Ford, Inc.) and the buyer 11-Zor py w,q aZonep: (Monticello Rousing and Redevelopment Authority) reads Oen that the seller agrees that said property (249 West Broadway) E shall be vacant of occupant or occupants at the time of 011e a«oe closing. This is subject to possible change by the buyer. The closing date is scheduled for Tuesday, September 15, 1987. The buyer (Monticello MRA) has not indicated, had no intention, y nor is in no position to lease out the said building and has no contractual relationship with the present occupant (A b B Trim); therefore, the said building shall be vacated as stipulated In the purchase agreement. Again, Robert, I apologize for any confusion which may have been created by any member of the City staff regarding a possible lease agreement. As Economic Development Director, I will continue to promote your business and refer potential custotcors to your new location. The very beat to A 6 B Trim. Sincerely, ( (� 011ie Koropchak, Director Monticello Mousing and Redevelopment Authority ccs Mr. Larry Plaka File ✓ 250 Eat BmGftW MORMCeb. MWV14 O 55852.9245