Loading...
03-21-94 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MONDAY, MARCH 21, 1994 6:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF (1) HRA MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 1994; (2) HRA MEETING O.F FEBRUARY 22, 1994; AND (3) SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND HRA MEETING OF MARCH 14, 1994 1. OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE HRA ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA 2. CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION FOR STAFF TO DRAFT AGREEMENT WITH TOLD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY TO MARKET AND FACILITATE REDEVELOPMENT OF CLOVERLEAF SITE HRA LETTER NO. 10 3. CONSIDERATION AND REVIEW OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING '- CONDEMNATION AND QUICK TAKE OF PHASE I, THE SHOPS AT LYNDALE; ILN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT HRA LETTER NO. 11 4. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES FOR PROVIDING FINANCIAL .,ASSISTANCE TO CSM CORPORATION, SHOPS AT LYNDALE HRA LETTER N0. 12 5. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO THE ILN .REDEVELOPMENT AND TAX INCREMENT PLAN HRA LETTER NO. 13 6. CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY TIME AND EVENTS SCHEDULE FOR PROPOSED CSM PROJECT HRA LETTER NO. 14 7. CONSIDERATION AND REVIEW OF PROPOSED CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT BETWEEN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND CSM CORPORATION HRA LETTER N0. 15 8. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF 6538 BLOOMINGTON AVENUE~~(CONTINUED FROM FEBRUARY 22, 1994) HRA LETTER NO. 16 9. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF 6501 15TH AVENUE (CONTINUED FROM FEBRUARY 22, 1994) HRA LETTER NO. 17 10. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF RICHFIELD REDISCOVERED PROPERTY AT 6636 SHERIDAN AVENUE TO MARLIN GRANT HOMES, INC. HRA LETTER NO. 18 11. CONSIDERATION OF STATUS REPORT ON TRX INCREMENT DISTRICTS HRA LETTER NO. 19 12. CONSIDERATION OF MARKETING STRATEGY FOR RESIDENTS OF NEW FORD TOWN AND RICH ACRES HRA LETTER NO. 20 13. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACQUISITION OF 7537 GIRARD AVENUE HRA LETTER NO. 21 14. CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZING TRANSFORMATION HOUSING INCENTIVE LOAN PROGRAM HRA LETTER NO. 22 15. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY EASEMENT ON CLOVERLEAF SITE; 77TH STREET PROJECT HRA LETTER N0. 23 ADJOURNMENT AUXILIARY AIDS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. REQUESTS MUST BE MADE AT LEAST 96 HOURS IN ADVANCE TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR AT 861-9702. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 23 Agenda March 21, 1994 Issue Statement• Approving extension of temporary easement on Cloverleaf Site; 77th Street Project. Background: There is a need to extend the temporary construction easement on the Cloverleaf Site for the 77th Street Project. Attached to this letter is the Temporary .Easement Agreement and site drawing and legal description for the temporary taking. On December 14, 1992., the HRA approved a resolution which allowed for the temporary taking of the above-referenced parcel. Under a Temporary Easement Agreement (Agreement) between the HRA and. the City, dated April 12, 1993, the use of the site for 77th Street construction purposes would be allowed until December 31, 1993. The HRA was compensated for the temporary taking in the amount of $200. As the Agreement has since expired and construction was not completed for that portion of the road, a new Agreement is required. The Temporary Easement Agreement would allow the contractor for the City to enter onto the subject property and continue with the 77th Street construction. The time period for the temporary taking would run from April 1, 1994 to December 31, 1994. Recommended Motion: Adopt a motion which authorizes the Chairperson and Executive Director to execute an agreement for a temporary construction easement. Basis of Recommendation: Additional approval of the extension of the temporary taking by MnDOT and FHWA is not required. Alternative Recommendation: Do not authorize the extension of the temporary taking. DiscussionJDecision Mode: Approval will make it possible for construction to continue in a timely manner. Respe tf lly submitted, JDP:ds Jame Prosser Exe t ve Director PARCEL 4 TEMPORARY EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT IS MADE THIS day of , 1994, between the HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, a public body corporate and politic whose address is 6700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423- 2599, Grantors (hereinafter referred to as "OWNER", whether one or more), and CITY OF RICHFIELD, Grantee, a municipal. corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, having its principal office located at 6700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423-2599 (hereinafter referred to as "City"). 1. Consideration and Description. In consideration of the sum of $1.00 and other good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is acknowledged, Owner hereby .grants, sells, and conveys to City, its successors and assigns, temporary easements for the purpose of constructing, operating, inspecting, maintaining, repairing, and replacing street and utility facilities and improvements in and over lands owned by the Owner situated in the County of Hennepin which are described herein as the Easement Tract. The Easement Tract is legally described on Exhibit A and depicted on Exhibit B, both of which are attached hereto and incorporated herein. 2. Term of Temporary Easement. This easement shall take effect on April 1, 1994 and shall automatically expire on December 31, 1994 unless previously released in writing by the City. 3. Ingress, Egress, and Maintenance. The City, its employees, contractors, and representatives shall have the right of ingress and egress to and from the Easement Tract for the purpose of constructing, operating, inspecting, maintaining, repairing, and replacing street, utility, and related facilities and improvements. Such ingress and egress shall be limited to the easements and to existing public roads, if any, on the premises. 4. Rights of City. Said easements shall also include: (a) the right to clear the surface of herbage and improvements; (b) the right to permanently change the elevation of the Easement Tract to match the City's street impravements; and (c) the right to store equipment and materials from time to time within the Easement Tract. 5. Restoration. After the installation of the public improvements, the .City, its employees, representatives, or contractors shall remove all construction equipment used by them on RJL51355 RC145-220 the Easement Tract by ruts, and depressions and remove all debris of elevation, the Cii Easement Tract as r reasonably possible., installation of such easement. or for the City, fill.and level all ditches, caused by construction or removal operations, resulting therefrom. Except for such change y will generally restore the surface of the ear to its original condition as may be. all within a reasonable time after the public improvements or expiration of this 6. Covenant of Ownership. Owner covenants that it is the Owner of the Easement Tract and has the right, title, and capacity to grant the easement granted herein. 7. Effect Upon Subsequent Parties. This Easement Agreement shall be binding upon and accrue to the benefit of the heirs, legal representatives, successors, and assigns of the parties hereto. OWNER HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD By Its Executive Director By Its Chairperson RJL51355 RC145-220 2 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On the .day of , 1994, appeared before me and did say that he is the Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, which is named in the foregoing instrument and that he executed said instrument on behalf of said Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On the day of , 1994,. appeared before me and did say that he is the Chairperson of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield; a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, which is named in the foregoing instrument and that he executed said instrument on behalf of said Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield. Notary Public The foregoing instrument was drafted by: Holmes & Graven, Chartered (RJL) 470 Pillsbury Center Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 RCI45-175 Parcel 4 RJ7,51355 RC145-220 3 Exhibit A 2/7/94 Legal Description of Easement Tract Parcel No.: No. 4 PID No.: 33 028 24 43 0017 Owner: Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield Description of Taking: A 10.00 foot temporary construction easement for roadway and utility purposes over, under and across that part of. the West Half of the East Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, Section 33, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota which lies southerly of the following, described Zine A: Commencing at the northwest corner of said West Half of the East Half; thence South 00 Degrees 12 minutes 05 seconds West, grid bearing, Hennepin County Coordinate System, along the West line of said West Half of the East Half a distance of 127.31 feet to the point of beginning of Line A to be described; thence North 75 degrees 35 minutes 33 seconds East 169.84. feet more or less to a point on the east line of said West Half of the East Half and said Line A there terminating. Together with a temporary construction easement over, under and across the west 30.00 feet of that part of said West Half of the East Half which lies northerly of a line 165 feet southerly of the north line of .said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter and Southerly of the herein described Line A. . Said temporary construction easements expire December 31, 1994. RJL51355 AC145-220 4 Vl fl` ,1 .} 1~: i:G t'1'~5. OlL OU'1. tf14v ~.iai-na~.nrtr:a+v -~~-~ va•a n+++ •c:i~~w • I• i V N v~'~-~~~„~~ ttr~; GF 7NE SE ~~~ ~ _ ~..-3x ~ i i '~ ®F~ .. SAC.. 33. Y. 2$„ R. 2, .. ~+ r~X ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~• ~ 1 ,,~ p ~ ~ ~o a~ ~ , ~ "= _ ~ -+ :4~ i ~._ ~ ~ SGO't2'~s'r i . u 4- , ~~ y0~: n •, .,~ i ~•. i~1 ; ~ iTJ :z ~ ~ ,r , ,; ~ : ~ ? ~ ,,~ ~ t }, jam. ~C ~ m ~ ~ ~ w o _ ~. . ~ .~,, - i rtr f ~~ 1, ~ ~ ~,~~ N / I I j i • ~ ('~'~ o • 7~ { •~ ~-~+ ~ ~ ~• ~ ~ •~ `I r!t ~ ~ _ _ ~ ~ .• ~, , ~ r.-rt =~, '~ ~~ ~ ~, ~~~~~ / '~ ~ sr ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ t r~~,/~ o ..~ T ~~+ ~ ~~ ._ ~ ~ ~ HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 22 March 21, 1994 Issue Statement: Authorizing a Transformation Housing Incentive Loan Program. Background: The HRA authorized a value added home .remodeling program in 1993 called."Transformation Housing." The pilot project was completed at 6500 James Avenue. The HRA has been evaluating two program elements to generate a greater quantity of transformation projects:, 1) A deferred loan to homeowners/homebuyers of 15 percent for remodeling contracts greater than $50,000; 2) Additional financial incentives with lenders which provide sufficient security and guarantees to encourage lenders to provide builder/remodeler and buyer/owner teams with property acquisition and interim construction financing. A summary of each program element is attached. The HRA is being asked to authorize the incentive loan at this time. Staff is working with lenders to identify ways the HRA may respond to help make lender resources available. Transformation type remodeling has inherent financial risks which are challenging to resolve. A more detailed report on lender contacts is provided in the March HRA Status Report. It is proposed that program income from the Richfield Rediscovered New Construction Program be committed to transformation deferred loans and anticipated bank support. Phase III of Richfield Rediscovered was funded by the Development Fund. Proceeds of land sales during 1994 (source of funds) and a Transformation '94 budget (use of funds} is attached. Recommended Motion: Authorize a transformation deferred loan to be made available starting in April 1994. Continue working with lenders to identify additional resources for transformation. Basis of Recommendation: 1. "Transformation" is homeowner/homebuyer driven. The HRA, builders, and lenders are facilitators. Sufficient incentives will instill an action in homeowners/homebuyers to invest and improve in Richfield in a substantial value added way. 2. Experience suggests that homeowners are voluntarily remodeling up to a contract price of approximately $40,000. -The special mortgage arranged by the HRA with Norwest supports this initiative and allows up to a 50 percent increase in value. 3. To remodel above a 50 percent increased value (i.e. transformation), to support both homeowners and homebuyers, and to do so with greater frequency than one or two per year, requires additional incentives.. The deferred loan concept takes into account that new construction may be more attractive than remodeling, costs usually exceed added value, remodelers want a reasonable profit, homeowners/homebuyers want to remodel in ways that make economic sense, and the HRA wants the greatest number of "transformations" to occur with the least allocation of limited resources. 4. Incentive loans and relocation support deal with the major program issues: added value is usually less than actual cost and, homeowners may have to temporarily relocate during major transformations. The HRA takes a shared cost position in major remodeling ventures. 5. Staff is working with builders and lenders on other major issues: identifying homes to transform and the participating homeowner/homebuyer clients. A marketing effort is enhanced by the availability of the deferred loan program element. 6. The deferred loan nature of the support ensures that the principal is secured and is returned to the HRA at a future time. 7. A funding source has been identified. Program income from Richfield Rediscovered new construction activities which have been funded by the Development Fund can be reprogrammed. Based on Richfield Rediscovered activity now underway, approximately $196,500 in land sale program income is anticipated in 1994. 8. A minimum of ten incentive loans could be provided. Given the maximum $15,000 amount will not be requested often, more than this minimum can be served. 9. Remodeling costs exceed value increases to property by up to 27 percent for typical major improvements. Thus, a 15 percent subsidy to project cost (the deferred loan) is a reasonable level of risk to be shared by the HRA. 10. A 15 percent of project contribution from the HRA provides greater lender-security, covers a portion of project costs discovered during remodeling, increases remodeler return, and provides an incentive to transform. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Increase HRA support in excess of the proposed amounts and identify other funding sources. 2. Delay incentive loan approval until lender participation is further defined. However, each lender has expressed an individual and case by case approach. Thus, developing these unique program responses, primarily geared to the builder, will take additional time. While builder support is refined, homeowners and homebuyers could be moving ahead with projects that don't need special lender support.. 3. Discontinue the Transformation Housing Program. Discussion/Decision Mode: Marketing of incentive loans could begin in April. The HRA will continue to be updated about progress with lenders. Resp lly submitted, Jam s Prosser Exe ive Director JDP:ds d~ o~ z 0 H O w N w a w w U °a a a Q w a U H a W a A a w H w U N a I W w w 0 w a O W O rn ra as b a) +~ b ~ a) o O O IOn ~ In In O .c u~ r-1 n L\ d~ rOi c•~O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ cd O a) q ~ •~I rnrn ~+~HHH _ _ ~ a) ~HA ~+ N~ N O f~ ~~ ~ ~~ O ~ ~~ ~ ~ O•~ a~a~oooa~ ~ ~ +~ ~., a~~nozzA a a o •~ m a s~ a E O O U! cd t11 E q ~ ~M-1 O (C ~ ~ ~ ~ b cad ~ 0 d~ R1 cd O O ~ r-I - •~ ~ ~ .. b b ~ a~ o •~ 0OOOOOOO O ~~ 9~ \ ~3 00000000 H a) it Sa ~ t>a •~1 to O O O ~n O In ~n to E O O a) a) a) bt'O r••1 O to t~ ~ ~ rn t0 O UI U! b f~ b a) MMNNNNN~ O ~ ~ ~A N~~ ~ t~ rn r~ r~ ra u~ r~ rat w o ~ • • a~ x ~ a a~ rn ~ 3 ~ ~~ OBE +~ ~-~ E ~ ~ ~ ~+~ ~wE ~ Ab a w ~~~'~a x~ ~ road E U N~~y~ jai Vim! ~~ E h .4.1 ,w `~ \~ a1 ~~ .. a ~olocob •~~ a o3 ~ -, ~ N 1 r~-1 ~ -OI E -ri c0 ~ O N i-i Oa U1o l/! 'L7~'O~fA ~O ed A~ ~+ tnv oa z ~~~•~~ ~o ~ ~ ~ .~ o .o .~ ~ v o ~ •~ ~ •~ a~ a In ~ ~ a~ •.~ +~ •r•1 +~ +~ a~ ~ w a~ a a~ ~ b •~ a~ ~ x .c o,-tv~~cn~ o Q ~Aroa aro w -~w rN-i d~ N *-I d~ N rl W i~ O O C~ N O~ d~ 00 ~ d~ V! t 1 1 I ~ '~ ~L~10L~t0t~L~ 'r7 ~ H N • O N z HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 21 Agenda March 21, 1994 Issue Statement: Authorization to acquire 7537 Girard Avenue and request the .City. Council to authorize acquisition and disposition of the site to the HRA. Backcrround Since 1980, the HRA has utilized the Voluntary Acquisition Program and CDBG funds to acquire substandard or under utilized residential properties for redevelopment. The Vo-Tech develops these sites with new housing units for moderate income families. The structure at 7537 Girard Avenue is substandard and a neighborhood eyesore. The lot width of 46 ft. is also substandard. However, the City hearing examiner has granted a lot width variance, the lot is in a neighborhood zoned for residential use and the lot is suitable for the development of a new single family home. The site is being marketed for $25,900 by a realtor on behalf of the foreclosing lender, National Mortgage Corporation. Year XIX CDBG funds are available for this purchase. The Hennepin County Assessor valued the property at $45,000 prior to foreclosure and the subsequent decline in condition. Staff has negotiated a price of $24,000 which reflects the lot value after demolition, pending authorization of this value as fair market value by the HRA and City Council. HUD rules require that the City purchase the property for the fair market value of $24,000. The subsequent transfer of the property to the HRA would require a $1.00 payment. The City Council could consider the purchase of the property on March 28, 1994 if requested by the HRA. The sale from the City to the HRA requires a public hearing and passage of a transitory ordinance. Transfer of the property to the HRA could occur in June 1994 after the transitory ordinance becomes effective. The drafted purchase agreement with the seller indicates the City will purchase by June 1994. The HRA would be responsible for property maintenance following acquisition and site clearance following transfer of the property from the City. The 1994 HRA budget provides $4,500 to clear the site (source: CDBG XIX), $600 for legal work to acquire (source: CDBG XIX) and $300 for property maintenance and insurance (source: proceeds of sale of 1994 Vo-Tech project). It is anticipated that Vo-Tech could build a new house on site starting in the summer of 1994. Staff is presently developing a plan, budget, and contracts for consideration by the HRA. Recommended Motion: It is recommended that the HRA: 1. Request the City Council on Mareh 28, 1994 to authorize acquisition of 7537 Girard Avenue and disposition of the property to the HRA. 2. Adopt the attached resolution. which authorizes, the Chairperson and Executive Director to enter into a purchase agreement with the City and take other actions necessary to acquire 7537 Girard Avenue for $1.00. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The owner is interested in selling to the City through the Voluntary Acquisition Program. 2. The .property qualifies for acquisition in accordance with the Voluntary .Acquisition Program Guidelines. 3. Funds have been budgeted for acquisition, clearance, and maintenance. CDBG funds may be committed once the environmental clearance process is completed with Hennepin County in April 1994. The purchase is contingent on this administrative process. 4. The subject property is available at this time and can be purchased with available funds. 5. HUD rules require a process in which the City acquires the property and transfers the title to the HRA. Alternative Recommendation: The HRA can choose not to acquire the property. However, staff has no better alternative for timely commitment of CDBG funds and the development of a future Vo-Tech project. Discussion/Decision Mode: Pending HRA and City Council authorization, the property could be acquired in May or June 1994. Respec fu y submitted, James Prosser Execut' a Director JDP:ds RESOLUTION N0. THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY DF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF 7537 GIRARD AVENUE WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (HRA) acquires property and builds and rehabilitates structures for residential purposes; and WHEREAS, the HRA desires to acquire the real property at 7537 Girard Avenue, legally described as: Lot 15, Block 19 Irwin Shores Addition, Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, the owner of 753.7 Girard Avenue has volunteered to ~_ sell the property for $24,000; and WHEREAS, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds will finance the acquisition of this parcel. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. The Executive Director is authorized to request the City Council to consider the purchase of 7537 Girard Avenue for - $24,000. 2. The HRA Chairperson and Executive Director are authorized to take necessary actions to purchase the property located at 7537 Girard Avenue for $1.00. Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 21st day of March 1994. Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson ATTEST: Vern Luettinger, Secretary HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 20 Agenda March 21, 1994 Issue Statement• Marketing strategy for residents of New Ford Town and Rich Acres. Background• The HRA requested staff to formulate and implement a marketing strategy to be directed toward the residents of New Ford Town (NFT) and Rich Acres (RA). The purpose of the strategy is to encourage the residents to relocate within Richfield. There are approximately 419 households in the area. To be effective, the marketing program should recognize at least four significant points: 1. The relocation process will continue for three-five years. 2. Approximately 76$ of the households are owner-occupants. 3. The NFT/RA population is socially and economically diverse. 4. Richfield is an attractive viable community with a variety of housing opportunities some of which are provided through HRA programs. Because the relocation process will continue for several years, the marketing program will be on-going. The initial program formulation contains these elements: Introduction of W.D. Schock Representatives to the Community, February 3, 1994 Informational meeting and bus tour for W.D. Schock representatives. The meeting was an opportunity to present HRA programs and respond to questions. The bus tour introduced the representatives to the community and the housing opportunities offered by HRA programs. Richfield Housing Opportunities Fair, February 16, 1994 The NFT and RA residents were invited to the fair at City Hall. Not only were HRA programs presented, but representatives of Woodlake Point and Lake Shore Drive condominiums were present as well as representatives of Market Towers apartments. The newly formed Richfield Apartment Managers Association (RAMA) was also represented. People were asked to fill out a housing preference card indicating the type of housing they were seeking together with an indication of their community preference, Richfield or another community. February 4 - A letter was mailed to all NFT/RA residents announcing the fair. February 10 - A brochure was mailed to all NFT and RA residents as a follow-up to the February 4 letter. Bus Tour, March 12, 1994 A bus tour similar to that provided the Shock representatives was scheduled. Sign-up for this event was offered at the fair and through a follow-up invitation mailed on March 2, 1994. Residents in attendance numbered 35. They stated that they were grateful for the attention they are receiving, surprised by all the construction activity throughout the City and are interested in staying in Richfield. Newsletter, April 1994 A newsletter will be mailed from time to time to NFT/RA residents. The first issue will feature an interview with a family which relocated from the 77th Street Project to a new Richfield Rediscovered house. Information System To more effectively encourage people to relocate within Richfield, it is important to provide information quickly and clearly. One staff person has been designated to field Richfield housing inquiries from NFT and RA residents. With this organizational feature, it will also be possible to establish a working relationship with residents as they think through their preferences and eventually relocate. Recommended Motion: Respond to staff with reactions to the initial marketing program. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The HRA requested staff to initiate a marketing program. 2. The proposed elements have been formulated to encourage all NFT and RA residents to relocate within Richfield. 3. The elements will present all housing options available in Richfield. Alternative Recommendation: Modify the program by deleting or adding events. Discussion/Decision Mode: The program is now being implemented. Resp lly submitted, James Prosser Execut ve Director JDP:ds HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 19 Agenda March 21, 1994. Issue Statement• Status report on tax increment districts. Background: Last March, the HRA established a development account to fund programs such as Richfield Rediscovered and the Community Apartment Program. Funds from existing tax increment districts, primarily the LHN, are transferred to this account At the time of those discussions, the HRA determined that once a year a report should be presented regarding the financial status. Publicorp Inc. recommended that the report be presented after the end of February because of the volume of bond payments made the first two months of the year. Recommended Motion: Review the attached tax increment district status update of March 1, 1994 and accept the presentation by representatives of Publicorp Inc. Basis of Recommendation: The HRA requested annual reporting on these projects. Alternative Recommendation: Delay presentation of the report. Discussion/Decision Mode: A report at the March meeting would prepare the HRA to take action on authorizing additional acquisitions for the Richfield Rediscovered program in the near future. Respectfully submitted, Jame D. Prosser Exec ive Director JDP:ds Q D J _W LL ~... W Q 0 n.. Q U F-- W W U Q' d- c a~ _ rn ~"' o U ``- sz s ~ U Q- i ~ ~ ~ .Q co a as ~ os~oo c z~~ c • N o o~ N L o 0 ` p' U J ~ ~ ~ p p N fl. U M O D *' ~ ~ tti ~~ U N V ~ ~_ ~ Q o ~ ~ N ~ N ~ vi ~= ~ s ~i N p 0 > p L p ~ . L N~ •V ~ O p~ v ~ ~ = N U ~. ~ O L 7 N N "~'o ~ p v~ N p O O v c ~ • p ca O rnv • u i=~ p as o ~, - ,~ ~ ' c1~ L ~ ttf cD O N ~ _ ' U3 ~_ -C cXa .5.~ -d -~ tt3 cts Q U ~ ~ to ~ N ~ fr ''"' p C ~ +~ 'O cn ~+-~ CC N ~ ,~,., ~ ~ ~ C +-% "' Q o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' D ~" G N N o • ~ - c ~- .~ <( p ~" - d ~ L ~ C ~ c~ +~ o fl. .Q -- ~ .V ~ L U ~ ~ L '~'} ~ U ~ _ V f O t 1 Q U. 0 ~ O O o V p ~ ~ ~ p ~ i Y~.. r ,i,J Y p U cn ~ .~ • N -p > > ~ O O ~ > _ ca .- ~ o N ~ Q ~ '~ -- U ~ N C J ~ N a~ ~cn• ~-- ~ ~ ~ -d ~ •~ ~ ~ 4 N ~ v ~ ~ ~ " o L U ~ N ~ i ~ o fl °~ L1J • a ,~, ~ -0 N ft3 Q ~ U ~ - -a ~ V •~ O COL C ~ • ~ .~,. +-. N ~ p ,~,., O N O U p CA ~ U cn U N ~ N ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ L ~ N ~'' O ~ ~ its ttf ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ U<--Q ~ ~ ~ ~~ N ~ ~ L V ~ c~ ~ ~.o ~ . ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ' ~' ~ p .n ~ to ° ~ OTC ~ a ~ * ' ~ ~ ~ c o • i c a ~ ~N ~ a~ ~, v, cYi o - ~~,~ ~,~ ~ Q .~ N U Cd ~ p~ W ~~ U p Q. ;= ~ p i7 p ~ N V= O N ~~ ~ ~~ ~ C p N=~ ~ p [~ ~ ~-' ._ C7 • N Q (].. cA N ~ O ~ O o 0 0 a~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ `~ .a a, a~ ~ N N N ,~, L ,rt Vim,, '~. .~ cl, O 6~ ..d ~ ~ V f ~ ~ v ~ U t!'~ ~ a ~ i r ~ *' G ,.' O ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ U) O +-+ N ~ T3 ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ a~ c~ c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~3~ oN ~°~~ N~ ~ °- ~ ~ ~ a°~ 'O .yr U C~ cll ~ = "d Y 4 ~ N ~ 7 ~~ 'd ~ ~ 'd ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ Nom"' ~, p, ~ ~ U 'd O r ~ 0 O O ~ ~ O ~.. ~,~ Vi ~ N s- N ~ ~ G ~ ? ~ `~ ~~°r c N ~ ,~ ~ 7 ~ ~ cam'' C ? ~ N ~ ~ N N ~ d ~. ' o U N N ~ ~ +~ O U ~ ~ ~ S1 ' ~- .Y t9 V ~ ~ ~ _ p..ctr 'r' .a S1 O ~- cn ~ Cp Q ~ ~ Zg = a'~ J ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r Q. ~ ... 'd N N a~ s N .~ N N N U ~ =~ .3 N U y' U N X ~ ~ J ca a~ ~~ N ~„" 0 U ~'a J N N d' N ~ ft -,~ i 6> > o ~ .~ ~ 0 6' ~ •~ ~ ~ O 't~ O a~ ~ G v ~°~' o o `s'- N ~ m ~~ !~ ~ ~ ~~ N C~ tt5 O .vy Cry ~ O ~' O ,~- 'fl ~ O ~ ~, N N ~ `~ 7 ~ ~ ate.. p ~ "d tri a.s ~ > u o ~ ~ N N ~ ~ ~ ,.. ~ - ~' -a ° o N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G ~ C O U O ~ ~ N O ~ ~ ~ '~ O O~ ~ ~ N O_ O-O L q) ~; O v ~ c6 ,_ „, ~. uy ca N v U N U N eY O t0 ~ d N_ N ~ 6). UN ~ ~ G ~ Z © 7 cya ~ ~ J +~ S Q q~ 7 ~~ +` ~ C U ~ J O ~ -c3 ~ N O O 5 ~ O_ ~ 'D f- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~ ~ 4i/ O O O ,_ ~, ._ N ,~ o c a ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o- -a n~ 0 0 0 '~ N ~ o sY .o v v ~ N '~ 4-~ C ay C N ~ ~~ t~ S CA p~ O N G 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ G N ~ O O U CN6 .~~ N~ O ~ ~ ~ N N' . ~ _ U ~ ~ ~ ~O ~ ~ ~ ~ QO O ~ G ~o ~ L o .Z o~w °'a~o .°~~ >~ ~LJ ,~ ~ o o~ .~~,~ ~o~ a.c o ~' ~ ~ ~ .~ N r O 0.. CG N_ 4 CU U -t7 a7 O .~ .~ O y U O w N co N Y O O . .+- U L O U U X Q ~'' ~ ~ N ~U ~ O O M N ,r, ~. N G ~ ? C ~ 'O O ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ • Q. O- O O O t!1 N -- •- O N +, _ ,~, ~ ~ O O °~ ~ o t7 ~ ~ O ~ O ~ M O ~ ~ r.,, ~' :~ O O ? N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N O X. O V rC~ ~ z Y _- O :d ? O ~ ~ q) N O ~ ~ ~ U 0 ~ N oU ~•~ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ -a~ ~X U_ G ~ ~ ,~ ~. O .O U O ~ ~ ~~ O ~ 0 0 p ~ O m ~ N N Q O U • N U ~ ._ Q .N N ~ m O ~ ~ ~ 4 0 ~. 0 N ~ Q M ca tl- O c9 ~ GO ~ N N N N ~. O O O T ~ m ~ O ~_ O yC O 1S') ~ N Q- ~ ~ ~~ ~ o ~ °' o ~ O U V V ~ i . f~/) ~ ~ C] ~ ~ (Y1 s- m Q ~ ,~'' (.~ U ~ ~ ~ r o c~i `~ N W H Q ~.. H U_ I- N N Q d d' r L U cv X a-' c~ ~ ~ N O C ~ N ` ~ U U C ~ X O ~ +' ~. v- -0 O C N ~ i ~ ~ N ~ .~ ~~ ~ ,~ ~ U ~ cv o a-+ C ~ N •C Q N O ~ ~ a. N ~ ~ L ~_ C ~ +, ~ U C ~~- O ~"' ~ ~ ~- 'p N ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~-+ O Q C O fn N ca > s ~ +~ ~ U N .~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ .N ~ ~ (n N U Q ~ ~ d O ~_ ~ ~ ~ L •- ~ C ~ ~ +~ ~ C Q C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'ca ~ U ,~ ~ U .~ F- ~. N ~o N ~ O ~ O ~ ~ ca ~` N ~ .~ O r~ xx,, W V > ~~ ~ ~ N_ <( .,~ 'C3 N _ N C W ~ ~-' Q ~ ~ O O ~- ~ ~ t ~ C? ~ ~ N a~ ._ ~ U_ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~= o N ~ Y ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ 'v a~ ~ ~ a ~ o cNa v ~ U U ~ 7 ~ N a K ~ ~ ~ _o N ~ ~ ~ © "~ t w ~ ~ 0 t~ w- N ~ ~ ~ ~ 0- '~ ~ O O U- ~ ~ ~ CL U 0 9 ~ ~ r 7 p. ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ "~ 0 ~ `~ a 0 K m u t w Q w .-. O N r V N_ A C 3 O U_ Z 0 ~"' U W "! a U F N D H Z W U z H Z J ~ ~+ O M I~ ti M O O 00 r r r r r r r r r r r r = O O O~ r 0p ~ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cb r M I~ O r Ln r r r r r r r r r r r r C V NOM~N~-NP+tnM(`~MMMMMMMOhMM W C~ O M r Lb o0 N M~ r r r r r r r r r r r r V O_OrNN00rMCfl~OC~00~~C~~d10~ ~ m .C ~ ~' ~ ~ `~ ~ Gfl ~ ~ ~ ~ ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ._ O O M~rNNO)M 000000000000 0 OO~OOO(Of~00 ~ N~ 000d~00MN~~ ~ N E O~I~OMOrI~ 'd' ~- O M ~t ~ 'd' ~ CO I~ N 00 r ~ V r r r r r ~- N N ~ C C r ~ OMM00M00NtOMCO000OCOCO0000COOO(0 _ +'' O O I~ M O M M r ~- r r r r r r r r r r r 'p O ~OaO~rI~T'~0n0~~~~~OA~O~tntn c U `- O M O O O O r M O M M M W M W M M M M M W x,4:00 N~OI~rC~000000000000 ~m OEM MM~d'tn00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00COt0 N Z D ~ ~ O OjI.p~0AM0000000000000 ~' ~ 0NM(OMOM r ~ ~ } r M M ~ ~ I~ to O F- ~ ,~-. ~ et 0 di O ttS 00 a0 "'' ~ ~ ~ v N N 0 0 ~ Z = ~ r r N W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N~~~~ M~ 10 ~ ' ~ 00 h ~ 00 0 (fl o0 N ~ a3 C O O~ ti~ ~~ 0~ N N O ~ m 00 (O(OMM~On~ r ~j N CV N N N N r r r ~ aoaoaooooo0000000000 00000 ~ N N ' ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ d N a'sZ E _ ~~~tv~~t~w o! o rnrnrnrnrnrnrn~n r' ~~ - NNNNNNN~- 0 r O O O O O O O O O O 0 N O O O O O O O O 0 ~ uj. . 00000000 O ~. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ a mmcoommmm w N V UQ~ r r r r r r r r N •- ooooaoaoaoaoaooooo0000000 ~ ~ C ~~~N N ~~'N N d d y N ~ _ _ ~iMM~ ~iMM M M C c H N ~' ~t ~ d' ~t ~ ~t N M ~ CV (V N N (V N N r o0 - r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r 1~ I~ I~ 1~ I~ ~ (p r r r r r r ~~ X ~ (6 ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M r r r r r r r U U M eh ~ CO i~ 00 0 0 r N M~ (Q 00 1~ 00 0 0 r N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r }~~~~~~~ N N N N N N N N N N N N a c 0 T N c ao n ~ M rn E 0 co ~ II ~ ~ ~t rn ~ w m ~ C ~ 'V p C ~ } Z (A U 7 d Oa>.a3~, i-- ~ ~ ~~ w ~ x ~ ~ ~ "' X fA U v "~-' x ~- o oX QU~Zf- ~c~ri~ U C Q O U_ n. a a a~ a rn rn O a N W U Q d O ...+ O~ O O~ O O~ O M O~ O~ O M M O 'd' ~ ~ H O O N ti O O N ti O O O O O to M O M O Cfl Cfl 'a N ~O~O~sFN~a?OCOMOOM~NN~CO(fl c V N~ (p N (O f~ O 00 M (O H M O CO N O 00 d) CM r r LL1 O""'M O~~MO~~~CflOCflMM~00ttMd'~ v ~ ~OrN~tCOO~O~OCflTI~MO~NOtOC0 ~m~ ~-rr.--NNCMCM~'d'tntCiCpCpI~00o0oi6i N 0 Orrd'r'ONOOCflOOMNNI~ONO ° OMNOrOCOMrOrOCflMM00Nl~d' N N~ COt~~OM~-~~rNrC4~CflNOI~CON N E Nao~OI~M~LO~N~-OOr-M~riao(V~ t- OM MM~~MI~MON~Cfl000NetCflGOTM 4? v rrrTrNNNNNMC0 ~ ~ N O O ~apf~OrM~OpON~c000ONd`(fl0000 C +•'000MNNrOO01001~Cfl~M~MNrr 'O N ~ O O CO O ~ O I.f) O ~ O ~ d1 'd~ O ~ W `~ O ~ ~ c V L~ MO~OOr~Nt`MM~OS~OC0~ti~. LJ.I c 4? M~ O~ f~ Gfl Cfl L~ ~~~ M M N N N r r 0 0 •«+ ~ COONMd^a0N(flO~CON(OO~QON(0OO' V ~ - r r .= r r N CV M M M ~ ~ ~ O Kj CO GO I~ ~ `' m O N Z ', 0 ~ ~~ O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 00 00 NOOOOOOOd~OOO OO0)OT X ~ O OIL st~~d~d~ ~~'~t~~~d~ ~~td~~d' H ~ w O CO O O O ~ ~ ~ O ~ O tO ~ ~ to to to O M ~ OO MNd'NOOOO)070001 OOOOOO~ .- r r r M M M M M M M M M M M M M M O Z ~ ~ O W O~ M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~ ~~ ".•' to l~ 0 0 ~ N Ln 00 ~ CO ~ y ~ ~ ~COtnCO ~ •Xm NNNN W ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ N ~~et~~d~d•~~~t~~st~~d"~t~oD N Z ~ Ln to l,n 6(~ Ln I,n t1~ to In In Ln In Ln Ln ~ Lf~ Lf~ In 40 J O OOO0)OOd'1OOOOOOOOOOO•- -~ M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M r _ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L ~ L O c N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N i~ X..r OOOOOp)OOOOOOOOOOOO tfl f0 O ~ ~ d' ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ d' ~ ~ d' ~ ~ st ~ eh ~ 00 H O ~ ~ to LL7 ~ tt') ~ ~ O ~ lf) Ln ~ I.n ~ ~ ~ LQ 00 N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r N M M M M M M M M CO M M M M M M M M M ~- O V ti ~ c 41 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Cfl CO Cfl Cfl CO CO (fl CO CO ~O CO CO CO CO CO CO CO Cfl T T T T T \"~ r r r T T T r l~ T T T r K _ ~y~ ~y~ M M 3 N M 00 00 00 OO 00 00 00 00 CO 00 00 00 M M M M QO ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ~ U U M d' ~ (fl t~ 00 O O •- N M ~ ~ (O f~ 00 O O ~- ~ 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O T r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 } r r r r r r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N (O ~ ~ O ~ ~~rn N ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ N OD .- ~ N U C O a> ~ U r ~ 'C C d0 ~ N d. ~ ~ ~ ~ U M M _ ~ .-. ~ ~ r r N ~ O ~ U ~ ~ N X N ~ N ~ ~p U e II ~ O ~ ~ Rf ~_ ~ d 'd' ~~} `~ ~~S ~ O } d ~ m` U Y c~ ~Q ~~ No u; awrn ~ a~ o c ~ U W~} `~ a a~ O~ °: ~~ Q ~ ~J ~a ~ ~ (6 (`6 .C d ~--- ~ N L T a~ X d m Q ~ Q O Li N~ J ~ ~ ~ ~~~pp o ~ o ~ a~'i (n C p O, U_ W H~ J U O Q U I Z li IL fA I- Q oO U ~ ~NM~InGD f~ U c o: `o U a N c~6 Q N d rn rn O tY a M W Q ~.. m v ~ ...0.-OM 00000000000 00000 C N O O ~ 0 to ~ ~ ~ Ln ~ ~ I.f) Ln Ln Ln t!) ~ Lt) In ~ N O tQ ~~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r C v N~ to 00 M N CV N CV N CV N CV N CV N N N N CV N W C+~'o0 tnN00000OOd000o0000000OD000000000000 v ~ ~M ~~toCfl(OCOCflCOCOCflCOCflCOCOCfltoCOCflCfl .`~ m N OMCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO d' ~ ° y N~ I~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0~ ~ O N ~ M~oO~- 0 ~ p ~"~ r r r N ~O .~ V C C ~ O t0 M 0 Cfl CO ~O Cfl Cfl t0 Cfl Cfl Cfl CO Cfl CO t0 GO CO Cfl ~ +' O N~1~0000000000000000 'p p y 0 O O O r' r r r r r r' r r r r r r r r r ~ V L~ N~ O M M 07 M C`7 M M C7 M M C7 C7 M C7 M M W C ,~ O ~} O In r ~- r r r r r r r r r r r r r r +~ ~ CM~d'tn(O~Otfl(D(O(O(O(O(O(D(O(OCfl(fl(O(O ~? CC - y m Z D "-' ~ N NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO X ~ N OOOO `' H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M L Z ~ ~ W M M M M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~ C t/J I~ ~ ti ~ N U N CO CO CO CO ~ M C (~ ~a n i-. n r. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 N ~ ~ ~ ~ "~ N N N N ~ ~~ N CO CO CO (O ~ ~" ~ 0000 N Q Z T T r r a ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'd' ~ d' ~ Q p O O O O O p V V NNNN ~ F - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ C o 0 0 0 a~ N E °» ~°r~ ~ o O p~ u N N N N O C r ~ I~ I~ ~~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ti tin ti ~ NNNN L X ~, (0 OO 00 00 00 Q~ r r r r U U M ~~(01~0000 rNM~O(OI~0000r ~ 00000000000000000~-r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 } r ~- ~- r r r ~- N N N N N N N N N N N N N C O U_ "O N .` 7 N L O a C c 0 U O ~_ M C (6 .` N_ O O U c N N n U N ~_ ~ ~ 0 N_ o ~ °D M_ ~ ~~ r N ~ N O ~ w ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~u ~ d' c ~~ yarn ~• p C ~ c } (/~ U U d ~ Q ZO w 3 d ~~s !- c` ~ ~ ~ W X N~` 44 ~ ~ w ~ ~ L C (~ X L d~ U ~ •- t (n - O O ... QU~ZO~ ~NM~,~ U C Q O U_ 0.. .fl N fCf a d 0 0 O a v w C7 Q n. N Q a ~ ~. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ N C U ~ W C ~: .r ~ C U_ ~ ~ L m ... N 0 o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N ~ M ~ V ~ C ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C ..~ N ~ U ~ W c ~ ~ C ~? c0 N m Z *- 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O X ~ ~ Fes- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v Z ~ c W 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ''^^ W ~~ V/ 0 ~a~ 0000000000000000000 x ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v a~ L X N ~ ~ (~ ~ ~Q U U M d' ~ CO I~ 00 O O ~ N c~ d' ~ CO I~ M O O r X 0 0 07 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~- r ~ O O O W O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 } .- r ~ r ~ r r N N N N N N N N N N N N ti c o. o` U .n a .o a~ L Q. LL rn rn O n. w C7 Q n. O~ M T~~ 00 N M~ M O I~ ~ (~ M CO 00 00 O M N I~ O M O O C +'OMI~~~OM~t'~OO~OM~'dOrM~MOrNMOOCO 'a N ~~NMM~~N~OrMM ~Ntt)M~d~CflrO6?COrO~O C V LM d'OM~~OCO`~N00Nt000~00GONI~ONI~OMO~MM ~ ~ Co~OONOOOO~IN~(~pCOO~IO~dN'MMNN~r~~~r~NNMM N m Z 0 L ~'NNGOOI~COO00NMNrOON00O00d'O~NOr00 +~+ ~ CO 00 r 00 O N O O M r N ti Cfl 00 I.[) I~ N M~~ r T Cfl I~ O to ~~} N M O O r M~ ~ d? N~ M N CO r CO N 00 et r O ~~ GO O~ ~ ~ O ~ M ~ DO O'1 O r N M ~ CO I~ O) O N M ~ Cfl 00 O ~ M ~ ~- ~ N ..r N rNMMM'~~'d'~d'~d'~t~~~~~tnCOCflCOCOd'NCO Z ~ ~ t r W O O (O 1~ .- 00 00 N O N O T O M~ N~ •- M~ CO CO ~- ~ r O X... C M~O~O~COtflI~Od'O~COI~O~OMM OtprO N CO r t0 r CO N I~ M O~ r 00 ~ T 00 CO M r 0 00 00 M I M 0 ~ I- ~ ~ ~ rd'to~OCflI~I~a000OO)OOrNNM~d'~COf~I~ CO ~ r r- r r T .- T T r r r N N N N N N N N N N N N ~ ~ `~ O a~~ d' N CO o0 O O o0 00 op O~ r N c0 ~ O r 0~ O N co r~ 0 OOMtiMTrMf~~NMCOrOOMM~MM Or(p 0 M X~. ~ C N~ ~- i~ ~ T' M~ N O M CO d~ M r r O O~ O O ~- N~ ~ ~ N f- ~ ~ r N N M ~ d' ~ (O f~ I~ GO ~ O r N M M d' ~ 1~ 00 ~ st NMMMMMMMMMMr M '. ~ N N •-NNNNNNNNNNN ~~ L N ~ ~ V d M ~ ~ (~ I~ MOO ~- N M d' ~ CO I~ M O O r N M ~ ~ O ~ M ~OOOOOO W 0000000000-rrT~-rrrr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 } r r r r r T r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 N 0 M ~ p~ O ~~ N .__ ..~ M ~ o ~ Z C U ~ O v ~ ~ y m ~ ~:aY ~ U ~ ~ fn ~ p c Q U J N •- N M U C Q O U 7 d a N (6 Q N a d' rn rn O a W C7 a a Q W Q F- U W 0., H Z W a 0 w w 0 W J W LL U CA r M r~ M O M~ LO CO O~ O N~~ 0 0 r 0 M~~ Q' ~~ ~ C +.+ O CA M r M O r M ti O r N CA ~ N I~ M~ M~ M~~~~~ ~ 'p N ~ ~ ~ ~'Nd~01~MOO0tnNN~M~rMOMOOOW W W W W p ~ 0 00 (O 1~ ~ V ~ O ~ W v L W ~ ~ ( aO ( 1 ( OO M N ~- N ~ OO M I r ~ O r r N N ~ r ~ M O O O ~ C d ' ~ ~ O ~ o ( ~ p O ~ ~ ~ O f" L O _ ~ _ ~~~~(flI~00000~~NNMM~'~d' y m 0 Z r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ ~•+ N 0 0 ANNCflOI~0000ONMNr00NOO00O~00N0r Cfl aO r 00 O N 0 O M r N~ CO aD ~~ N M I~ e r r CO f~ O 0 Cfl X ~ N ~' NMOO~-M~~ON~aoNCOrCONao~rOti~aoO? 0 ~~ ~~ M ~Mf~0O~OrNM~(OI~~ONM~CO0OO~M~r~ rNMMMd'~~"~~~t~~'I.!)~ln~lntQtO(000Cfl~N aD M ~ ~ ~O ~ Z V ~ C O w ~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X ~ ~ ~ ~o ¢ aZ ~~ ~ ~ -w s- O CO CflCOC0000000000000000000000 Cfl '•' O X ~ 0 O 0 NNNN 0 0 0 0 O r C M W ~ C ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T Q .-. O ~ M tC) ~~~ 0 U ~ v v Z ~ c - W L- O d' ~ 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O~ 0 0 0 0 ~ ""'' O O OONO00OO0000000000 ~ ~ ~ x ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ v_d~ W 0 ~ ~ ~ v~v_~ ~ ~ ~ v_d W ZH En d' oicoorn~.r~~n~.n~n~n~ci~ui~~n~n~~n~ J ~ ~~ t M 0 MN~tN00000000000000 r r r r M M M M M M M M M M M M M M . V Z C C w L O I~~~~tn~M 000000000000000000 (fl , ~. ca C 0 0 0 0NMCflM00O rMMLn~I~M r ~ ~ ~~ O (0~0~0(fl~(fl ~~~ M J ~ NQ O NNOO Z ~ -O ~ r r w _~ M~ M ~ ~' tp (O 1~ M 0 O r N M ~ ~ Cfl I~ 00 0 O r N M ~ ~ CO I~ M ~ ~ Cfl 0 CA 0 0 Cn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r r r r r r r r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N } r r r r r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N U C Q. O U a a Q a 0 0 O a HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 18 Agenda March 21, 1994 Issue Statement: Public hearing and authorization of the sale of Richfield Rediscovered property at 6636 Sheridan Avenue to Marlin Grant Homes, Inc. Background• The HRA purchased the property at 6636 Sheridan Avenue on March 24, 1993 from Richard Cash. In June 1993, the existing house was demolished and the garage retained.. Since then, the lot has been vacant and staff has marketed the property as part of Richfield Rediscovered. Marlin Grant Homes, Inc. of Bloomington has secured a purchase agreement from a buyer for the Iot and has signed a development agreement. The sale price of the lot will be $31,000. The proposed. home is valued at approximately $130,000. The development agreement form remains essentially unchanged from those used previously for Richfield Rediscovered. The agreement requires Marlin Grant Homes, Inc. to: • Pay for the site at the stated lot value upon completion of the home; • Provide financial security during the construction period with a letter of credit, or similar security, that has a value of 531,000 (the security amount is the difference between the lot price and the total HRA investment in the property or the lot price, which ever is greater); • Provide a completed property (home and land combined) with a value greater than $120,000. • Complete the home and garage retrofitting and pay for the lot by August 31, 1994. Marlin Grant Homes, Inc. has already completed several Richfield Rediscovered homes. The projects have been promptly developed, buyers have been pleased with the product and all of the HRA's financial requirements have been met. Recommended Motion: Following the public hearing, adopt the attached resolution which authorizes the Chair and Executive Director to execute an agreement to sell bb36 Sheridan Avenue to Marlin Grant Homes, Inc. for the development of a new single family home. Basis of Recommendation: 1. A check of references indicates Marlin .Grant Homes, Inc. is an experienced, capable, financially secure builder. 2. The HRA has acquired the lot at 6636 Sheridan Avenue for redevelopment. 3. A development agreement has been negotiated and is in conformance with program guidelines.. 4. Notice of public hearing was published in the Sun-Current on March 9, 1994. Alternative Recommendation: Do not proceed with the development agreement with Marlin Grant Homes, Inc. and direct staff to find another buyer. Discussion/Decision Mode: Closing is expected to occur in April with"'construction starting shortly thereafter. ly submitted, James Prosser Exec ve Director JDP:ds HRA RESOLUTION NO. THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD., MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6636 SHERIDAN AVENUE TO MARLIN GRANT HOMES, INC., IN ACCORDANCE WITH A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (HRA) desires to develop certain real property pursuant to and in furtherance of the New Home Program, said real property being described as follows: Lot 12, Block 4 Tingdale Bros. Lincoln Hills Addn, Hennepin County. WHEREAS, the HRA is authorized to sell real property within its area of operation after .public hearing; and WHEREAS, a developer Marlin Grant Homes, Inc. of Bloomington has been identified as the purchaser of the described property, in accordance with a development agreement; and WHEREAS, the public hearing has been held after proper public notice; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority: 1. A public hearing has been held and 6636 Sheridan Avenue is authorized to be sold to Marlin Grant Homes, Inc. in accordance with a development agreement with the HRA. 2. The purchase price is $31,000. 3. The Chairperson and Executive Director are authorized to , execute the Development Agreement and other agreements as required to effectuate the sale to Marlin Grant Homes, Inc. Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 21st day of March 1994. Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson ATTEST: Vern Luettinger, Secretary o ~ ; r ~. r Y O V . ~ '~ s t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~, y ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ y 4 -- I II i ~ I 3 I ~~ ~ I ~ ~ I 'u~ o d~ ~ li ~~, i 1 d~ s _ I ~~ - ~ 7 :: ~ ° ?~ ~ ~~• ~.i. ~N s II ~~ i -~ I o o D I I ~~~ ~1 ! - ~~~ ~ ~~ < 2 ~ ..- ;~ d; = ~ q I ~ ~ - ~ ' ~0 ~ ~ y N N b t 2 d1 ~ t I 11 II ~~ ~;i~ ~ I sr~I~~Q r~~ ~~ -- - _ _~ .. ~..1 . ~~ J) 2 ~ ~ ~~g ~~~ ~i ~) 3 S ~.~~ ~ l ~ ~ --''11 a 1l~ ~- ~~ ,~ Z~~ ~~r s ~. ~~~ . . ~~o z,~ ~~~ , ~ 4 .d- L p ~ ~ ~ 3_ i ~I ~_~ 1 ~. ~~ ~ ~ ~p ~ ~ J l ~ 1 , '~ 67 -~ .a s ,~* ~ ~ . _ _ _ - ._,- _~ x 3 ` ~ ~ III; i~ `'L~~.: m y ` i . ~. (~~ ~ ~~ y 1 1----~-~ ~o ~ : ,~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J 1 I t ~ I ..,5~ ~: s ~ Il z '~~ ~ i ~ g ~ ' I ".,, i i ~~ .. I I V` ~ ~ 4 { T ~ 'ice y ~ o ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~~ ;Y ~ s . I ~ ,~ 1 s , I ~ ~ ~I ~ ` d~. ~ 3 1` f 11~ ~ ~ ~~ `1~ -~ ~~ i~l - -- .~* ~, ~ ,, ;~ _~, ~~~ ~I ~_~~, ,r ~ _ ~ , ---- , -~1 ~ ~. -.~ '' ~~ I ~ y ~~ I '9 ~ 1~} J ~ 3 I 1" ~ 7 I 1~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ f ~~ ~ - ~. _ - , ,Q ~~ ~~~ s ~~ , Z l~ Z f~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ 1~ ~s 4 ~ ~. -~ ~` ( .. -- ~ 'D s - ~~' ~~ ~ ~ ~~ i ~ , > . aCy. y'8 ~' dti1 °1"~~ a1. s ~~ .'tl.i "~y ~~ ~ ~ti~~ ~ ~ ~ s ? t ~ 'r 4~ ~ ~ ~~`~ a ~ w ~ c~ J; ~ _a !! ~ x ~ ~~ ~~ , ~~~ ~ ~. 'S ~ ~ ~~ x ' -~, " s .~ oV d1 ~~. ~ ~ k ~~ as ~ ~ a ~ '~ ~! ($ ,i A~ `il ~ ~ .. '~ ~ ~ ' O V _ L 1, 1 ~ fy t i-~ ,'1 _ ~ f '. 4 ~~ ~: s..s s Si ~~~ ~ till ~ ;, $ - ~ r 1 1, a. y i` ~ , ~~ ~`~1 ~ ~> - ~h '? 3 ~~~rJi ;4 ~ ' ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ ~'~'` ~yi~L P ss d ~ j .,,,~s,~ ~ ~ ~,{ 1 $ ~~ ~ ,~,SS*'Nr z ~,: 4x~ ~~' Z S _, j i ~~ ~ ~~Z~jb~~ ~ ~ d'!y yy4t ..t~l'f'~' '• p-,~rl o-,Z t ~n .ta ~~ i ~ ~; 4 ' . HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 77 Agenda March 21, 1994 Issue Statement• Public hearing and sale of 6501 15th Avenue (continued from February 22, 1994). Background• The construction project at 6501 15th Avenue .was authorized by the HRA in March 1992, as a cooperative project with Hennepin Technical College (HTC). The project is completed and a sale is anticipated by early April. The selected purchaser is a four member, income qualified family currently renting a home in Richfield. They responded to a Sun- Current advertisement. They meet the requirements stated in Attachment A. HRA authorization following a public hearing would permit final processing. The home is being sold for $89,500. The purchasers-are making a down payment of $4,500. They have applied for an MHFA mortgage in the amount of $80,000. The difference between the initial purchase price and the estimated market value, $5,000, is provided by the HRA as a second mortgage. Project costs are covered by the buyers' down payment and first mortgage. The second mortgage accomplishes the following: 1. Makes the initial purchase price affordable. 2. Prevents a speculative purchase in which the buyer might benefit from selling the home quickly. The HRA will pay up to 2-1/2 points for mortgage discounting (approximately $2000) and the cost of title insurance (approximately $200) at closing. After closing, the HTC contract of $64,936 will be paid. These costs have been anticipated in the 1993 budget and will be paid by the proceeds of sale. If, during final processing, the family is found ineligible by the lender, the purchase agreement is void and the earnest money will be released back to them. At this time however, the lender has qualified the purchaser through the preliminary processing. Recommended Motion: It is recommended that following the public hearing, the HRA adopt the attached resolution which authorizes the disposition of the HRA owned property at 6501 15th Avenue. Basis of Recommendation: 1. A qualified family has been identified as a purchaser and meets program requirements. 2. A purchase agreement cannot be processed further by the lender without HRA authorization of sale. 3. A public hearing notice has been published in the Sun-Current which allows the HRA to consider the sale at the March meeting. 4. The Planning Commission has determined that the sale for residential purposes is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Alternative Recommendation: Do not adopt the resolution. However, this would cause a delay in the-sale of the property, be very confusing to the buyer., and would increase HRA holding costs. Discussion/Decision Mode: Authorization of the sale is required at the March 21 meeting so that the buyers can finalize mortgage financing for a prompt closing. Respec ly submitted, James Prosser Execut' a Director JDP:ds RESOLUTION NO. THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING .SALE OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6501 15TH AVENUE WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), owns certain real property located at 6501 15th Avenue, legally described as: Lot 24, Block 5, Nokomis Gardens Rearrangement of Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Girard Parkview Addition; and WHEREAS, the HRA acquired the property so that the South Hennepin Technical College (HTC) could construct a new single family home at 6501 15th Avenue, to be sold by the HRA to a moderate income family; and WHEREAS, the family has been identified as qualified purchasers for 6501 15th Avenue; and WHEREAS, the conditions of sale include a total sales price of $89,500; a first mortgage of $80,000 payable to the lender, a lien of $5.,000 payable to the HRA, and $4,500 downpayment, and WHEREAS, the sale of 6501 15th Avenue may be authorized by the HRA following a public hearing which considers the disposition of the property; and WHEREAS, that hearing has been held following proper publication of notice. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota that the HRA Chairperson and Executive Director are authorized to execute the purchase agreement and other required documents so that the disposition of HRA owned property at 6501 15th Avenue occurs as presented herein. Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 21st day of March 1994. Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson ATTEST: Vern Luettinger, Secretary ATTACHMENT A 6501 15TH AVENUE NEW HOME PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR HOME BUYERS - Be a 3-6 member family (a family is defined as persons related by blood, marriage or operation of law). - Be a first time home buyer (or have not owned in 3 years). - Have the following maximum annual income depending upon family size: Family Size Maximum Income 3 $35,700 4 $39,700 5 $42,850 6 $46,050 This income is 80$ of the metropolitan area median income, an accepted CDBG program income level. - Have the ability to make monthly payments on an $80,000 mortgage, pay $4,500 down, and pay required closing costs. - Agree to be subject to a lien held by the HRA for the difference between the initial sales price and the actual value. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No.16 Agenda March 21, 1994 Issue Statement: Public hearing and sale of 6538 Bloomington Avenue (continued from February 22, 1994). Background: The construction project at 6538 Bloomington Avenue was authorized by the HRA in August 1992, as a cooperative project with Hennepin Technical College (HTC).. The project is completed and a sale is anticipated at the end of March 1994. The selected purchaser is a three member family. HRA authorization following a public hearing would permit final processing. The home is being sold for $105,000. This site was purchased under the Richfield Rediscovered Program in October 1990. No interest was expressed in the site, although it was marketed on a continuing basis. In August 1992, the HRA authorized the execution of a contract with HTC to build a 1-1/2 story home with several features found in other Richfield Rediscovered homes, such as a double garage, air conditioning, two bathrooms and a fireplace. Since CDBG funds were not utilized for the project, there were no first-time buyer or income requirements. The purchasers are making a down payment of $5,250. They have applied for an FHA mortgage in the amount of $99,750. Project costs are covered by the buyer's down payment and first mortgage. The HRA will not be paying mortgage discount points, but will pay the cost of title insurance (approximately $200) at closing. After closing, the HTC contract of $85,949 will be paid. These costs have been anticipated in the 1993 budget and will be paid by .the proceeds of sale. If during final processing the purchasers are found ineligible by the lender, the purchase agreement is void and earnest money will be released. This is unlikely, however, since the buyers were pre-qualified. The HRA had an opportunity to inspect the completed work during an open house that was held October 24, 1993. Recommended Motion: It is recommended that following the public hearing, the HRA adopt the attached resolution which authorizes the disposition of the HRA owned property at 6538 Bloomington Avenue. Basis of Recommendation: 1. A qualified family has been identified as a purchaser. 2. A purchase agreement cannot be processed further by the lender without HRA author"nation of sale. 3. A public hearing notice has been published in the Sun-Current which allows the HRA to consider the .sale at the March meeting. 4. The Planning Commission has determined that the sale for residential purposes is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Alternative Recommendation: Do not adopt the resolution. However, this would cause a delay in the sale of the property, be very confusing to the buyer, and would increase HRA holding costs. Discussion/Decision Mode: Authorization of the sale is required at the March 21 meeting so that the buyers can finalize mortgage financing for a prompt closing. Resp t ly submitted, Jame Prosser Exec ve Director JDP:ds RESOLUTION NO. THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE-CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6538 BLOOMINGTON AVENUE. WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), owns certain real property located at 6538 Bloomington Avenue, legally described as Lot 8, Block 5, Nokomis Gardens Rearrangement of Blocks 1,2,3,4,5 Girard Parkview Addition; and WHEREAS, the HRA acquired the property so that the. South Hennepin Technical College (HTC) could construct a new single family home at 6538 Bloomington Avenue, to be sold by the HRA to a lender-qualified purchaser; and WHEREAS, a family has been identified as qualified purchasers for 6538 Bloomington Avenue; and WHEREAS, the conditions of sale include a total sales price of $105,000; a first mortgage of $99,750 payable to the lender and $5,250 downpayment; and WHEREAS, the sale of 6538 Bloomington .Avenue may be authorized by the HRA following a public hearing which considers the disposition of the property; and WHEREAS, that hearing has been held following proper publication of notice. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota that the HRA Chairperson and Executive Director are authorized to execute the purchase agreement and other required documents so that the disposition of HRA owned property at 6538 Bloomington Avenue occurs as presented herein. Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 21st day of March, 1994. Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson ATTEST: Vern Luettinger, Secretary HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 15 Agenda March 21, 1994 Issue Statement• Review of a proposed contract for private redevelopment between the HRA and CSM Corporation. Background• The context within which redevelopment activities proceed is established by a contract. Approval of the contract is usually one of the first items in the redevelopment process which establishes the responsibilities of the parties involved.. The major points of the contract with CSM Corporation delineate the responsibilities of CSM with respect to site assembly, construction of improvements and finance. It also delineates the HRA's responsibilities with regard to site assembly and the providing of tax increment financing assistance to CSM. Performance dates are associated with some of these activities. A working draft of-the contract will be presented by legal counsel to the HRA at their meeting on March 21, 1994. Recommended Motion: Review the proposed draft contract with legal counsel and staff. Basis of Recommendations: 1. Discussion at the HRA meeting on March 21, 1994 of the proposed contract will make it possible for modifications to be made. 2. The contract sets the context within which the redevelopment concept would become a realty. 3. Information provided by CSM indicates they are an experienced developer. See the attached materials. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Delay the discussion. 2. Reject the discussion. Discussion/Decision Mode: Review on March 2I, I994 will facilitate action at the concurrent City Council/HRA meeting on March 28, 1994. Respect ully submitted, Jam s Prosser Exe ive Director JDP:ds 03~'li%94 15:58 FAl 612 646 2404 CS3i CORPORATIO\ ~• ~ f~1002i006 ---~•-~r -~-..r~. ------: --~~ . ~~C,~M corporation - - ~ ~ . € _ ~~~ 2567 Territorial Road • St. Paul, MN 55774.1500 • fi7tisa8.1777 • FAX 612/bab-2a0a March 11, 1994 Mr. James D. Prosser City Manager City of Richfield b7Qp Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423-2599 Ite: Shops at Lyndale h'WC I-494 and Lyndale Avenue Rear Mr. Prosser: Further to oux meeting on Tuesday, March 8, enclosed please find a Real Estate Resume for CSM Corporation, and its president and sole 'shareholder, Gary Holmes. As indicated on the attached summary of acquisitions and development, CSM has been extremely active over the last several years in the development and acquisition of industrial, multi family residential and retail projects. The total cost of new construction of retail and industrial properties since 1991 has exceed $18 million, and has bean funded internally through our own cash reserves and lines of credit. Acquisitions. of industrial and retailproperty over the last several years has totailsd in excess of S 10 million, which has also bean funded internally. The total value. of our apartment developments over the last several years has exceeded $95 million. CSM was awarded the 1993 NAIOP Industrial Building of the Year awazd for Gateway Business Center, and 1993 Minnesota Shopping Center Association Starr awazds for Sportmart Plaza ShoppinS Center and Bonavcnture Shopping Center. • We are happy to provide a letter of reference from our Bank if necessary. Please do not hesitate to.contact me should you require such a letter., Gur current line of credit is sufficient to fund the initial acquisition of the Phase I land utilizing the "quick take" process, and Chas we are not anticipating the need for acquisition or construction financing for Phase I. . oaiili9l . 15:59. ~ FaT Sit 848 2401 CS'.4i CORPORATIO'~ ~ ~ . ~ lmooa~oo~ should you have any questions regarding. the enclosed material, plQase do rot hesitatt to contact me- incerely ! . `~~~~ Murray Ro cc: By on sauce Dave 'ours, ~~ aberg J. Wa ace Palmborg garland 09i11i94 15:59 F~,T 612 646 2404 CS:H coxYUx.~itu~ . C$M COItlORATION C014QRCIAL ACQU2lITIbNS AND Dtygt,Op1~NTS 2991 TIDlOUIlB 1994 Proieet ~ ixe ocation Tyb! All Arae~ican Mini Storage 290 Vnitn Dsnvsr, CO Mini Storage 8lst Buy Plaza Shopping 61,350 SF 6t. Cloud, MN Retail Center Best Suy Plnsa Shopping 11,600 SF Grand Forks, ND Retail Center Phase II Bloekbu*tor Video 5,500 SF St. Paul, MN Retail (Lexington Avenue} ElockbuBtQr VidQO 6,400 SF Minneapolis., MN R4tai2 (Lake Street} . Banaventuro Shopping Center 83,798 SF MinnQtanka, MN Rstail .Eoone Avenue 8uainssa Cantor 160,000 SF Brooklyn Park, I~IIJ Office/ Warehouse Bryant Street Warehouse 339,D40 SF DQnVer, CO Warehouse/ Distribution Contury Hills Shopping Center 54,165 SF White Boar Laka, Retail HN Country Inn 5,664 SF Woodbury, MN Hotel 160 units Gatoway Bu.inetas Canter 48,000 SF Roaevilly, MN Showroom Park Glen Business Canter 83,000 SF St. Louis Park, Offios/ ~ Warehouse Patton suildinq 70,700 Sf' Roseville, adN Offios/ .Warehouse Skylia~ Business Center 140,000 SF Minneapolis, MN Offiesj W3tehouHe _ Spertmarti plaza Shopping Ctr. 66,DD0 EF Kianetonka, MN Retail Westgate Busin~se Csntor 77,000 SF St. Paul, !Q1 Office/ Phase 2 Warehouse Westgate Husinesa CaAt~r 66,000 SP' 6t. Patti, MN Office/ Phase II Showroom Westgate aueiness Canter 103,000 BF St. Pnul, ~ OtfiaQ/ Phase III Warehouse comgroj ~03i11:B4 16:00 FAQ 812 848 2x04 CSM •CORPORATIO'~ CS!! COItPORATIOt7 • ARaInExTi]-L sous=xa DEVELOP~1ZTs 1491 T1iROUa1i 1994 ~ of Project nit® Loca~iQn 8ap^ Lake Hilla Townhomee 284 Plymouth, MI3 Creakaide Apart:aants 17Z Portland, QR P'ountaitis Apartmanti 166 Das Moiaas, ZA* Meadows Tewnl~omae 166 Duluth, MN* Mequon Trail Townhouse Z46 Mequon, WI Park P1dce J-partmant• 7Z Fargo, ND* Rivergra¢na Apartments 208 Portland, OR Rivargr~ens phaea II 12fi Portland, OR 5uneet Place Apartmeate 172 Baavertoa, OR* * under conptruction (~005i008 resproj -09/ii/94 16:00 FA% 612 646 .204 _ CSUi CORPORATIO\ ~w,~~~, V,.V .x~AL ~srA r~ ~sv~t.~ For csM co~o~rrol~r G~iRY S. HOLMES CSM Corporation, formerly Colonial Services & Management, Inc., was Incorporated on December 3, 1976 under the laws of the Stale of Minnesota. It is engaged in the acquisition, development, leasing, financing, property management, and sale of real estate in Colorado, Illinois, lowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri,. North and South Dakota, Wisconsin, Wyoming, and Oregon. CSM Corporation is a licensed real estate broker in the Stare of Minnesota. The CSM group of companies works with both national tenants and local retailers. CSM. has developed several retail centers for Best Buy Scores, the nations' second largest publicty held consumer electronics and major appliance specialty retailer, and has just completed its severah Best Buy in Saini Cloud, Minnesota, Other narional retailers with whom CSM has completed transactions include Chi Chi's, Perkins Restauraru, JoAnn Fabrics, Filene's Basement, Sporrrnart, Coldwell Banker, Blockbuster Video, Border's Books, and ITT/7horpe Finance. In 1990, Mr. Holmes acquired ZS% interest in Century Bank, afull-service banking facility located in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, and also serves as a director for the bank. Mr. Haln:es is a 3S ~ shareholder and a member of the Board of 1irectors of Norcr~t Companies, Inc., Saint Paul, Minnesota, a manufacturer of kitchen cabinets which has sales in excess .of $44 million. Mr. Holmes is also active as a member of the Board of Directors of the Minneapolis Heart Insritute and a member of the S~iecial ddvisory Board on Real Estate Mtuters of Abbott Northwestern Hospital fn Minneapolis, Minnesota. He is a former shareholder and member of the Board of Directors of the Riverside Community Bank in Minneapolis, Minnesota. • HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 14 Agenda March 21, 1994 Issue Statement• Preliminary time and events schedule for the proposed CSM project . Backcrround Attached are two schedules. One schedule is organized on a calendar basis, the other .schedule is organized according to major activities. The events in both schedules are the same. Recommended Motion: Review and discuss the schedules and their timing with staff. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The schedules identify the need for special meetings. 2. If the schedule is maintained it appears possible to meet the needs of CSM for a July Phase I start followed by a November opening of Phase I. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Delay discussion of the schedule. 2. Suggest modifications to the schedule. Discussion/Decision Mode: The schedules have a significant impact on the processing of the CSM proposal and Phase I construction start and opening. Respec f lly submitted, James Prosser Execu ve Director JDP:ds Preliminary Time and Events CSM Proposal ILN By Date CSM submit concept proposal statement PC-2 plan and Final Development Plan Phase 1 and Phase 2. 3/16 Development Agreement to HRA for review. 3/21 Redevelopment Plan Modification to HRA for review 3/21 Condemnation Shops at Lyndale Phase 1 quick take HRA for review. 3/21 Fiscal disparities contribution shift and report/analysis of impacts, process etc. to HRA for review. 3/21 Review request by HRA that Planning Commission find sale of property in conformance with Comprehensive Plan. (Incorporated into HRA resolution approving Modification No. 4.) 3/21 Notify School District and County of City Council public hearing on Redevelopment Plan Modification scheduled for 4/25 (30 days between notice and hearing required). 3/22 Notice to Ferber regarding 4/12 Planning Commission hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 3/22 Schedule with Planning Commission a special meeting for 4/12 regarding Rezoning/Conditional Use Permit/Final Development Plan. 3/22 ARC meeting with presentation of concept proposal statement PC-2 Plan and Final Development Plan by CSM and review by technical staff. 3/23 By Date Page 2 Development Agreement to HRA for action. 3/28 Redevelopment Plan Modification to HRA for approval subject to Planning Commission findings 3/28 Condemnation Shops at Lyndale Phase 1 quick take for HRA for action. 3/28 Fiscal disparities contribution shift and report/analysis of impacts, process etc. to HRA for action. (Incorporated into HRA resolution approving Modification No. 4.) 3/28 Request by HRA that Planning Commission find sale of property in conformance with Comprehensive Pian 3/2g City Council request Planning Commission to schedule public hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 3/28 Fiscal disparities contribution shift report/analysis of impacts, process for City Council action. 3/2g City Council initiate request for rezoning for Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas and give first reading to ordinance. 3/28 City Council set special meeting for 4/18 for hearing on rezone for Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas and second reading of ordinance. 3/28 Notice to Ferber regarding 4/25 City Council hearing on Redevelopment Plan Modification. 3/29 Notice to Ferber regarding HRA hearing on sale of property; portion of Cloverleaf site for Church and Phase 1. 3/29 Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council public hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 3/29 By Date 2 Page 3 Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on Conditional Use Permit/Final Development Plan for Phase 1 and Phase 2. 3/29 Notice to Ferber regarding City Council hearing on rezoning for Phase 1 and Phase 2 and second reading. 3/29 Mail notice regarding 4/12 Planning Commission action on rezoning. 3/29 Mail notice. regarding 4/I2 Planning Commission action on Conditional Use Permit/Final Development Plan 3/29 Notice of Planning Commission hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment published. 3/30 Commence condemnation and quick take, Phase 1. 4/1 Notice regarding City Council hearing on Redevelopment Plan modification published. 4/6 Publication of hearing notice on HRA sale of property; portion of Cloverleaf site and Phase 1. 4/6 Notice of City Council hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment published. 4/6 Notice published City Council hearing on Conditional Use Permit/ Final Development Plan. 4/6 Notice published City Council hearing on Rezoning. 4/6 Mail notice regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on Conditional Use Permit/Final Development Plan. 4/6 By ~~te 3 Page 4 Planning Commission findings the Redevelopment Plan Modification conforms with Comprehensive Plan; special meeting. Planning Commission finding that sale of property by HRA is in conformance with Comprehensive Plan; special meeting. Public hearing by Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan Amendment; special meeting. Planning Commission action on rezoning Phase 1 and Phase 2; special meeting. Planning Commission action on Conditional Use Permit/Final Development Plan, Phase 1. HRA hearing on sale of property; portion of Cloverleaf site and Phase 1 Public hearing by City Council Comprehensive Plan Amendment; special meeting. City Council public hearing and second reading regarding rezoning; special meeting. City Council public hearing Conditional Use Permit/Final Development Plan special meeting. City Council public hearing Redevelopment Plan Modification. Rezoning published. Rezoning effective. Title and possession through condemnation quick take, Phase 1. By Date 4 4/ 12 4/12 4/12 4/12 4/12 4/18 4/18 4/18 4/18 4/25 4/27 5/27 7/1 Preliminary Time and Events CSM Proposal ILN By Activities Development Agreement Defines roles/responsibilities of HRA/CSM. A significant item is the provision for tax increment "pay as you go" assistance. To HRA for review 3/21 To HRA for action; special meeting 3/28 Condemnation Title to property obtained by court order if negotiations are not successful. Quick take provides, title in about 90 days. Shops at Lyndale Phase 1 Quick take to I3RA for review 3/21 To HRA for action; special meeting 3/28 Shops at Lyndale Phase 2 Condemnation without quick take No Date to HRA for action Commence condemnation and quick take, Phase 1 Title and possession through quick take, Phase 1 Title and possession without quick take, Phase 2 By Activities 1 4/1 7/1 No Date Page 2 Fiscal disuarities contribution shift Special legislation makes it possible for the City to elect to pay the fiscal disparities contribution from outside the district even though the initial choice was to pay from within the district. Report/analysis of impacts, process etc. to HRA for review 3/21 To HRA for action; special meeting 3/28 Report same to City Council for action 3/28 Redeveloament Plan Modification The tent needs to reflect CSM proposal. Currently it reflects the Larson proposal from 1989. Property to be acquired is properly identified however. To HRA for review 3/21 To HRA for approval subject to Planning Commission findings; special meeting 3/28 Notify School District and County of City Council public hearing scheduled for 4/25 (30 days between notice and hearing required). 3/22 Notice to Ferber regarding 4/25 City Council hearing 3/29 Notice regarding City Council hearing published 4/6 Planning Commission findings the modification conforms with Comprehensive Plan; special meeting 4/12 By Activities 2 Page 3 City Council public hearing 4/25 Sale in Conformance with Comprehensive Plan The HRA must sell property only after a public hearing on the sale. Prior to the hearing the Planning Commission is asked to find that the sale/proposed use is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The existing Emerson Church site is designated by the Comprehensive Plan "Institutional" and must be amended to "Freeway Strip". HRA review request that Planning Commission find sale in conformance with Comprehensive Plan. (Incorporated into HRA resolution approving Modification No. 4.) 3/21 To HRA for approval; special meeting 3/28 Planning Commission finding that sale is in conformance; special meeting 4/12 HRA Public. hearing on Sale of Property Public hearing would address sale of a portion of Cloverleaf site for Church and Phase 1. Notice to Ferber regarding HRA hearing 3/29 Publication of hearing notice 4/6 Hearing 4/18 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Amend plan to change existing church site designation from "Institutional" to "Freeway Strip". Notice to Ferber regarding 4/12 Planning Commission hearing 3/22 By Activities 3 Page 4 City Council request Planning Commission to schedule public hearing 3/28 Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council public hearing 3/29 Notice of Planning Commission hearing published 3/30 Public hearing by Planning Commission; special meeting 4/12 Notice of City Council hearing published 4/6 Public hearing by City Council; special meeting 4/18 Rezoning/Conditional Use Permit (CUP)/Final Develoument Plan (FDPI Site is currently zoned C3. FAR not sufficient thus rezone to PC-2. CUP is also required as is approval of FDP. CSM submit concept proposal statement PC-2 plan and FDP Phase 1 and Phase 2. 3/16 Schedule with Planning Commission a special meeting for 4/12 3/22 ARC meeting with presentation of above by CSM and review by technical staff 3/23 City Council initiate request for rezoning for Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas and give first reading to ordinance 3/28 By Activities 4 Page 5 City Council set special meeting for 4/18 for hearing on rezone for Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas and second reading of ordinance. 3/28 Notice to Ferber regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on CUP/FDP for Phase 1 and Phase 2 3/29 Notice to Ferber regarding City Council hearing on rezoning for Phase 1 and Phase 2 and second reading 3/29 Mail notice regarding 4/12 Planning Commission action on rezoning 3/29 Mail notice regarding 4/12 Planning Commission action on CUP/FDP 3/29 Notice published City Council hearing on CUP/FDP 4/6 Notice published City Council hearing on rezoning 4/6 Mail notice regarding 4/18 City Council hearing on CUP/FDP 4/6 Planning Commission action on rezoning Phase 1 and Phase 2; special meeting 4/12 Planning Commission action on CUP/FDP Phase 1; special meeting 4/12 City Council public hearing and second reading regarding of rezoning; special meeting 4/18 City Council public hearing CUP/FDP; special meeting 4/18 Rezoning published 4/27 By Activities 5 Page 6 Rezoning effective 5/27 By Activities HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 13 Agenda .March 21, 1994 Issue Statement• Review of proposed Modification No. 4 to the ILN Redevelopment and Tax Increment Plan. Background: The existing ILN redevelopment and tax increment plan was based on two premises: • the redevelopment project south of 77th Street would have to provide sufficient tax increment to fund substantial portions of the 77th Street project within the ILN area, and • the redevelopment project would be that proposed by The Robert Larsen Partners in 1989. Given these circumstances it was necessary to prepare plan modifications as alternative sources of revenue were found and it is not necessary for the redevelopment project to support 77th Street improvements. And the Larsen proposal was replaced by the CSM proposal. The Modification has two sections; the redevelopment project plan and the tax increment financing district plan, each with their respective. table of contents. The modification is not the plan in its entirety but only the sections of the original plan which have changed. The redevelopment project plan describes the public and private activities to be undertaken and begins on page 4-1. Page 4-3 is the development program map which illustrates the approximate locations of the areas to be developed by "Shops at Lyndale" and the Emerson Avenue Congregational Church. Pages 4-4 through 4-5 contain a description of the proposed private development. Pages 4-6 through 4-10 are a discussion of the public. improvements and identify property purchased (Cloverleaf site) and property to be purchased consistent with previous HRA actions. Also indicated is that CSM would be responsible for acquiring property but the HRA may assist with condemnation if necessary. CSM would also be responsible for relocation. The tax increment financing plan begins on page 4-11. Page 4-12 references topics discussed in the redevelopment project plan as does a portion of the text on page 4-13. Estimated Project Costs are discussed on page 4-13 and illustrated in Appendix A as Sources and Uses. The Sources and Uses information indicates a need for approximately $2.8 million in TIF assistant to provide an acceptable rate of return to the developer. Revenue Sources are discussed on page 4-14. The primary revenue source would be tax increment financing provided on a "pay as you go" basis. Tax increment payments would be made only when tax payments are received. (The CDP office development within the CABA project was. the first '°pay as you go"-tax increment district and was established in 1988.) As noted in another HRA Letter, to be considered on March 21, 1994, the developer has indicated a need for the full tax increment including that portion of the increment which is paid to the fiscal disparities pool. The plan states that such a change may be made. However, the plan also provides for another option which could be utilized, that of a cash payment from the project. It would likely take the form of a land write down. (.This option is also discussed in the above identified HRA letter.) Tax increment cash flows are discussed on pages 4-14 and 4-15 and illustrated in Appendix B. The cash flow shows the projected generation of tax increment. (Again, this projected tax increment is paid only if taxes are paid.) To project cash flows certain assumptions are made. There are six cash flows and each cash flow has two pages; one page is a list of assumptions and the second page is the projected cash flow. The assumptions for each cash flow are the same except with regards to the fiscal disparities election. Thus there are two cash flows for Phase 1, one with the fiscal disparity contribution not coming from the project, page B-4 (preceded on page B-3 by the assumption) and one showing the fiscal disparities contribution coming from the project, page 2-7 (preceded on page B-6 by the assumptions). The organizational format is the same for Phase 2 and the cash flows in which Phase 1 and 2 are combined. Page 4-15 identifies Appendix C as the section which illustrates the impact of this proposed project on taxing jurisdictions. Two impacts are discussed. First, if the project were not built there would be no impact on tax revenue receipts. Secondly, if the project were built without utilizing tax increment the potential increase in tax revenue available to the taxing jurisdictions is illustrated in the table titled "Impact On Tax Rates" and the "Potential Taxes" column on page C-3 (with the fiscal disparity contribution not coming from the project) and on page C-5 (with the fiscal disparity contribution from the project). However, because the site area proposed for "Shops At Lyndale" is already developed, assistance is needed to clear the existing improvements and make the site ready for new construction. A developer cannot charge rents high enough to pay for the construction of a new building and related site improvements as well as purchase and clear the existing improvements. Thus the need for outside assistance. The only practical resource available to the HRA/City is tax increment. Once the agreed upon amount of assistance is provided and the tax increment district ends in 2012, the increment would be shared by all taxing jurisdictions. Recommended Motion: Review and discuss the redevelopment plan modification. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Action on the plan modification should be taken at the concurrent HRA meeting on March 28, 1994. The meeting of March 21, 1994 offers an opportunity to review the Plan. 2. The plan modification has been reviewed by legal counsel and Publicorp representatives and is in conformance with applicable laws and .regulations. 3. The attached motion would be utilized on March 28, 1994. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Delay discussion. 2. Reject the Modification. Discussion/Decision Mode: A review would facilitate timely processing. submitted, D./Prosser i e Director JDP : j s HRA RESOLUTION NO. THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF .RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA APPROVING MODIFICATION TO RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN, CONSISTING OF MODIFICATION N0. 4 TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE INTERSTATE/LYNDALE/NICOLLET REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT; REQUESTING THE RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING THEREON: RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PLANS BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01 The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "HRA") adopted a redevelopment plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") and a tax increment financing plan (the "TIF Plan") for the area of the City generally known as the Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet area (the "Project Area") on October 21, 1985. 1.02 The City Council of the City of Richfield (the "City") held a public hearing on the Redevelopment plan and TIF Plan (collectively, the "Plans") and approved the plans on November 12,.1985. 1.03 Corrections to property identification numbers and boundary lines and changes in the public and private improvements proposed to be constructed within the Project Area occurred thereafter and necessitated adopting Modification No. 1 to the Plans in 1985 and Modification No. 2 to the Plans in 1989. 1.04 On May 17, 1993, the HRA adopted a Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, which consisted, in part, of the Project Area and which Redevelopment Plan contained Modification No. 3 to the Plans. 1.05 Additional acquisitions and changes in the public and private improvements proposed to be constructed within the Project Area have occurred thereafter and have necessitated the consideration of this Modification No. 4 to the Plans. 1.06 The HRA has caused to be prepared modified Plans which are contained in a document entitled "Interstate Lyndale Nicollet Redevelopment and Tax Increment Financing Plan, Modification No. 4 dated March 21, 1994, and on file with the HRA. Section 2. HRA Approval. 2.01 The HRA finds that the objectives of the HRA in encouraging development and redevelopment within the Project Area will be advanced by adoption of Modification No. 4 to the Plans. 2.02 The Modification No. 4 to the Plans is herby approved and adopted by the HRA, subject to review and approval by the Richfield Planning Commission. Section 3. Further Proceeding. 3.01 The executive director of the HRA is hereby authorized and directed to transmit copies of the Modification No. 4 of the Plans to the school board of Independent. School District No. 280 and the Board of Commissioners of Hennepin County for review and comment and to notify said public bodies of the public hearing to be held on Modification No. 4 to the Plans by the City. 3.02 The HRA requests that the Richfield Planning Commission review Modification No. 4 and comment regarding the consistency of the modified Plans wit the City's Comprehensive Plan and comment with regards to Minnesota Statutes, 362.356, Subd. 2. 3.03 The HRA requests the City to hold the public hearing on Modification No. 4 to the plans required by Minnesota Statutes, 469.028 and Minnesota Statutes, 469.175, subd. 3 as soon hereafter as is practicable and recommends that the modified Plans be approved by City. Section 4. Financing. 4.01 The HRA intends to request that the City assist from time to time in financing the public redevelopment costs identified in the Modified Plans by issuance of its general obligation bonds payable from the tax increment of the TIF District. 4.02 The HRA also intends to request that the City from time to time consider various other actions necessary to the implementation of the Modified Plans and pledges its .cooperation with the City in achieving the objectives of the Modified Plans. Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March, 1994. Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson ATTEST: Vern Luettinger, Secretary INTERSTATE LYNDALE NICOLLET REDEVELOPMENT AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN CITY OF RICHFIELD Housing and Redevelopment Authority Modification No. ~4 March 21, 1994 r~ L..J • MAYOR Martin J. Kirsch CITY COUNCIL Michael Sandahl, Council Member At Large Susan Rosenberg, Ward 1 Russ Susag, Ward 2 Donald Priebe, Ward 3 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Thomas Harms, Chairperson Russ Susag, Vice-Chairperson Vern Luettinger, Secretary Joan Helmberger, Member Michael Sandahl, Member CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR James D. Prosser PLANNING COMMISSION Daniel Linnihan, Chairperson Kristal Stokes, Vice Chairperson Timothy Erlander, Secretary Pamela Dmytrenko, Member Michael Gallagher, Member Morris Nilsen, II, Member Thomas Scaglia, Member William Snyder, Member Paul Wasko, Member • CITY STAFF Byron Wallace Director, Community Development Bruce Palmborg Housing & Redevelopment Coordinator Kathy Jablonsky Redevelopment Specialist William Weaver " City Planner Shawn Drill Zoning Administrator Mike Eastling City Engineer CONSULTANTS John B. Dean Ronald L. Batty HRA Legal Counsel Holmes & Graven, Chartered Minneapolis, MN Sidney Inman Mark Ruff Publicorp, Inc. Minneapolis, MN Arijs Pakalns Bennet, Ringrose, Wolsfeld, Jarvis, Gardner, Inc. Minneapolis, MN Orr-Schelen Mayeron & Associates, Inc. . Minneapolis, MlV NOTE TO READER The following text represents Modification No. 4 to the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan. Only those areas'of the plans requiring revision are incorporated in this modification. To understand all of the proposed activities, the reader is encouraged to review Modification No. 4 in conjunction with the following plans: Original ILN Redevelopment Project Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan dated October 21, 1985 Modification No. 1 to the ILN Redevelopment Project Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan dated November 25, 1985 Modification No. 2 to the ILN Redevelopment Project Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan dated September 18, 1989 Modification No. 3 to the ILN Redevelopment Project Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan dated June 14, 1993 [Richfield Redevelopment Project Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan, dated June 14, 1993 J r~ • TABLE OF CONTENTS INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET (ILN) MODIFICATION N0.4 . PART I -REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN PART I -REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN Original Plan Pa a Modification No. 4 Pa e STATUTORY AUTHORITY STATEMENT 1 4-2 MAP OF PROJECT AREA, LIST OF PARCELS, AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION 1 4-2 PUBLIC PURPOSE STATEMENT 9 No Chan e STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 10 No Chan e Pro'ect Area 10 No Chan e Core Commercial District 13 No Chan e New Develo ment District ~ 14 No Chan e Mixed and Hi hwa -Oriented Commercial District est 15 No Chan e Mixed and Hi hwa -Oriented Commercial District ast 15 No Chan e DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES 16 4-2 Antici ated Private 16 ~ 4-4 Pro osed Public 19 4-6 77th Street Im rovements 20 4-6 Emerson Avenue ~ 21 No Chan e Tra ~c Control Si als ~ 21 ~ 4-6 West 771/2 Street 21 4-6 West 78th Street - West o Emerson Avenue 21 4-7 TABLE OF CONTENTS • PART I -REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN Original Plan Pa a Modification No. 4 Pa e Pro osed Public Develo meat Activities Continued . West 78th Street -East o L ndale Avenue 22 No Chan e L ndale Avenue 22 No Chan e L ndale Avenue Bride 23 No Chan e Parkin Lot Im rovements 23 No Chan e General Streetsca a Im rovements 24 4-7 Sanita Sewer Li t Station 24 4-7 Storm Sewer _ _ _ 4_~ ACQUISITION, RELOCATION AND CLEARANCE ACTIVITIES 24 ~ 4-7 SITE PREPARATION 28 No Chan e BUILDING REHABILITATION 28 No Chan e VACATION OF PUBLIC LAND 28 No Chan e PHYSICAL INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS/LAND USE AND RELATED ISSUES 29 No Chan e New Develo ment District 29 No Chan e .Mixed and Hi hwa -Oriented Commercial District West 29 No Chan e Core Commercial Distirct ~ 30 No Chan e Mixed and Hi hwa -Oriented Commercial District East 30 ~ No Chan e Traffic Circulation and Parkin 31 No Chan e • TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I -REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN Original Plan Pa e Modification No. 4 ~ Pa e Tra is Circulation and Parkin Continued Freew /Access/Barriers ~ 31 No Chan e Area Access 31 No Chan e West 76th Street Throu h are 32 No Chan e Commercial Access Throu h Residential Nei hborhood 32 No Chan e Tra rc/Parkin Con icts in the Core Commercial District 32 No Chan e Closel S aced hrtersections 32 No Chan e Closel S aced Streets 33 No Chan e Narrow West 77th Street 33 No Chan e Pedestrian Circulation 33 No Chan e Lack o Pedestrians Circulation S stem 33 No Chan e Ph sical Conditions/Ima a 34 No Chan e Lack o Focal Point 34 No Chan e Lack o Stron Ima e 34 No Chan e Natural Amenities 34 No Chan e Views 34 No Chan e Screenin 35 No Chan e Outdoor Stora e ~ 35 No Chan e General A eara~~ce/Ima a 35 ~No Chan e iii TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I -REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN Original Plan Pae Modification No. 4 Pae Conclusion 36 4-10 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 39 No Chan e PROJECT ADMINISTRATION 39 No Chan e REDEVELOPEMENT PROPOSALS 39 4-10 REHABILITATION PROGRAM 40 No Chan e RELOCATION PROGRAM 41 No Chan e MAINTENANCE OF .THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS 41 No Chan e • • iv TABLE OF CONTENTS INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET (ILN) MODIFICATION N0.4 PART II -TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN PART II -TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN Original Plan Pa' a Modification No. 4 Pa e FINDINGS OF FACT 42 4-12 STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 47 4-12 LIST OF PARCELS IN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT ~ 47 ~ 4-12 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM ~ ~ 53 4-12 ACQUISITION PLAN 53 4-12 RELOCATION PLAN 53 4-12 ANTICIPATED TIMING OF ACTIVITIES ~ 60 4-13 Private Develo ment 60 4-13 Public Im rovements 61 4-13 TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT FINANCE PLAN 64 4-13 ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS 64 4-13 REVENUE SOURCES 66 4-14 TIMING OF EXPENDITURES 67 4-14 PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT FINANCING ASSISTANCE 69 4-14 ASSESSED VALUES 70 4-14 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART II -TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN . Original Plan Pae Modification No. 4 Pae TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW 71 4-14 IMPACT ON TAXING. JURISDICTIONS 78 4-15 PROJECT COST ASSUMPTIONS 81 4-15 ESTIMATED ASSESSOR'S VALUE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT ASSUMPTIONS 83 4-15 APPENDIX A =Sources and Uses Statement - - - A-1 APPENDIX B - Pro'ect Cashflows - - - B-1 APPENDIX C - Im acts on Tazin Jurisdictions - - - C-1 • • • vi TABLE OF CONTENTS INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET (ILN) MODIFICATION N0.4 LIST OF MAPS AND EXHIBITS MAP OR EXHIBIT NUMBER TITLE Original Plan Pa a Modification No. 4 Pa e M-A1 Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment. Project Area 2 No Chan e E-I Redevelo ment Project Parcels 3 4-Z E-II Redevelopment Project Area Boundary Descri tion 8 No Chan e M-A2 Sub-Areas 11 No Chan e M-A3 Phase I Development Program and Public Im rovement Plan 17 4-3 M-A4 Ac uisition, Relocation, and Clearance Plan 26 4-9 E-III-A . Pro ernes Ac uired, Phase I 27 4-7 E-III-B Pro ernes To Be Ac uired, Phase I 27 4-8 M-A5 Existin Land Use 37 No Chan e M-A6 Land Use/Circulation Plan 38 No Chan e M-B1 Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment Tax Increment Financin District 45 No Chan e M-B2 Buildin Conditions 46 No Chan e E-I'V Tax Increment Financin District Parcels ~ 48 No Chan e E-V Tax Increment Financing District Boundary Descri tion 52 No Chan e vii LIST OF MAPS AND EXHIBITS MAP OR EXHIBIT NUMBER TITLE Original Plan Pa a Modification No. 4 Pa e E VI Pro ernes Pro osed To Be Ac uired, Phase I 58 See 4-7 M-B3 Ac uisition, Relocation, and Clearance Plan 56 See 4-9 M-B4 Phase I Development Program and Public Im rovement Plan 57 See 4-3. E-VII Antici ated Activi Schedule 63 See 4-5 E-V11I Estimated Pro'ect Costs B Line Item ~ 65 See Appendix A E-1x Antici ated Source of Funds 66 See Appendix A APPENDIX A Sources and Uses of Funds - - - A-1 APPENDIX B Pro'ect Cashflows - - - B-1 APPENDIX C Im acts on Tazin Jurisdictions - - - C-1 • viii PART REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN MODIFICATION N0.4 4-1 ~ INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET REDEVELOPMENT PLAN STATUTORY AUTHORITY STATEMENT The statutory authority for the activities proposed in the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment Plan, dated October 21, 1985, were conferred upon the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) by the Minnesota Housing and Redevelopment Authorities Act, Minn. Stat. Sec. 462.411, et seq. More specifically, Minn. Stat. Sec. 462.515 established the requirements that a redevelopment plan be prepared by an HRA prior to undertaking property acquisition, relocation, and redevelopment. Due to subsequent legislative changes, the authority for any modifications to the Redevelopment Project Plan now lies within Minn. Stat. Chapter 469, specifically at Minn. Stat. Sec. 469.001 - 469.047, inclusive, as amended. MAP OF THE PROJECT AREA, LIST OF PARCELS. AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION The list of parcels located in the project area is revised under Modification No. 4 to indicate property subdivisions necessary to accommodate the new 77th Street right-of--way. At this writing, the subdivisions are currently in process. Specifically, the properties impacted under the subdivision are the "Cloverleaf Site" parcels owned by the Richfield HRA. Only the subdivision changes are noted within Modification No. 4. ~ Otherwise, the list of parcels under the original plan remains the same. The properties impacted by the subdivision are as follows: EXHIBIT I -Redevelopment Project Parcels Former Parcels• Property Address Property Identification Number 7644 Emerson Avenue 33-028-24-43-0015 7600 Fremont Avenue 33-028-24-43-0016 Revised Parcels: Property Address (Not Available At This Time) (Not Available At This Time) (Not Available At This Time) (Not Available At This Time) DEVELOPMENT ACTNITIES Property Identification Number 33-028-24-43-0028 33-028-24-43-0029 33-028-24-43-0030 . 33-028-24-43-0031 As before, the redevelopment of the lLN project area will be accomplished through the efforts of the City of Richfield, the Richfield HRA, private developers, property owners, and business owners. Property improvements, current and future phases, will be constructed over a period of several years. Therefore, amendments to this documents may be required from time to time as redevelopment unfolds. The private and public developments discussed within this portion of the plan continue to remain within Phase I, Stage II of the redevelopment process. (See original Redevelopment Plan for further detail on the overall phasing and staging of the redevelopment of • • • 4-2 ^^^o Dnnn•nn^a''0' _ _. .. _ . _T _, i _- • -• - - - • ,........._..~..~..~.:.r..: _ _ _. _ ~ I_~. _ _ _ _ , ~ ,; n^ ^ ^ dn^ ^^na - a ~ ^ ,.. ___ _ __ _. - -. ~ __ . _~ : ~M ~ ' P ~ ~,, __~-__ -_ _ _ . _ _ _ ~ ~ ,. . , Q o O C~ O - .. , . _ _. - - -- _ ._ 1 ~_ __ - ... - -- -- ,, .__ __.- ~d ~~ -~-~-~ - NNtr ~~N.NN.N.~N.N..N.NNN r~ffi~. :: f~ C~ - ~ ~ ------- ~,~.~.~ -' -----~t::~,:-- -- ^ 1 1111 'T • r r rri•r111111111111Tjt'•„, D ^ ^ ^ D D O 111111t11111111111111111r1'`.:, ^D^^ 4^^DOL7I7 ^ ^ D D ^•~ ^ :. 11111111111111111:IIlllf111`~`.. ---- ---- ~-- - -- ._-~- ----.. - ~:= 1111111111t11111t111111111 ~. --... 11111111111111111111111111 11;1. o,ay .^non aooo^ aoooann ,-.on.o 0 ova-~,• ~ ;i;i,iii~i~ii;~;,,~;~;,;~;~ ;: 1111,11111111 i , II111111111111 • r IIIIIIIIIlil16 111111111111111111111111111{ _c~ ~o^^o Lnn _nDnnD^oon n o a a rn ^' ~ a;l~l~t~lili,~1~,~1~,~1ir~1~ ;:,'~ alllllllllllllr -- ---- - __ _ _ _ _ _ 1111111111111111111111h11, ,I~ dr] D ' D aa>a a aan4 .' p ~ ~ t7 O OL7 11II1i1111111111I11i+~+~lj~ ; ;'I [,~ ~ o ° ~~" 111111111lIIlUi!~ - - _ ~ ~_ ~ - _ _ - - - - - ' ' 1111111111111111IIII11111111 , - - - - -- - ^1.- - - - _ _.. __ • ~ 111111111111+111+111111111+' I . ° ~ ^^^.D^^^1=J ^,^ n !~ n ^ ~ L7 D D D' ~ +11111111111111111111111111 ', 1;1 D D.~ ^ ^ ,.i t1t111rltltlllrlflltrtrlllr' ! :I - - - - -- i - - - - - - ~ ~ ~- 1- --- - - -- ( I I 1 I I I Irl 11,1 I,1 I ' - - - - - - -- ^ ^^ ^~^ D^D^~! IT. - _ ~ ._- . _ '11I~ 1tfi11f~1 II,'I~I'1,+IIIr 10^.DDI]^0 ^D 0 Q t7 0.~a C7 ^ 111111 111111111;• 111111111111111 - - - - - - - - '; i - j is 111+,1111111111111111+f,11111~,, . ° ~-------a----.' ,_..-~_- --- . II(11111111111111+111'Irlllrlt ;_ I 1'O O^Dd ^^D^C1 !D 1111111+1t111111111-1111111t1~.~ ' ^•Oi7~ , A D O D O D O Q 11111111111111111111111111111 i, - - - - - - - - - - - -, - - - - - - - -' ~ -- -- --- - - _ • 11111111111111111111111111111 - ~ - - T _ _ ~ ~_ _ _ _ _ Ir1~111+lllrlflllllflflllf111~ '; 7 ^ ^ ^DD Q ,nOODDL7d D ~ _ - 11+M 11r111tIIIII1ttIr111fIf11 DOOQ i no D D ^ D ^ I~I~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~1+I~I~I~1~1~ ; '~ _ ._ ' - -r - ~~ 111 ~If111111111111111111111111~ 7•,111111111111111111111111'11111 ]^ ^° - ------_ 111111111111111 ---- -- ~^DOQDQ^DQO1?j L70 D^ D ~111111111111r1111111t1I1t11111 - _ ,..._ J :`' I~I~1~1~1, --- - - ___ _-___ -__ _- f: - =--_--- .~: /!:: __ _ a ,. .~~~ ~~. ^ - 1 11 I - ^ D O O D d I ~ . ~' , ~ ~ 1111111 .:::<•::::•:: `:~:::•:::.::::.:::•:::.::•::;:::: ~:.>::•:~>:::•::;;. --- -'~ - __ J•' 1111111 •. a ^Ll ^ ~. : --- ~„ MoD ^n ^^ , ^^ nnDDn^aD! ~ --~ `_~ _ _ -•t ,~1 ]G ^ o o a da^na °D _____ __ __.-_- ~~.-_.. j; . ~ O c~ O o 0. n D '•` ~~:-~ -•-__ II I I 'tr1 Ilr .: III tl I111111111 ;i:::i:::;:::::>~::;:::::;:::;• ~::::;~: ~::<:: /i 1111111111111111 i;~i~::y:~:: R%~::aY:~ i~~i~i~- /, III 11 1 1 1~:~::;`~~::~~i:•`•::~:~:::::~.`•::;:;: ::`. 11f1i1111111i1t1 •.: ~. ~`~ ~. (I 1 1 1 111 = --- -;::_:::i•--'- i/ ~ ; \ ~! ~ /~ ~ i,/ y' ~.- .; \~ 4 - ;. ~z ~ CO „~ O v ~ r_ ~ _ ~ Tl ~ `: ~ U LZ ~~ E Y C/ ^ + w • ~ U ~~ ~+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ :~ ~~~~~~ ~' , _ < ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ E O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 111 .~~" g ~~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ >_ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ 10 a o the ILN project area.). Please note that within the overall ILN redevelopment phasing and staging, individual tracts of land for proposed developments will contain their own phasing as it relates to construction or build out. ANTICIPATED PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES As a portion of the Cloverleaf Site was needed for the new 77th Street, the Richfield HRA sold the necessary land to the 77th Street project, thus downsizing the site somewhat. To date, no survey has been undertaken to determine the exact size of the residual land. Until the 77th Street right-of--way construction ~is completed, the interim use of the site will be to accommodate a concrete batch plant for the 77th Street project. Modification No. 4 addresses redevelopment for the remainder of the land in Phase I, Stage II, namely the property located in the "Mixed and Highway Oriented District -West" area, as well as a portion of the Cloverleaf site. CSM Corporation has entertained a redevelopment proposal, known as "The Shops At Lyndale" for the "Mixed and Highway Oriented District -West" tract of land and a portion of the Cloverleaf site. This land lies south of 77th Street and is bounded by I-494 at its southern perimeter, Lyndale Avenue to the east, and Emerson Avenue to the west. Within this area, two phases of redevelopment are proposed. Each phase will build on the next until full build-out is achieved. The developer is anticipating acquisition of the property through negotiations.. The HRA's power of eminent domain may be used as an alternative if negotiations are not successful. This would assure site assembly in a comprehensive, timely manner necessary for construction commencement in 1994. The first phase of the project would be contained within the area bounded by Emerson Avenue on the west and Colfax Avenue on the east. Per the preliminary site plan, Phase One would contain three (3) anchor tenants and a new church. The detail for each of the phases is as follows: PHASE ONE PHASE TWO Site Area 308,965 s uare feet Number of Acres 7.09 Anchor A 45,000 s uare feet Anchor B 42,000 s uare feet Anchor C 25,000' s uare feet Gross Bld . Area* 112,000 s uare feet Church 13,340 s uare feet *Approximate Area Site Area 41.1,752 s uare feet Number of Acres 9.45 Acres Sta e 1: In-Line Sho 20,475 s uare feet Pad Site southwest 6,000 s uare feet Subtotal 26,475 s uare feet Sta ell: _ Anchor D 35,000 s uare feet Anchor E 25,000 s uare feet Anchor F 25,000 s uare feet Pad Site east 5,000 s uare feet Subtotal 90,000 s uare feet Gross Bld . Area* 11.6,475 s uare feet 4-4 • • • TOTAL DEVELOPMENT Site Area 720,717 s uare feet Number of Acres 16.54 Buildin Area: Phase One -retail 112,000 s uare feet - church 13,340 s uare feet Phase Two 116,475 s uare feet Gross Bld . Area* 241,815 s uare feet *Approximate Area The following table summarizes both Phase One and Phase Two development components. Proposed Proposed Development Development Type of Initiation Com letion Pro osed Develo meet 3rd Quarter, 1994 .Winter, 1994 Retail center with approximately 112,000 square . feet of space, occupied by three separate, major retailers, located between Emerson Avenue and Colfax Avenue and relocation of church to -Cloverleaf site; construction preceded by site assembly through negotiated acquisition, or eminent domain, and site clearance activities. 1995 1995 Retail stores with 20,475 square feet of space, and ,. Pad- Site tenant of 6,000 square feet, located east . and south east, of Phase One at approximately Colfax Avenue and 78th Street; most likely use of Pad Site to be restaurant; construction preceded by site assembly through acquisition (negotiated and/or eminent domain) and site clearance activities. 1995 1996 Retail center with 85,000 square feet of space, occupied by three separate retailers, and Pad Site tenant of 5,000 square feet located between Bryant Avenue and Aldrich Avenue; most likely use of Pad Site to be free-standing retailer; construction preceded by site assembly through acquisition (negotiated and/or eminent domain) and site clearance activities. 4-5 All of the referenced phased development would proceed within the context of a comprehensive plan to be formulated by the City, HRA, and developer. PROPOSED PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES Proposed public development in Phase I, Stage II, is and has always been undertaken by the City and HRA. The new 77th Street right-of-way is being developed in order to accommodate private developments such as the above proposed project as well as accomplish other goals and objectives set forth in the redevelopment project area as a whole under the original redevelopment. plan of 1985 and the modified redevelopment plan of 1989. In addition to the City and HRA, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT), and. other interim revenue source agencies such as the Metropolitan Council and the of the Right-of--Way Acquisition Loan Fund (RALF) are involved in bringing the new 77th Street .right-of--way into existence. Situated within the "Mixed and Highway-Oriented West" site is a church. Phase One of the CSM project would include construction of a new church on the eastern portion of the Cloverleaf site, just west of the Phase One retail center. The HRA would sell a portion of the Cloverleaf site for the new church. Also, the HRA and City would assist the developer in assembling the site area by vacating portions of public rights-of--way south of 77th Street. 77th Street Improvements Prior to this modification, substantial funding of public improvements relied upon tax increment revenue sources from redevelopment activities. Subsequently, other revenue sources became available outside of redevelopment activity .revenues. Traffic Control Signals One traffic control signal would be placed at Girard Avenue and 76th Street to control traffic filtering into and out of the new 77th Street. Additional traffic control devices will be installed as needed. .West 771/2 Street The intersection of West 77 1/2 Street with Lyndale Avenue would be eliminated with Phase Two of the CSM,development proposal. However,'the gas station at 77 1/2 Street and Lyndale Avenue would remain. Access to the businesses would be from the new 77th Street. The "Pad Site" proposed on the east end of the. Phase Two, CSM project could potentially contain a curb cut to access this building. However, no major entrance/exit to the general site would be constructed at this location. West 77 l/2 Street may be vacated for the project. • 4-6 West 78th Street -West of Emerson Avenue The improvements listed within this section under the modified redevelopment plan of 1989 are hereby revoked as they related specifically to the Cloverleaf site. General Streetscape Improvements The new 77th Street right-of--way plan addresses the installation of a variety of plant materials and other landscaping features to beautify the landscaped buffer screenwall and surrounding, adjacent areas to compliment .the project and make the area more attractive. Sidewalk improvements are also included in this plan. The proposed.CSM Corporation development project south of 77th Street would be part of a planned unit development (PUD). As a result of the PUD, plans for landscaping, parking, and lighting would be evaluated as a complete package and integrated into the 77th Street project as well. Reviews would be undertaken by the City. Sanitary Sewer Lift Station A portion of this section is hereby revoked as it related only to the hoteUoffice proposal of 1989. Other related public improvements are listed in the section entitled "Proposed Public Improvements". Storm Sewer Upgrading of the storm sewer is part of the 77th Street project. ACQUISITION, RELOCATION. AND CLEARANCE ACTIVITIES In the fall of 1991, the HRA had the opportunity to purchase the Cloverleaf site and gain control of a major portion of the ILN project area. On March 16, 1992, the HRA approved acquisition of the Cloverleaf Site and purchased the following property on April 15, 1992: EXHIBIT III - A: Properties Acquired, Phase I Pro er Identi ication Number Pro er Address 33-028-24-43-0015 7644 Emerson Avenue 33-028-24-4-0016 7600 Fremont Avenue 33-028-24-43-0017 7600 Fremont Avenue 33-028-24-43-0018 7700 Fremont Avenue Also see section titled "Map of the Project Area, List of Pazcels, and Legal Description" of Modification No. 4 to the ILN Redevelopment Plan for information on property subdivisions related to the above parcels. The property listed on the following page would be acquired for the CSM Corporation development proposal. 4-7 EXHIBIT III - B: Properties To be Acquired, Phase I ~~ Property Identification Number ~ Property Address N 33-028-24-43-0009 7701 Emerson Ave. 33-028-24-43-0010 7721 Emerson Ave. 33-028-24-44-0025 7700 Colfax Ave. 33-028-24-44-0026 7714 Colfax Ave. 33-028-24-44-0027 `7726 Colfax Ave. 33-028-24-44-0028 7738 Colfax Ave. :.;:. ::.::.:::.:::.::::::::::::::::::::::::. : Pro er Identi ication Number Pro er Address 33-028-24-44-0082 900 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0083 902 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0084 904 W. 771/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0085 ~ 908 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0086 910 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0087 ~ 914 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0088 901 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0089. 920 W. 77 1/2 St. Pro er Identi ication Number Pro er Address 33-028-24-44-0073 800 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0074 804 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44=0075 808 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0076 812 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0077 816 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0078 820 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0081 805 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0080 809 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0099 801 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0100 723 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0101 ?19 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0097 715 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0096 705 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0095 701 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0094 716 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0093 714 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0092 ~ 712 W. 77 1/2 St. 33-028-24-44-0091 708 W. 77 1/2 St. • 4-8 . ~ -- • __ _ _. _ _ 11-~~-~--naw~wa~~4--•11 ~~ `w L i •; ~ . ~ 1 n ~ ^ a D'I r D a l^ i^ 'o t~ b ~~ '" ! ^ , i'! ~~ - - ^.a,^,^~ ;;^ ^ ^ ^ ^ o ~ T Q . ~0 -=-o .-_-_-.~_ ~---_- - - ~_-__=~ r--- ---------- n ~ , ~ C ; :~ I ::.a-L ~_~ o~o~~C.CG Coa c e ca oaau p Q ^ ^'d o~G J L -__ __.. _.-_.._____.-- .-_, .. _ _ _ __ ~~a ac moo' ^uCC7 ~~DD~~D~' ~, ca o o-ran ° D D ^^GDD' ~ O^ ~Q^OD•D^~^'^II,I I' (> OHO O~C7.^ ~~_-, ~ _ -~ --... -=1 -- - .--~ L.-=- -- ~ ~ - --_ -- -. = -=~ r----=--- - - - - - - - -- -- -- -_ u` C~j w a 1 L] G~[7b'O .'~000O,I~~~.°I~•°i~~Q•O _ _ ~ O' ~ , _ ter- ~ ^DDr-]CDCD ^IL7J ! ~^a o ^ '~ ^ooo^;^'^ - - --- -- ---~~ u_~ I c::=_ ,_____._ CCCCO^GC CcGG^Q GL'^_^.QD ~! ~ p O OD b ~d 4 - ~ o o ^'Cc ' ca^oo i ° ^^aU ; ; C n •o a o~o b U~ C] ~.C•^^ ~7 ;,G QQOaa~oTolOp'a Q ;I I; C O fl ,Q d ;O ~D I ~ _ h ,' ' D^^~^ pG^O~ O O 00 _..-. _. I _.~ :~ _ ~_ - ~~oooooo~ ^ C .' / ^.~. ^^~G^ ~ ~ .~y:, r.. :0000000 '' laooooo000000000 000000000000000 .r. Q ~~ooooo000000000~ i l .. , r.~ C~ ooooe: ~;°;°o°o °o°o°o° °°°°°°°°°°o °o°o°o°o°a°~ I ° .0_0_0_0 - O O O O O i 000000 !° o o o ~ o O r- - - 0 0-°- . ° ° ° ° ° ° ,°°°o°°°°,°°°, ~ ' o°°°°°° 0000000 o° o° O° •°°ooo°~ 0 0 o a o 0 •0000001 : i oooo c°o°o°o iooooo0 ,oooooo~ 000000 o°°°°o° o°°oo°o ,0000001 0 0 0 0 0 0 oooooo~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 °000000 ooooaol 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000001 °o°ooo° °°oo°o° 0 0 0 0 0 0 (ooooooi 0 0 0 0 0 0 s °oo°°°o 000000, ;~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' O ° ° ° O°O°O°O o o ' O o o o ~~ O O O O O O ~ 0000000 O O O O O O i ~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000001 . ' oooo 0 0 0 0 °o°°ooo° ' °°°°o°o°o°o°i ~. 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O, ; ~O~O~O~O~O~O~ ~o"o"o"o"o"o°0"0"0"0 0 0 0 ooo°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o i _o_o_o 0 0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_ G ~ Li G' ^ i L7 >a°ooe°ooooooaoooooQOOOOOOOO°o°ooooaooooo00000000°g000000000,° ~ -~"~-" "' = ~ ~ --- _.t " ~ •~O°O°O O°O°O°O°O°O°O O°O°O O°O°O°O°O°O°O°O°O°O°O°O°O°O°O°fr /~ __ j.~-- uooooo0000000000000000000000° `~ - _ - - --' ---_ ~. ,ooooo00000000000000000000000 %~ . -~ o 00000°oo°oooo°000000°°°ooo. , ;o°booooo00000000000000000000. ~G+~-=^C a^^CC~][;~ ~ aooooo000000000000000000000 ...._~ l7 C ^ -.r ~ 'J ^ 00000000000000000000000000- G I ~ooooo00000000000000000000 ~ +~ 0000000000000000000000000 ~ 1 X000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 •i >ooooo0000000000~00000000~ r i ~ o0000000000000000000000~ ~/ [ ~ooooo000000000000ooooor• .1 I~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r r -- L~. L'.•u ~'Cr~^U OOt~e ~ooooo00000000000ooooor i• _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 000000000000000000 ~.y /'~~~-~. ,~ _ _ _ .-_.._.bi~ !•'+ ~o~o„o„oo„o~o°ooooo00oooo~y /j /~.' ~ ' .'~; . ) l : ? ' ~ ~ i..~ ~.. ~ _ - // - ~ i ` ^oo^b ~p -. ..~~ ~ i _ ~ _ ,o v .^ r~ ~ u ^ o ^ ^ o a , I I I I i I• i I I I ~ ~~ ~ I t` -_~ L_ - -i- - - -1 _ ~ • 1 ~^ O,d ^I ~'O^'D~O;^JpI^ ~:r„J 0000 _;~,. ~= ~I =.: s I=~ f_~ I l f! I ! ~Q j~, - - _ ~-, . y ~~ C ~ r •~ ~~. .6 e;jr•~ ~~ ~'2 ~~ ~ -:.. ~ ' ~ [+`" Cat ~"'~ ~,Mi i..,.A ,yam ~`~ `.'~~ ~.~ ~" ~.~ ~.~ ~ I~~m ~ ~ O C _r ~1 ~1 O C3 ~~ o ~ ~ a z° ~ a E c o o > M a ~ o°o°o O O°O O°O°O U ~_ .~ ±~ •~ ~/ .~ UU ~' ~'~ ~ Q ~ cis a. The developer would be responsible for acquisition of the referenced property. The HRA may provide assistance with condemnation should the developer not be able to obtain the property through negotiated acquisitions. All acquisition activities would be conducted according to applicable state and federal regulations. 'CSM Corporation will be responsible for the relocation process. All buildings which are acquired for the proposed project would be demolished. If feasible, buildings acquired. would be sold for removal from the site. All other descriptive activity under this section in Modification No. 2, dated September of 1.989, are hereby revoked. Much of the activity related to public rights-of--way at that time have become part of the 77th Street project or were part of the 1989 proposed development for the Robert Larsen project. CONCLUSION The activity described under the conclusion section~of Modification No. 2, dated September of 1989, is hereby amended to (l.) recognize the implementation of the new 77th Street right-of--way and its related circulation plan; and (2.) recognize the change in use of the site known as the Mixed and Highway Oriented District -West. All descriptive activity relating to land use and circulation plans for the Robert Larsen project and public improvements supporting the Robert Larsen project are hereby revoked. REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS As .stated earlier within Modification No. 4, CSM Corporation will be responsible for site assembly including acquisition, relocation, and demolition. Upon the developer's request, the HRA may assist with site assembly by utilizing its powers of eminent domain to ensure property title and possession in a timely manner. All aspects of the development activity will be detailed in the Contract for Private Development. Activities not related to the CSM development project yet part of prior redevelopment plan modifications remain as described in those plans. n u 4-10 PART II TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN MODIFICATION N0.4 4-11 ~ .INTERSTATE-LYNDALE-NICOLLET TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN ' FINDINGS OF FACT The findings of fact are hereby confirmed as listed within the original Interstate Lyndale Nicollet (ILN) Tax Increment Financing Plan of 1985. STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The statement of goals and objectives listed within the tax increment plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Tax Increment District, dated June 14, 1993 are hereby confirmed. LIST OF_PARCELS. AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION The list of parcels and legal descriptions enumerated within the tax increment plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Tax Increment District, dated June 14, 1993 are hereby confirmed. Modification No. 4 to the Redevelopment Plan for the ILN project area amended the project area parcels to accommodate property subdivisions resulting from the new 77th Street as well as additional property acquisitions by the HRA. This reference is also necessary for the tax increment plan. Therefore, the section entitled "Map of the Project Area, List of Parcels, and .Legal Description" .under Modification No. 4 to the Redevelopment Plan for the ILN project area is hereby adopted by reference. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM The Development Program for Modification No. 4 is discussed under the Redevelopment Project Plan (Modification No. 4). Both proposed .private and public development activities are. identified. Therefore, the section entitled "Development Activities" under Modification No. 4 to the Redevelopment Plan for the ILN project area is hereby adopted by reference. ACQUISITION PLAN As stated within Modification No. 4 under the Redevelopment Project Plan, the developer would bear significant responsibility for acquisition of the property listed for acquisition. The HRA may assist in acquisition activities so that the. developer would obtain title and possession. of property in a timely manner. This implies that the HRA may exercise its powers of eminent domain, or condemnation, on property for which negotiations are not successful. The section entitled "Acquisition, Relocation, and Clearance Activi"ties" under Modification No. 4 to the Redevelopment Plan for the ILN project area provides additional information and is hereby adopted by reference. RELOCATION PLAN Relocation activities pertaining to the CSM development project can be found within the section titled "Acquisition, Relocation, and Clearance Activities" under Modification No. 4 to the Redevelopment Plan for the ILN project area. This section is hereby adopted by reference. • • • 4-12 ANTICIPATED TIMING OF ACTIVITIES In general, the timing of private and public activities have been.. addressed in prior modifications to the ILN Redevelopment Project Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan. The timing of activities specific to the current CSM development project are listed within the section titled "Anticipated Private Development Activities" of Modification No. 4 for the ILN Redevelopment Project Plan which is hereby adopted by reference. Anticipated. Tln21nP of Activities -Private Development See descriptive above in section titled "Anticipated Timing of Activities." All references to prior private redevelopment projects are hereby revoked. Anticipated Timing of Activities -Public Improvements See descriptive above in section titled "Anticipated Timing of Activities." TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT FINANCE PLAN The sections which follow represent the cashflows, sources and uses statement (budget), and impacts on taxing jurisdictions as they specifically relate to the CSM development project for which Modification No. 4 was undertaken. It was necessary to make certain assumptions regarding income, costs, inflation, and timing of the tax increment financing district. These assumptions are based on discussions with the HRA, City, staff, consultants, and the developer. ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS The estimated project costs are represented as a Sources and uses statement. This statement is provided. by the developer, CSM Corporation and was reviewed by the City and HRA and analyzed by the City's fiscal consultants, Publicorp, Inc. See Appendiz A -Sources and Uses Statement. As one can see, the Sources and Uses Statement is detailed based on the different phases of the project. Toward the end of Appendix A, both phases are combined to show an aggregate total. Shown at the top of each respective statement is the amount of tax increment necessary to sustain the project. For example, Phase One shows that with tax increment assistance, approximately $2,821,024. of increment is required in order to provide a rate of return that is acceptable to the developer in order to make the project feasible. Without tax increment assistance, the rate of return for Fhase One is only 0.86%. This rate of return and level of risk would not be acceptable to any developer for a project of this magnitude. But for the assistance of tax increment, this project would not be possible. This directly ties into the "But For" test for the project whose burden of proof lies with the developer. 4-13 REVENUE SOURCES The revenue source for the CSM development project will be tax increment. No new general obligation bond sales are contemplated. The pay out of the tax increment will be on a "pay-as- you-go" basis. That is, tax increment payments will be made to the developer to pay for legally allowable,~authorized project costs as tax increment is-generated by the project. If.taxes are not paid, payments will not be made to CSM. In order to obtain a maximum value for loan indebtedness, 100% of the captured value and, in turn, tax increments generated from the CSM development project, will be used for debt service. The estimated tax increment to be paid may require. a change in the fiscal disparities sharing of the II.N tax increment district in order to make the project feasible. That is, a selection may be made in order that the project not contribute to the fiscal disparities pool. The city as a whole would absorb the ILN's portion of the fiscal disparities contribution. This in turn would provide for the necessary level of increment required for the project. Should the project contribute to the fiscal disparities pool and, therefore, avoid spreading the contribution to the city as awvhole, an amount amenable to both the city and developer will be made from the balance of the ILN tax increment district to cover the shortfall of necessary increment. The project cashflows presented in Appendix B shows the cashflows with the fiscal disparities change election and without. See section titled "Tax Increment Cashfloow" below for further detail. TIMING OF EXPENDITURES The developer of "The Shops at Lyndale" will pay for project expenditures. The developer would be reimbursed for project costs as tax increments are generated by the project. See above sections for further detail. PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT FINANCING ASSISTANCE See above sections for further detail.. ASSESSED VALUES The estimated market value of the CSM development project is detailed in the attached tax increment cashflow. - TAX INCREMENT CASHFLOW The estimated tax increment cashflows of the CSM development .project is detailed in Appendix B -Project cashflows. Again, each of the project phases has a cashflow. Both phases are combined at the end of Appendix B for an aggregate total. Furthermore,. each phase and combined phase has two cashflows, one in which fiscal disparities assistance is used and one for which it is not. 4-14 The first page of each cashflow provides background information, such as basic assumptions, property tax class rates, and base tax capacity for the project parcels. The second page provides the specific detail with respect to the project such as market values, tax capacity based on the market values, and the cashflow itself. In general, the cashflow, ties in with the Sources and Uses Statement. Please fie reminded that the cashflow figures shown are estimates based on certain assumptions made. Figures will reconcile within a range rather than a specific dollar or value amount. IMPACT ON TAXING JURISDICTIONS The overall analysis regarding an estimate of impact on taxing jurisdictions resulting from the CSM development project is detailed in Appendix C -Impacts on Tazing Jurisdictions. Please note there are two impact analyses within Appendix C, the first one with the fiscal disparities change election and the second one without. PROJECT COST ASSUMPTIONS Project cost assumptions are enumerated within the Sources and Uses statement and related descriptive paragraphs within this plan. ESTIMATED ASSESSOR'S VALUE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT ASSUMPTIONS Estimated assessor's value for the CSM development project are listed directly on the cashflows. 4-15 • APPENDIX A SOURCES AND USES STATEMENT • A-1 PHASE i A2 SHOPS AT LYNDALE BUT FOR ANALYSIS CITY OF RICHFIELD 11-Mar-94 PHASE .I 111.000 SQUARE FEET MORTGAGE EQUITY TAX INCREMENT TOTAL SOURCES. LAND DEMOLITION ENVIRONMENTAL/SOIL TESTING SOIL CORRECTION OFFSITE WATER PONDING TOTAL LAND COSTS RETAIL 1 TURNKEY 45.,000 RETAIL 2 TURNKEY 42,000 RETAIL 3 TURNKEY 25,000 RETAIL 4 TURNKEY 0 RETAIL 5 TURNKEY 0 RETAIL 6 TURNKEY 0 .SMALL SHOPS 0 PADS 0 SITEWORK 112,000 CONST. CONTINGENCY 3.0%: TOTAL CONSRUCTION COST S ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERI NG SURVEY/TITLE LEASING FEES/MARKETING OVERHEAD CONSTRUCTION INTEREST LOAN PLACEMENT FEES SOFT COST CONTINGENCY 3.0% TOTAL SOFT COSTS TOTAL PROJECT COSTS WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT SOURCES AND USES SOURCES f % 9,604,27 75,0: 3,201,442 ^c5.0% ------------ 12,805,769 --------- 100.0% USES 5,370,300 41.9% 200,000 1.6% 50,000 0.4% 125,000 1.0% 100,000 0.8% 5,845,300 45.6% (34.00 1,530,000 11.9% (34.00 1,428,000 ~ 11.2% (36.00 900,000 7.0% 0 0 0 0 f9.00 1,008,000 7.9% 145.980 1.1% 5,011,980 39.1: f^c.50 280,000 2.2% f0.15 16,800 0.1:: f3.50 392,000 3.1:: f1.00 112,000 0.9% 8.5% 990,937 7.7% 100,000 0.8% 56,752 ----------- 0.0% 1•, 948, 489 15.2 12,805,769 100.0% WITH TAX INCREMENT SOURCES AND USES • SOURCES f 6,78,303 53.0': 3,201,442 25.0': 2,821,024 11.01 12,805,769 USES 5,370.300 41.9% 200,000 1.6% 50,000 0.4% 125,000 1.0% 100,000 .4.8% 5,845,300 45.6% 1,530,000 21.9% 1,428,000 .11.2% 900,000 7.0% ~. 1,008,000 7.9% 145,960 1.1% 5,011,980 39.1% 280,000 2.2% 16,800 0.1~ 392, 000 3.1': 112,000 . 990,937 7.7% 100.000 56.752 ----------- 0.0.. 1,948.489 12,805,769 • A-3 SHOES AT LYNDALE RUT FOR ANALYSIS 'TTY OF RICHFIELD -Mar-94 RETAIL 1 RETAIL RETAIL 3 ' RETAIL 4 RETAIL 5 RETAIL 6 SMALL SHOPS ' PADS TOTAL RENTAL INCOME WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT INCOME STATEMENT 45,000 (12.00 540,000 4,000 f10.40 420,000 25.000 (11.50 287.500 1.247.500 EXPENSE RECOVERY CAM TAXES INSURANCE MANAGEMENT FEES TOTAL RECOVERIES POTENTIAL GROSS INCOME .REDIT/VACANCY RESERVE EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME OPERATING EXPENSES 1.25 FSF 4.00 PSF 0.10 PSF 148,000 448,000 ll,c^00 0 599,c^00 1,846,700 7.Of (129,269) 1.717,431 CAM TAXES INSURANCE MGMT FEES STRUCTURAL RESERVES TOTAL EXPENSES NET OPERATING INCOME MORTGAGE PAYMENT 1.25 FSF 4.00 FSF 0.10 PSF 5.0•r,INCOME 0.25 PSF 20 YEAR TERM 8.SiINTEREST 9,604,327 PRINCIFAI NET INCOME RETURN ON E9UITY 140,000 448,000 11,200 62.375 26.000 689,575 1.027,856 20 YEAR TERM 8.S :INTEREST 1,000,183 27,673 0.86:: WITH TAX INCREMENT INCOME STATEMENT 540;000 420,000 287,500 1.247.504 140,000 448,000 11,200 599,^c00 1,846,700 (129.269) 1,717.431 140,000 448,000 11,200 62.375 28,000 689,575 1.027,856 706,405 321, 45'1 10.04 A-4 pKASE II • • A5 SHOFS AT LY.NDALE BUT FOR ANALYSIS CITY OF RICHFIELD _ 1-Mar-94 - WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT WITH TAX INCREMENT FHASE II 116,475 St~UARE FEET SOURCES AND. USES SOURCES AND USES SOURCES SOURCES f = f MORTGAGE 9.170,071 75.0%: 7,102,916 58.1': EQUITY 3.056.690 25.0%: ~ 3,056,690 25.0': TAX INCREMENT -=---------- --------- 2,067,155 ----------- 16.9•x,. TOTAL SOURCES 12,226,761 100.0': 12,226,761 USES USES LAND 4,562,608 37.3:: 4,562,608 37.3%: DEMOLITION 300.000 2.5% 300.000 2.51 ENVIRONMENTAL/SOIL TESTING 50.000 0.4: 50,000 0.4 SOIL CORRECTION 75,004 0.61 75;000 0.6: OFFSITE WATER PONDING 0 0.0: 0 0.0: TOTAL LAND COSTS 4,987,608 40.82 4,987,608. 40.81 RETAIL 1 TURNKEY 0 0 O.OZ 0 0.0: RETAIL ^c TURNKEY 0 0 0.0: 0 O.Oi RETAIL 3 TURNKEY 0 0 0.0: 0 O.OZ RETAIL 4 TURNKEY 35,000 (34.00 .1,190,000 9.7f 1,190,000 . 9.7 tETAIL 5 TURNKEY 25,000 '134.00 850,000 .7.0% 850,000 7.Oi RETAIL 6 TURNKEY 25.000 134.00 850,000 7.0 850,000 7.0': SMALL SHOES 20,475 135.00 ~ 716,625 5.9 716.625 5.91 PADS 21,000 145.00 495.000 4:0: 495,000 4:0% SITEWORK 116,475 f9.04 1,048.275 8.6: 1,048.275 $.b CONST. CONTINGENCY 3.Oi 154.497 1.3~ 154,497 1.3: TOTAL~CONSRUCTION COSTS 5,304.397 43.4: 5,304,397 43.4': ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING f2.50 291.188 2.41 291,188 2.4: SURVEY/TITLE f0.15 17.471 0.1 17,471 0.1%: LEASING FEES/MARKETING 13.50 407,663- 3.3%: ~ 407,663 3.3 OVERHEAD f1.00 116,475 1:Oi ~ .116,475 1.0% CONSTRUCTION INTEREST B.Sy 945,608 7.71 945.608 7.7 LOAN PLACEMENT FEES 100,000 0.8: 100,000 0.8 SOFT COST CONTINGENCY 3.OZ 56,352 0.5: 56,352 4.5 TOTAL SOFT COSTS 1,934,756 15.8%: 1.934,756 15.8% 70TAL PROJECT COSTS 12,226,761 .100.01 12;226,761 108.Oy A-6 SHOE'S AT IYNDALE BUT FOR ANALYSIS CITY OF RICHFIELD 11-Mar-94 kETAIL 1 .RETAIL ,RETAIL fiETAIL 4 FETAIL 5 kETAIL 6 SMALL SHOES FADS TOTAL RENTAL INCOME EXPENSE RECOVERY CAM TAXES INSURANCE MANAGEMENT FEES TOTAL RECOVERIES POTENTIAL GROSS INCOME CREDIT/VACANCY RESERVE EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME OPERATING EXPENSES, CAM TAXES INSURANCE }iGMT FEES STRUCTURAL RESERVES TOTAL EXPENSES NET OPERATING INCOME MORTGAGE PAYMENT 0 0 0 35,000 25,000 25,000 20,475 11,000 1.25 FSF 4.00 PSF 0.10 FSF 5.0 WITHOUT TAX INCfiEMENT INCOME STATEMENT ' 0 0 0 :11.00 385,000 t10.~5 256 50 110.50 262.500 612.00 245,700 :15.00 165,000 1.314,450 1.25 PSF. 4.00 PSF 0.10 FSF S.OINCOME 0.25 FSF 20 YEAR TERM 8.5iINTEREST 9,170,071 PRINCIPAL NET INCOME RETURN ON EQUITY 145,594 465,900 !1.648 20,535 643.676 1,.958,126 7.0 (137,069) 1,821,057 145.594 465,900 11.648 65,723 29,119 717,983 1,103,075 954,960 !48,115 4.85: .MITN TAX INCkEMENT INCOME STATEMENT 0 0 0 385.000 256.250 262,500 245,700 . 165,000 1.314,450 145,594 465,900 11,648 643.676 1,958,126 (137,069) 1,821,0:57 !45.594 465,900 11,648 65,7c^3 29,119 ~7i7,983 1,103,075 cc^0 YEAR TERM 8.5 :INTEREST 739,689 363,386 11.89: • A-7 PHASE I~ & PHASE II A-8 SHOPS AT LYNDALE RUT FOR ANALYSIS 'CITY OF RICHFIELD 11-Mar-94' PHASES I/II «8.475 SQUARE FEET i10kTGAGE ECIU17Y TAX INCREMENT T07AL SOURCES LAND DEMOLITION ENVIRONMENTAL/SOIL TESTING SOIL CORRECTION OFFSITE iJATER PONDING TOTAL LAND COSTS KETAIL 1 TCJRNKEY 45,000 RETAIL c^ TURNKEY 42,000 RETAIL 3 TURNKEY 25,000 RETAIL 4_ TURNKEY 35,000 RETAIL S TURNKEY 25,000 kETAIL 6 TURNKEY 25,000 SMALL SHOPS 20,475 PADS 11,000 SITEWORK 228.475 CONTT. CONTINENCY. 3.0 TOTAL CONSRUCTION COSTS AkCHITECTUkE/ENGINEERING SURVEY/TITLE LEASING FEES/MARKETING OVERHEAD CONSTRUCTION INTEREST LOAN PLACEMENT FEES SOFT COST .CONTINGENCY TOTAL SOFT COSTS 707AL.PROJEC7 COSTS 3.Oi WITHDUT 7AX INCkEMENT SOURCES AND USES SOURCES s I8.774,~98 75.0-: 6.258,131 c^S.Oi 25,03c,530 100.0: USES 9,932.908 500,004 100,000 200,000 100,004 10,832,908 39.5: 2.0 0.4 0.8~ 0.4 43.1 (34.00 1,530.004 f36.00 1,512,000 (36.00 900,000 (34.00 1,190,000 (34.00 850,000 (34.00 850,000 f35.00 '716.625 145.00 495,040 f9.00 2,056,275 30^c,997 10,402,897 f2.50 571,188 f0.15 34,271 f3.50 799,663 :1.00 ~ 228,475 8.5: 1,943,899 200,040 113,325 3.890,820 2.5,1.26,625 6.1~ 6.Oi 3.61 4.7Z 3.4 3.4 2.91 2.0 8.2Z 1.2%c 41.4 2.3~ 0.11 3 _ ^' ...i 0.9Z 7.71 0.8Z 0.3 iS.Sy 100.0 idITH TAX INCF;E~tENT~ SOURCES AND USES .SOURCES ~ . : 13,886,219 35.5'; 6,c^58.13 25.0': 4,888,179 19.5-: 25,032,530 USES 9.932,908 39.5': soo,oo0 2.0 100.000 0.4': 200,000 0.8: 100,000 0.4: 10,832,908 43.1: 1,530,000 6.1: 1,512,000 6.0: 900,000. 3.6: .1,190,000 4.7: 850,000 3 850,000 3 716,625 2.9: 495,000 2.0: 2,056,275 8.c^^: 302, 997 1.2:: 10.,402,897 41.4: s71,i88 2.3: 34, 271 0 . i %: 799,663 3.2 1,943,899 7.7: .200, 000 0.8't .113,325 0,5 3,890,8^c0 iS.S'/. 25,126.625 100.0% • A-9 SHOPS AT LYNDALE FUT FOR ANALYSIS CITY OF RICHFIELD 1-Mar-94. WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT RETAIL 1 RETAIL RETAIL RETAIL 4 RETAIL 5 kETAIL 6 SMALL SHOPS PADS TOTAL RENTAL INCOME EXPENSE RECOVERY ----------------- CAM TAXES INSURANCE MANAGEMENT FEES TOTAL RECOVERIES °OTENTIAL GROSS INCOME CREDIT/VACANCY kESERVE EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME OPERATING EXPENSES ------------------ CAM TAXES INSURANCE MGMT FEE5 STRUCTURAL RESERVES TOTAL EXPENSES NET OPERATING INCOME MORTGAGE PAYMENT INCOME STATEMENT 45,000 (12.00 540,000 42.000 (10.00 40,000. 25.000 (11.50 287,500 35,000 (11.00 385,000 25,000 (10.25 256,250 25,000 (10.50 262,500 20,475 112.00 245,700 11,444 (15.00 165,000 2,561,950 1.25 PSF 4..00 FSF 0.10 PSF S.Oi 1.25 FSF 4.00 FSF 0.10 PSF 5.0 :INCOME 0.25 PSF 285,594 913,900 22,848 24,535 1,242,876 3,804,826 7.0 (266,338) 3,538,488 285,594 913,900 22,848 128,098 57,119 1,407,558 MITH TAX INCREMENT INCOME STATEMENT 540;004 420, 000 287,500 385,000 256,250 262,500 24 5, 700 165,000 2,561,950 2$5,594 913,900 22,848 1,242,876 3,804,826 (^c66,338) 3,538,488 285,594 913,900 22,848 128,098 57,119 1,407,558 2,130,931 2,130,931 20 YEAR TERM 8.5iINTEREST 18,774,398 PRINCIPAL NET INCOME . RETURN ON EQUITY 20 YEAR TERM 8.5iINTEREST 1,955,143 175,788 2.81x. 1,446,094 684,837 10.942 A-10 • APPENDIX B PROJECT CASHFLOWS • • B-1 PKASE ~ 'ties ElecriO° Change) tWith Fis+~ai Dispar' g-2 03/16/94. City of Richfield -C.S.M. Project PHASE I - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 1 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS 'SHA'DED AREAS MAY REQUIREFURTHER DISCUSSION District: _ LL.N. . Inflation Rate 3.0000% Present Value Rate 8.50% Fiscal Disp. Contribution Ratio 0,0000% Tax Capacity (Extension) Rate 1.373190 Year District Created: ~ Nov. 1985 First Year of Increment: June 1987 Last Date of TI Pa ment: June 2011 PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES -PAY 1994 APARTMENT 3.400% COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4,600% COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000% COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600% NONHMSTD RESID 2,300% HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000% HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2,000% HOMSTD RESID 115K+ 2.000% VACANT LAND 4.600% ID BASE TAX CAPACITY BASE MARKET PROPERTY VALUE TYPE BASE TAX CAPACITY 33-028-24-43-0009 0 R 0 33-028-24-43-0010 1,470,000 A 49,980 Clovedeaf 33-028-24-43-0015 11'4;000 LC N!A Cloverleaf 33-028-24-43-0016 500,000 R NIA. Clovai°af 33-028-2443-0017. ' 226;000 LC '.NIA Ctoverloar 33-028-24.43-0018 740;200 CC N/A 33-028-24-44-0025 146,900 VL 6,757 33-028-24-44-0026 94,700 CC 2,841 33-028-24-44-0027 166,500 C 7,659 33-028-24-44-0028 91,800 CC .2,754 33-028-24-44-0028 87,500 R 1,030 33-028-24-44-0073 147,300 CC 0 33-02&24-44-0074 108,900 C 0 33-028-24-44-0075 107,100 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0076 119,700 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0077 91,200 C 0 33-028-24-44-0078 78,100 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0080 283,500 CC 0 .33-028-24-44-0081 78,700 C 0 33-028-24-44-0082 91,200 C 0 33-028-24-44-0083 128,300 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0084 135,100 C 0 33-028-244-0085 87,200 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0086 75,100 C 0 33-028-24-44-0087 230,600 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0088 128,400 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0089 393,100 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0090 216,600 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0091 110,600 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0092 53,800 C 0 33-028-24-44-0093 53,800 C 0 33-028-24-44-0094 100,300 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0095 55,400 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0095 ..64,000 R 0 33-028-24-44-0096 232,000 C 0 33-028-24-44-0097 148,100 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0099 295,100 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0100 221,100 C 0 33-028-24-44-0101 150,800 CC 0 7,622,700 71,021 B-3 • C~ 81100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. - F~a~e review all assumptions. CSM94A 03/16/94 City of Richfield - C.S:M. Project PHASE I - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 2 Market Square Retail Retail Retail Retail Retail Retail Phase 1 B Phase ! C D C E F G H J K L M N Values Feet 2,849,600 45,000 2,659,600 42,000 1,583,100 25,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,092,300 112.000 Tax Taxes Construct 131,082 4.00 1994 1996 122,343 4.00 1994 1996 72,823 4:00 1994 1996 0 .4.00 1994 1996 0 4.00 i 994 1996 0 4.00 1994 1996 0 4.00 1994 1996 0 4.00 1994 1996 0 4.00 1994 1996 0 4.00 1994 9996 0 -' 4.00. 1994 1996 0 d.00 1994 1996 0 4.00 1994 1996 0 , 4:00 1994 1996 0 4.00 1994 1996 0 4.00 ' 1994 1996 326,248 TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW Beginning Period Annual Project Fis. Dis. Captured Semi-Annual Admin Semi-Annual Ending Period Base Tax Tax Tax Capacity Tax Gross Tax Payment Net Tax Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capaci Ca aci -0.00% Ca aci Increment 10:00% increment Yrs. Mth.. Yr. 0.0 02-01 1994 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 08-01 1994 0.5 08-01 1994 71,021 71,021. 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 02-01 1995 1.0 02-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0&01 1995 1.5 08-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 2.0 02-01 1996 2.0 02-01 1996 71,021 326,248 0 255,226 175,237 17,524 157,713 2.5 08-01 1996 2.5 08-01 1996 71,021 326,248 0 255,226 175,237 17,524 157,713 3.0 02-01 1997 3.0 02-01 1997 71,021 336,035 0 ~ 265,014 181,957 18,196 163,761 3.5 08-01 1997 3.5 08-01 1997 71,021 336,035 0 265,014• 181,957 18,196 163,761 4.0 02-01 1998 4.0 02-01 1998 71,021 .346,116 0 275,095 188,879 18,888 169,991. 4.5 08-01 1998 4.5 08-01 1998 71,021 346,116 0 275,095 188,879 18,888 169,991 5.0 02-01 1999 5.0 02-01 1999 71,021 356,500 0 285,478 196,008 19,601 176,407 5.5 08-01 1999 5.5 08-01 1999 71,021 356,500 0 285,478 196,008 19,601 176,407 6.0 02-0i 2000 6.0 02-01 2000 71,021 367,195. 0 296,173 203,351 20,335 183,016 6.5 08-01 2000 6.5 08-01 2000 71,021 367,195 0 296,173 203,351 20,335 183,016 7.0 02-01 2001 7.0 02-01 2001 71,021 - 378,210 0 307,189 '210,914 21,091 189,823 7.5 08-01 2001 7.5 08-01 2001 71,021 . 378,210 0 307,189 210,914 21,091 189,823 8.0 02-01 2002 8.0 02-01 2002 71,021 389,557 0 318,535 218,705 21,870 196,834 8.5 08-01 2002 8.5 08-01 2002 71,021 389,557 0 318,535 218,705 21,870 196,834 9.0 02-01 2003 9.0 02-01 2003 71,021 401,243 0 330,222 226,729 22,673 204,056 9.5 08-01 2003 9.5 08-01 2003 71,021 401,243 0 330,222 226,729 22,673 204,056 10.0 02-01 2004 10.0 02-01 2004 71,021 413,281 0 342,259 234,994 23,499 211,494 ~ 10.5 08-01 2004 10.5 08-01 2004 71,021 413,281 0 342,259 234,994 23,499 211,494 11.0 02-01 2005 11.0 02-01 2005 71,021 425,679 0 354,658 243,506 24,351 219,156 11.5 08-01 2005 11,5 08-01 2005 71,021 425,679 0 354,658 243,506 24,351 219,156 12.0 02-01 2006 12.0 02-01 2006 71,021 438,450 0 367,428 252,274 25,227 227,047 12.5 08-01 2006 12.5 08-01 2006 71,021 438,450 0 367,428 252,274 25,227 227,047 13.0 02-01 2007 13.0 02-01 2007 71,021 451,603 0 380,582 261,305 26,131 235,175 13.5 08-01 2007 13.5 08-01 2007 71,021 451,603 0 380,582 261,305 26,131 235,175 14.0 02-01 2008 14.0 02-01 2008 71,021 465,151 0 394,130 270,608 27,061 243,547 14.5 08-01 2008 14.5 08-01 2008 71,021 465,151 0 394,130 .270,608 27,061 243,547 15.0 02-01 2009 15.0 02-01 2009 71,021 479,106 0 408,084 280,189 28,019 252,170 15.5 08-01 2009 15.5 08-01 2009 71,021 479,106 0 408,084 280,189 28,019 252,170 16.0 02-01 2010 16.0 02-01 2010. 71,021 493,479 0 422,457 290,057 29,006 261,051 16.5 08-01 2010 16.5 08-01 2010 71,021 493,479 0 422,457 290,057 29,006 26'1,051 - 17.0 02-01 2011 17.0 02-01 2011 71,021 508,283 0 437,262 300,222 30,022 270,200 17.5 08-01 2011 17.5 08-01 2011 71,021 508,283 0 437,262 300,222 30,022 270,200 18.0 02-01 2012 TOTALS 7,469,869 746,987 6,722,882 PRESENT VALUE 3,215,364 321,536 2,893,828 RI100-18 B-4 Prepared by Publicorp Inc.$Rtrjase review all assumptions. CSM94A • PHASE I ithout Fiscal Disparities Election Change) B-5 03/16/94 City of Richfield -C.S.M. Project PHASE I - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 1 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS . SHADED AREAS MAY'REQUIRE FURTHER DISCUSSION ~ _ District: I.L.N. Inflation Rate 3:0000% Present Value Rate 8.50% Fiscal Disp. Contribution Ratio 15.0000°!0 Tax Capacity {Extension) Rate 1.373190 Year District Created: Nov. 1985 First Year of Increment: June 1987 Last Date of TI Pa ment: June 2011 PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES -PAY 1994 APARTMENT 3.400% COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4.600% COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000% COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600% NONHMSTD RESID 2.300% HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000% HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2.000% HOMSTD RESID 115K+ 2,000% VACANT LAND 4.600% ID BASE TAX CAPACITY BASE MARKET PROPERTY VALUE ~ TYPE BASE TAX CAPACITY 33-028-24-43-0009 0 R 0 33-028-24-43-0010 1,470,000 A 49,980 Gloverteaf .' 33-028-24-43-0015 114,000 LC ' N/A. Cloverleaf: 33-02&24-43-0016 '500,000- ' R ' N/A Cloverleaf 33-028-24-43-0017 226,000 _ LC N1A Ctodedeaf 33-02&24-43-0018 _ 740,200 CC N!A 33-028-24-44-0025 146,900 VL 6,757 33-028-24-44-0026 94,700 CG 2,841 33-028-24-44-0027 166,500 C 7,659 33-028-24-44-0028 91,800 CC 2,754 33-028-24-44-0028 87,500 R 1,030 33-028-24-44-0073 147,300 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0074 108,900 C 0 33-028-24-44-0075 107,100 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0076 119,700 CG 0 33-028-24-44-0077 91,200 C 0 33-028-24-44-0078 78,100 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0080 283,500 CG 0 33-028-24-44-0081 78,700 C 0 33-028-24-44-0082 91,200 C 0 33-028-24-44-0083 128,300 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0084 135,100 C 0 33-028-24-44-0085 87,200 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0086 75,100 C 0 33-028-24-44-0087 230,600 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0088 128,400 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0089 393,100 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0090 216,600 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0091 110,600 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0092 53,800 C. 0 33-028-24-44-0093 53,800 C 0 33-028-24-44-0094 100,300 CC 0 33-028-24-44.0095 55,400 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0095 64,000 R 0 33-028-24-44-0096 232,000 C 0 33-028-24-44-0097 148,100 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0099 295,100 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0100 221,100 C 0 33-028-24-44-0101 150,800 CC 0 7,622,700 71,021 B-6 RI100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. - Ptease review. all assumptions. CSM94A 03/16/94 .City of Richfield -C.S.M. Project PHASE I - $4.00 - 3% inflation Page 2 Market Square Retail Retail Retail Retail Retail Retail Retail Retail B C D C E F G li I J K L M N O Values Feet 2,849,600 45,000 2,659,600 42,000 1,583,100 25,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,092, 300 112,000 Tax Taxes apacity /Sq.Ft. 131,082 4.00 122,343 4.00 72,823 .4:00 0 4:00 0 _ 4:00 0 4:00 0 4.00 0 4.00 0 4:00 0 4:00 0 ,4.00- 0 4:00 0 4:00 0 4.00 0 _ 4:00 0 4.00 326,248 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 Phase I Phase I TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW Beginning Period Annual Project Fis. Dis. Captured Semi-Annual Admin Semi-Annual Ending Period Base Tax Tax Tax Capacity Tax Gross Tax Payment Net Tax Yrs. Mth. Yr. Ca aci Ca aci 15.00% Ca aci Increment 10.00% Increment .Yrs. Mth. Yr. 0.0 02-01 1994 71,021 71.,021 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 08-01 1994 0.5 08-01 1994 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 02-01 1995 1.0 02-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 08-01 1995 1.5 08-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 2.0 02-01 1996 2.0 02-01 1996 71,021 326,248 48,937 206,289 141,637 14,164 127,473 2.5 08-01 1996 2.5 08-01 1996 71,021 326,248 48,937 206,289 141,637 14,164 .127,473 3.0 02-01 1997 3.0 02-01 1997 71,021 336,035 50,405 214,608 147,349 14,735 132,614 3.5 08-01 1997 3.5 08-01 1997 71,021 336,035 50,405 214,608 147,349 14,735 132,614 4.0 02-01 1998 4.0 02-01 1998 71,021 346,116 51,917 223,177 153,232 15,323 .137,909 4.5.08-01 1998 4.5 08-01 1998 71,021 346,116 51,917 223,177 153,232 15,323 137,909 5.0 02-01 1999 5.0 02-01 1999 71,021 356,500 53,475 232,003 159,292 15,929 143,363 5.5 08-01 1999 5.5 08-01 1999 71,021 356,500 53,475 232,003 159,292 15,929 143,363 6.0 02-01 2000 6.0 02-01 2000 71,021 367,195 55,079 241,094 165,534 16,553 148,981 6.5 08-01 2000 6.5 08-01 2000 71,021 -367,195 55,079 241,094 165,534 16,553 148,981 7.0 02-01 2001 7.0 02-01 2001 71,021 .378,210 56,732 250,457 171,963 17,196 154,767 7.5-08-01 2001 7.5 08-01 2001 71,021 378,210 56,732 250,457 171,963 17,196 154,767 8.0 02-01 2002 8.0 02-01 2002 71,021 389,557 58,434 260,102 178,585 17,858 160,726 8.5 OS-01 2002 8.5 08-01 2002 .71,021 389,557 58,434 260,102 178,585 17,858 160,726 9.0 02-01 2003 9.0 02-01 -2003 71,021 401,243 60,187 270,036 185,405 18,541 166,865 9.5 OB-01 2003 9.5 08-01 2003 71,021 401,243 60,187 270,036 185,405 18,541 166,865 10.0 02-01 2004 10.0 02-01 2004 71,021. 413,281 61,992 280,267 192,430 19,243 173,187 10.5 08-01 2004 10.5 08-01 2004 71,021 413,281 61,992 280,267 192,430 19,243 173,187 11.0 02-01 2005 11.0 02-01 2005 71,021 425,679 .63,852 290,806 199,666 19,967 179,699 11.5 08-01 .2005 11.5 08-01 2005 71,021 425,679 63,852 .290,806 199,666 19,967 179,699 12:0 02-01 2006 12.0 02-01 2006 71,021 438,450 65,767 301,661 207,119 20,712 186,407 12.5 08-01 2006 12.5 08-01 2006 71,021 438,450 65,767 301,661 207,119 20,712 186,407 13.0 02-01 2007 13.0 02-01 2007 71,021 45.1,603 67,740 312,841 214,795 21,480 193,316 13.5 08-01 2007 13.5 08-01 2007 71,021 451,603 67,740 312,841 214,795 21,480 193,316 14,0 02-01 2008 14.0 02-01 2008 71,021 465,151 69,773 324,357 222,702. 22,270 200,432 14.5 08-01 2008 14.5 08-01 2008 71,021 .465,151 69,773 324,357 222,702 22,270 200,432 15.0 02-01 2009 15.0 02-01 2009 71,021 479,106 71,866 336,218 230,846 23:085 207,761 15.5 08-01 2009 15.5 08-01 2009 71,021 479,106 71,866 336,218 230,846 23,085 207,761 16.0 02-01 2010 16.0 02-01 2010 71,021 493,479 74,022. 348,436 239,234 23,923 215,311 16.5 08-01 2010 16.5 08-01 2010 71,021 493,479 74,022 348,436 239,234 23,923 215,311 17.0 02-01 2011 17.0 02-01 2011 71,021 508,283 • 76,242 361,019 247,874- 24,787 223,087 17.5 08-01 2011 17.5 08-01 2011 71,021 508,283 76,242 361,019 247,874 24,787 . 223,087 18.0 02-01 2012 TOTALS 6,115,326. 611,533 5,503,794 PRESENT VALUE 2,625,814 262,581 2,363,233 $-7 R1100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. -Please review all assumpSions. • • CSM94A PHASE II (With Fiscal Disparities Election Change) B-8 03/16!94 City of Richfield -C.S.M. Project Phase II - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 1 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS .SHADED AREAS MAY REQUIRE FURTHER DISCUSSION Distract: LL.N. Inflation Rate 3.0000% .Present Value Rate 8.50% Fiscal Disp. Contrabution Ratio 0.0000% Tax Capacity (Extension) Rate 1.373190 Year District Created: Nov. 1985 first Year of Increment: June 1987 last Date of TI Pa ment: June 2011 PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES -PAY 1994 APARTMENT 3.400% COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4.600% COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000% COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600% NONHMSTD RESID 2.300% HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000% HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2.000% HOMSTD RESID 115K+ 2.000% VACANT LAND 4.600% PID BASE MARKET VALUE PROPERTY TYPE BASE TAX CAPACITY 33-028-24-43-0009 0 R 0 33-028-24-43-0010 1,470,000 A 0 Cloverleaf 33-028-24-43-0015 114;000' LC' N/A- . Cloverleaf 33-028-24-43-0016: 500;000 R NIA cloeerleaP 33-028-24=43-0017 226;000 LC N!A Cloverleaf _33-028=24-43-0018. Z40-,200 CC N/A 33-028-24-44-0025 146,900 VL 0 33-028-24-44-0026 94,700 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0027 166,500 C 0 33-028-24-44-0028 91,800 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0028 87,500 R 0 33-028-24-44-0073 147,300 CC 5,176 33-028-24-44-0074 108,900 C 5,009 33-028-24-44-0075 107,100 CC 3,327 " 33-028-24-44-0076 119,700 CC 3,906 33-028-24-44-0077 91,200 C 4,195 33-028-24-44-0078 78,100 CC 2,343 33-028-24-44-0080 283,500 CC 11,441 33-028-24-44-0081 78,700 C 3,620 33-028-24-44-0082 .91,200 C 4,195 33-028-24-44-0083 128,300 CC 4,302 33-028-24-44-0084 135,100 C 6,215 33-028-24-44-0085 87,200 CC 2,616 33-028-24-44-0086 75,100 C 3,455 33-028-24-44-0087. 230,600 CC 9,008 33-028-24-44-0088 128,400 CC 4,306 33-028-24-44-0089 393,100 CC 16,483 33-028-24-44-0090 216,600 CC 8,364 33-028-24-44-0091 110,600 CC 3,488 33-028-24-44-0092 53,800 C 2,475 33-028-24-44-0093 53,800 C 2,475 33-028-24-44-0094 100,300 CC 3,014 33-028-24-44-0095 55,400 CC 1,662 33-028-24-44-0095 64,000 R 640 33-028-24-44-0096 "232,000. C .10,672 33-028-24-44-0097 148,100 CC 5,213 33-028-24-44-0099 295,100. CC 11,975 33-028-24-44-0100 221,100 C 10,171 33-028-24-44-0101 150.800 CC 5.337 B-9 • f l F ~, ~~ RI100-18 Prepared by Publicorp lnc. -Please review all assumptions. CSM94C 0311.6/94 City of Richfield - C.S:M. Project Phase II - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Develo ment T Market Values PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION Square Tax Taxes Feet Ca aci /S .Ft. Construct Pa able Retail Phase I A 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase I 8 0 0 0 4:00 1994 1996 Retail Phase I C 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase II D 2,216,400 .35,000 101,952 ~ 4:00 1994 1996 Retail Phase II C 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase II E 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase 11 F 1,293,400 20,425 59,497 4.00 1994 .1996 Retail Phase tl G 854,900 13,500 39,324 4.00 1994 1996 Retail H 0 0 0 4.00- 1994 1996 Retail I 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail J 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail K 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail L 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 , Retail M 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail N 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail O 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 TOTALS 7,530,900 118,925 346,420 Page 2 Beginning Period Yrs. Mth. Yr. Annual Base Tax Ca aci Project Tax Ca aci Fis. Dis. Tax Capacity 0.00% Captured Tax Ca aci Semi-Annual Gross Tax Increment Admin Payment 10.00% Semi-Annual Net Tax Increment Ending Period Yrs, Mth. Yr. 0.0 02-01 1994 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 08-01 1994 0.5 08-01 1994 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 02-0i 1995 1.0 02-01 1995 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 08-01 1995 1.5 08-01 1995 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 2.0 02-01 1996 2.0 02-01 1996 155,079 155,079. 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 08-01 1996 2.5 08-01 1996 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 3.0 02-01 1997 3.0 OZ-01 1997 155,079 346,420 0 191,340 131,373 13,137 118,236 3.5 08-01 1997 3.5 08-01 1997 155,079 346,420 0 191,340 . 131,373 13,137 118,236 4.0 02-01 1998 4.0 02-01 1998 155,079 356,812 0 201,733 138,509. 13,851 124,658 4.5 08-01 1998 4.5 08-01 1998 155,079 356,812 0 201;733 138,509 13,851 124,658 5.0 02-01 1999 5.0 02-01 1999 155,079 367,517 0 212,437 145,858 14,586 131,272 5.5 08-01 1999 5.5 08-01 1999 155,079 367,517 0 212,437 145,858 14,586 131,272 6.0 02-01 2000 6.0 02-01 2000 155,079 378,542 0. 223,463 153,428 15,343 138,086 6.5 08-01 2000 6.5 08-01 2000 155;079 378,542 0 223,463 153,428 15,343 138,086 7.0 02-01 2001 7.0 02-01 200'1 155,079 „ 389,898 0 234,819 -161,226 16,123 145,103 7.5 08-01 2001 7.5 08-01 2001 155,079 389,898 0 234,819 161,226 16,123 145,103 8.0 02-0'I 2002 8.0 02-01 2002 155,079 401,595 0 246,516 169,257 16,926 152,331 8.5 08-01 2002 8.5 08-01 2002 155,079 401,595 0 246,816 169,257 16,926 152,331 9.0 02-01 2003 9.0 02-01 2003 155,079 413,643 0 258,564 177,529 17,753 159,776 9.5 08-01 2003 9.5 08-01 2003 155,079 413,643 0 258,564 177,529 17,753. 159,776 10.0 02-01 2004 10.0 02-01 2004 155,079 426,052 0 270,973 186,049 18,605 167,444 10.5 08-01 2004 10.5 08-01 2004 155,079 426,052 0 270,973 186,049 18,605 167,444• 11.0 02-01 2005 11.0 02-01 2005 155,079 438,834 0 283,755 194,825 19,482 175,342 11.5 08-01 2005 11.5 08-01 2005 155,079 438,834 0 283,755 194,825 19,482 175,342 12.0 02-01 2006 12.0 02-01 2006 155,079 451,999 0 296,920 203,864 20,386 183,477 12.5 08-01 2006 12.5 08-01 2006 155,079 451,999 0 296,920 203,864 20,386 183,477 13.0 02-01 2007 13.0 02-01 2007 155,079 465,559 0 310,480 213,174 21,317 191,856 13.5 08-01 2007 13.5 08-01 2007 155,079 465,559 0 310,480 213,174 21,317 191,856 14.0 02-01 2008 14.0 02-01 2008 155,079 479,526 0 324,446 222,763 22,276 200,487 14.5 08-01 2008 14.5 08-01 2008 155,079 479,526 0 324,446 222,763 22,276 200,487 15.0 02-01 2009 15.0 02-01 2009 155,079 493,912 0 338,832 232,640 23,264 209,376 15.5 08-01 2009 15.5 08-01 .2009 155,079 493,912 0 338,832 232,640 23,264 209,376 16.0 02-01 2010 16.0 02-01 2010 155,079 508,729 0 353,650 242,814 24,281 218,533 16.5 08-01 2010 16.5 08-01 2010 155,079 508,729 0 353,650 242,814 24,281 218,533 - 17.0 02-01 2011 17.0 02-01 2011 155,079 523,991 0 368,911 253,293 25,329 227,963 17.5 08-01 2011 17.5 08-01 2011 155,079 523,991 0 366,911 253.293 25.329 227.963 18.0 02-01 2012 B-10 RI100-18 Prepared by Pubticorp tnc. -Please review alt assumptions. ~ C5M94C PHASE II • aeries Election Change) ~,i~ut Fiscal ~~sP • • g-l 1 03/16/94 City of Richfield -C.S.M. Project Phase II - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 1 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS SHADED AREAS MAY REQUIREFURTHER DISCUSSION District: LL:N. Inflation Rate 3.0000% Present Value Rate 8.50% Fiscal Disp. Contribution Ratio 15.0000% Tax Capacity (Extension) Rate 1.373190 Year District Created: Nov. 1985 First Year of Increment: June 1987 Last Date of TI Pa ment: June 2011 PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES -PAY 1994 APARTMENT 3.400% COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4.600% COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000% COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600% NONHMSTD RESID 2.300% HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000% HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2.000% HOMSTD RESID 115K+ 2.000% VACANT LAND 4.600% PID BASE MARKET VALUE PROPERTY TYPE BASE TAX CAPACITY 33-028-24-43-0009 0 R 0 33-028-24-43-0010 1,470,000 A 0 Eiovetleaf 33-028-24-43-001.5 114;000 LC `N/A Cloverleaf 33-028-24-43-0016 500;000 R NIA Cloverleaf 33-028-24=43-0017 226,000 LC NIA Cloverleaf: 33-028-24-43-0018 740,200 CC. N/A 33-028-24-44-0025 146,900 VL 0 33-028-24-44-0026 94,700 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0027 166,500 C 0 33-028-24-44-0028 91,800 CC 0 33-028-24-44-0028 87,500 R 0 33-028-24-44-0073 147,300 CC 5,176 33-028-24-44-0074 108,900 C 5,009 33-028-24-44-0075 107,100 CC 3,327 33-028-24-44-0076 119,700 CC 3,906 33-028-24-44-0077 91, 200 C 4,195 33-028-24-44-0078 78,100 CC 2,343 33-028-24-44-0080 283,500 CC 11,441 33-028-24-44-0081 78,700 C 3,620 33-028-24-44-0082 91,200 C 4,195 33-028-24-44-0083 128,300 CC 4,302 33-028-24-44-0084 135,100 C 6,215 33-028-24-44-0085 87,200 CC 2,616 33-028-24-44-0086 75,100 C 3,455 33-028-24-44-0087 230,600 CC 9,008 33-028-24-44-0088 128,400_ CC 4,306 33-028-24-44-0089 393,100 CC 16,483 33-028-24-44-0090 216,600 CC 8,364 33-028-24-44-0091 110,600 CC 3,488 33-028-24-44.0092 53,800 C 2,475 . 33-028-24-44-0093 53,800 C 2,475 33-028-24-44-0094 100,300 CC 3,014 33-028-24-44-0095 55,400 CC 1,662 33-028-24-44-0095 64,000 R 640 33-028-24-44-0096 232,000 C 10,672 33-028-24-44-0097 148,100 CC 5,213 33-028-24-44-0099 295,100 CC 11,975" 33-028-24-44-0100 221,100 C 10,171 33-028-24-44-0101 150,800 CC 5,337 B-12 R1100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. -Please review all essumpdons. CSM94C D3H6/94 City of Richfield -C.S.M. Project. Phase II - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 2 Develo meet T e Market Values PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION Square Tax Taxes Feet Ca aci !S .Ft. Construct Pa able Retail Phase I A 0 0 0 4:00 1994 1996 Retail Phase I B 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase I C 0 0 0 4:00 1994 1996 Retail Phase II D .2,216,400 35,000 101,952 4:00 1994 '1996 Retail Phase II C 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4:00 1994 1996 Retail Phase II E 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase II F 1,293,400 20,425 59,497 4:00 1994 1996 Retai! Phase II G 854,900 13,500 39,324 , 4:00 1994 1996 Retail H 0 0 0 4.00 1994 •1996 Retail I 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail J 0 0 0 ' -'.4.00'. 1994 1996 Retail K 0 0 0 ' :4.00' 1994 1996 Retail L 0 0 0 4100 1994 1996 Retail M 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail N 0 0 0 4.00- 1994 1996. Retail O 0 0 0 - 4.00 1994 1996 TOTALS 7,530,900 118,925 346,420 • TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW Beginning Period "Annual Project Fis. Dis. 'Captured Semi-Annual Admin Semi-Annual Ending Period Base Tax Tax Tax Capacity Tax Gross Tax Payment Net Tax Yrs.. Mth. Yr. Ca aci Ca aci ' :15.00% Ca aci Increment 10.00% Increment Yrs. Mth. Yr. 0.0 02-01 1994 .155,079 155,079 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0.5 08-01 1994 0.5 08-01 1994 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 02-01 1995 1.0 02-01 1995 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 08-01 1995 1.5 08-01. 1995 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 2.0 02-01 1996 2.0 02-01 1996 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 08-01 1996 2.5 08-01 1996 155,079 155,079 0 0 0 0 0 3.0 02-01 1997 3.0 02-01 1997 155,079 346,420 51,,963 139,377 95,696 9,570 86,126 3.5 08-01 1997 3.5 08-01 1997 155,079 346,420 51,963 139,377 95,696 9,570 86,126 4.0 02-01 1998 4.0 02-01 1998 155,079 356,812 53,522 148,211 101,761 10,176 91,585 4.5 08-01 1998 4.5 08-01 1998 155,079 356,812 53,522 148,211 101.,761 10,176 91,585 5.0 02-01 1999 5.0 02-01 .1999 .155,079 367,517 55,127 157,310 108,008 10,801 97,207 5.5.08-01 1999 5.508-01 1999 155,079 367,517 55,127 157,310 108,008 10,801 97,207 6.0 02-01 2000 6.0 02-01 2000 155,079 378,542 56,781 166,681 114,443 11,444 102,998 6.5 08-01 2000 6.5 08-01 2000 155,079 378,542 56,781 166,681 114,443 11,444 102,998 7.0 02-01 2001 7.0 02-01 2001 155,079 389,898 58,485 :176,334 121,070 12,107 108,963 7.5 08-01 2001 7.5 08-01 2001 155,079 389,898 58,485 176,334 121,070 12,107 108,963 8.0 02-01 2002 8.0 02-01 2002 155,079 401,595 60,239 186,277 127,897 12,790 .115,107 8.5 08-01 2002 8.5 08-01 2002 155,079 401,595 60,239 186,277 127,897 12,790 115,107 9.0 02-01 2003 9.0 02-01 .2003 Y55,079 413,643 62,046 196,517 134,928 13,493 121,435 9.5 08-01 2003 9.5 08-01 2003 155,079 413,643 62,046 196,517 134,928 13,493 121,435 10.0 02-01 2004 10.0 02-01 2004 155,079 426,052 63,908 .207,065 142,170 14,217 127,953 10.5 08-01 2004 10.5 08-01 2004 155,079 426,052 63,908 207,065 .142,170 14,217 127,953 11.0 02-01 2005 11.0 02-01 2005 155,079 438,834 65,825 217,930 .149,629 14,963 134,666 11.508-01 2005 11,5 08-01 2005 155,079 438,834 65,825 217,930 149,629 14,963 134,666 12.0 02-01 2006 12A 02-01 2006 155,079 451,999 67,800 229,120 157,313 15,731 141,561 12.5.08-01 2006 12.5 08-01 2006 155,079 451,999 67,800 229,120 157,313 15,731 141,581 13.0 02-01 2007 13.0 02-01 2007 155,079 465,559 69,834 240,646 165,226 16,523 148,704 13.5 08-01 2007 13.5 08-01 2007 155,079 465,559 69,834 240,646 165,226 16,523 148,704 14.0 02-01 2008 14.0 02-01 2008 155,079 479,526 71,929 252,518 173,377 17,338 156,040 ~ 14.5 08-01 2008 '14.5 OS-01 2008 155,079 479,526 71,929 252,518 173,377 t7,338 156,040 15.0 02-01 2009 15.0 02-01 2009 155,079 493,912 74,087 264,745 181,773 18,177 163,596 15.5 08-01 2009 15.5 08-01 2009 155,079 493,912 74,087 .264,745 181.,773 18,177 163,596 16.0 02-01 2010 .16.0 02-01 2010 155,079 508,729 76,309 277,340 190,420 19,042 171,378 16.5 08-01 2010 16.5 08-01 2010 155,079 508,729 76,309 .277,340 190,420 19,042 171,378 17.0 02-01 2011 17.0 02-01 2011 155,079 523,991 78,599 290,313 199,327. 19,933 179,395 17.5 08-01 2011 17.5 08-01 2011 155,079 523,991 ' 78,599 290,313 199,327 19,933 179,395 18.0 02-01 2012 TOTALS 4,326,076 432,608 3,893,468 PRESENT VALUE 1,739,951 173,995 1,565,956 • B-13 RI100-18 Prepared, by Publicorp Inc. -Please review all assumptions. CSM94C PHASE I & PHASE II (With Fiscal Disparities Election Change) B-14 03/16/94 City of Richfield -C.S.M. Project Phase I And II - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 1 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS SHADED AREAS MAY REQUIRE FURTHER DISCUSSION District: _ Lt.N. Inflation Rate ~ 3.0000% Present Value Rate 8.50% Fiscal Disp. Contribution Ratio 0.0000% Tax Capacity (Extension) Rate.. 1.373190 Year District Created: Nov. 1985 First Year of Increment: June 1987 Last Date of TI Pa ment: June 2011 PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES -PAY 1994 APARTMENT 3.400°(0 COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4.600% COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000% COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600% NONHMSTD RESID 2.300% HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000% HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2.000% HOMSTD RESID 115K+ 2.000% VACANT LAND 4•~% ID BASE TAX CAPACITY BASE MARKET PROPERTY VALUE TYPE BASE TAX CAPACITY 33-028-24-43-0009 0 R 0 33-028-24-43-0010 1,470,000 A 49,980 Cloverteaf 33-028-24-43-0015 114;000 LC N%A ct°a~t~c 33-028-24-43-0016 500,000 _ R' NJA: '' Clovedwf 33-028-24-43-0017 226,000 LC NJA ctor~i~ 33-028-24-43-0018 740,200 CC N/A 33-028-24-44-0025 146,900 VL 6,757 33-028-24-44-0026 94,700 CC 2,841 33-028-24-44-0027 166,500 C 7,659 33-028-24-44-0028 91,800 CC 2,754 33-028-24-44-0028 87,500 R 1,030 33-028-24-44-0073 147,300 CC 5,176 33-028-24-44-0074 108,900 C 5,009 33-028-24-44-0075 107,100 CC 3,327 33-028-24-44-0076 119,700 CC 3,906 33-028-24-44-0077 91,200 C 4,195 33-028-24-44-0078 78,100 CC 2,343 33-028-24-44-0080 283,500 CC 11,441 33-028-24-44-0081 78,700 C 3,620 33-028-24-44-0082 91,200 C 4,195 33-028-24-44-0083 128,300 CC 4,302 33-028-24-44-0084 135,100 C 6,215 33-028-24-44-0085 87,200 CC 2,616 33-028-24-44-0086 75,100 C 3,455 33-028-24-44-0087 . 230,600 CC 9,008 33-028-24-44-0088 128,400 CC 4,306 33-028-24-44-0089 393,100 CC 16,483 33-028-24-44-0090 216,600 CC 8,364 33-028-24-44-0091 110,600 CC 3,488 33-028-24-44-0092 53,800. C 2,475 33-028-24-44-0093 53,800 C 2,475 33-028-24-44-0094 100,300 CC 3,014 .33-028-24-44-0095 55,400 CC 1,662 33-028-24-44-0095 •64,000 R 640 33-028-24-44-0096 232,000 C 10,672 33-028-24-44-0097 148,100 CC 5,213 33-028-24-44-0099 295,100 CC 11,975 33-028-24-04-0100 221,100 C 10,171 33-028-24-44-0101 1.50,800 CC 5,337 7,622,700 226,101 B-15 • C~ RI100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. -Please review alt assumptions. CSM94F 03/16/94 City of Richfield - C.S.M: Project Phase I And II - $4.00 - 3% Inflation Page 2 Develo ment T e Marken Values PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION Square Tax Taxes Feet Ca aci /S :Ft. Construct Pa able Retail Phase I A 2,849,600 45,000 131,082 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase I B 2,659,600 42,000 122,343 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase I C 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase II D 2,216,400 35,000 101,952 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase II C 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase II E 1,583,100 25,000 72,823 4:00 1994 1996 Retail Phase II F 1,293,400 20,425 59,497 4.00 1994 1996 Retail Phase II G 854,900 13,500 39,324 4.00 1994 1996 Retail H ~ 0 0 0 4.00. 1994 1996 Retail I 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 ~ Retail J 0 0 0 4:00 1994 1996 Retail K 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail L 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail M 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 ~ Retail N 0 0 0 4.00 1994 1996 Retail O 0 0 0 4.00. 1994 1996 TOTALS 14,623,200 230,925 672,667 Beginning Period Annual Project Fis. Dis. Captured Semi-Annual Admin Semi-Annual Ending Period Base Tax Tax Tax Capacity Tax Gross Tax Payment Net Tax Yrs Mth Yr Capacity Capacity 000% Capacity Increment 10.00% Increment Yrs. Mth: Yr. 0.0 02-01 1994 71,021 ~ 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 08-01 1994 0.5 08-01 1994 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 02-01 1995 1.0 02-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 08-01 1995 1.5 08-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 2.0 02-01 1996 2.0 02-01 1996 71,021 326,248 0 255,226 175,237 17,524 157,713 2.5 08-01 . 1996 2.5 08-01 1996 71,021 326,248 0 255,226 175,237 17,524 157,713 3.0 02-01 1997 3.0 OZ-01 1997 226,101 872,667 0 446,566 306,610 30,661 275,949 3.5 08-01 1997 3.5 08-01 1997 226,101 672,667 0 446,566' 306,610 30,661 275,949 4.0 02-01 1998 4.0 02-01 1998 226,101 692,847 0 466,747 320,466 32,047 288,419 4.5 08-01 1998 4.5 08-01 1998 226,101 692,847 0 466,747 320,466 32,047 288,419 5.0 02-01 1999 5.0 02-01 1999 226,101 713,633 0 487,532 334,737 33,474 301,263 5.5 08-01 1999 5.5 08-01 1999 226,101 713,633 0 487,532 334,737 33,474 301,263 6.0 02-01 2000 6.0 02-01 2000 226,101 735,042 0 508,941 349,436 34,944 314,493 6.5 08-01 2000 6.5 08-01 2000 226,101 735,042 0 508,941 349,436 34,944 314,493 7.0 02-01 2001 7.0 02-01 2001 226,101 • 757,093 0 530,992 364,577 36,458 328,119 7.5 08-01 2001 7.5 08-01 2001 226,101 757,093 0 530,992 364,577 36,458 328,119 8.0 02-01 2002 8.0 02-01 2002 226,101 779,806 0 553,705 380,171 38,017 342,154 8:5 08-01 2002 8.5 08-01 2002 226,101 779,806 0 553,705 380,171 38,017 342,154 9.0 02-Q1 2003 9.0 02-01 2003 226,101 803,200 0 577,099 396,233 39,623 356,610 9.5 08-01 2003 9.5 08-01 2003 226,101 803,200 0 577,099 396,233 39,623 356,610 10.0 02-01 2004 10.0 02-01 2004 226,101 827,296 0 601,195 412,778 41,278 371,500 10.5 08-01 2004 10.5 08-01 2004 226,101 827,296 0 601,195 412,778 41,278 371,500 11.0 02-01 2005 11.0 02-01 2005 226,101 852,115 0 626,014 429,818 42,982 386,836 11.5 OB-01 2005 11.5 08-01 2005 226,101 852,115 0 626,014 429,818 42,982 .386,836 12.0 02-01 2006 12.0 02-01 2006 226,101 877,678 0 651,577 447,370 44,737 402,633 12.5 08-01 2006 12.5 08-01 2006 226,101 877,678 0 651,577 447,370 _44,737 402,633 13.0 02-01 2007 13.0 02-01 2007 226,101 904,009 0 677,908 465,448 46,545 418,903 13.5 08-01 2007 13.5 08-01 2007 226,101 904,009 0 677,908 465,448 46,545 418,903 14.0 02-01 2008 14.0 02-01 2008 226,101 931,129 0 705,028 484,069 48,407 435,662 14.5 08-01 2008 14.5 08-01 2008 226,101 931,129 0 705,028 484,069 48,407 435,662 15.0 02-01 2009 15.0 02-01 2009 226,101 959,063 0 732,962 503,248 50,325 452,923 15.5 08-01 2009 15.5 OS-01 2009 226,101 959,063 0 732,962 503,248 50,325 452,923 16.0 02-01 2010 16.0 02-01 2010 226,101 987,835 0 761,734 523,003 52,300 470,702. 16.5 08-01 2010 16.5 08-01 2010 226,101 987,835 0 761,734 523,003 52,300 470,702 17.0 02-01 2011 17.0 02-01 2011 226,101 1,017,470 0 791,369 543,350 54,335 489,015 17.5 08-01 2011 17.5 08-01 2011 226,101 1,017,470 0 791,369 543,350 54,335 489,015 18.0 02-01 2012 TOTALS 12,873,101 1,287,310 __11,585,790 PRESENT VALUE 5,403,876 540,388 4,863,488 B-16 RI100-18 Prepared by Publicorp Inc. -Please review all assumptions. CSM94F ~~~~J ~.ri PKASE I & 'P1~'~E II ~~ies Elect-on Change) ViV~ Fiscal Dispa • B-17 03/16/94 City of Richfreld -C.S.M. Project Phase I And 11- $4.00 - 3%.Inflation Page 1 BASK ASSUMPTIONS SHADED AREAS MAY REQUIRE FURTHER'OISCUSSION District: LL.N. Inflation Rate 3.0000% Present Value Rate 8.50% Fiscal Disp. ConMbution Ratio 15.Q000% Tax Capacity (Extension) Rate 1.373190 Year District Created: Nov. 1985 First Year of increment: June 1987 Lass Date of TI Pa ment: June 2011 APARTMENT 3.400% COMMERCIAL: FULL MV 4.600% COMMERCIAL <100K 3.000% COMMERCIAL >100K 4.600% NONHMSTD RESfO 2.300% HOMSTD RESID <72K 1.000% HOMSTD RESID <72K-115K 2.000% HOMSTD RESID 1i5K+ 2.000% VACANT LAND 4.600% PID BASE MARKET VALUE PROPERTY TYPE BASE TAX CAPACITY 33-028-24-43-0009 0 R 0 33-028-24-43-0010 1,470,000 A 49,980 Ciaverleat 33.028-24-43.OOT5 114000 LG _ N/A Cloverlaf' 33-02$&24-43=0016 500,000 #2 N!A cio~~~~r 33-028-24=43-0017 ,.226,000 LC N1A ciovertea£ 33-028-24-43-0018 ?40;200 CC N/A 33-028-24-44-0025 146,900 VL 6,757 33-028-24-44-0026 94,700 CC 2,841 33-028-24-44-0027 166,500 C 7,659 33-028-24-44-0028 91,800 CC 2,754 33-028-24-44-0028 87,500 R 1,030 33-028-24-44-0073 147,300 CC 5,176 33-028-24-44-0074 108,900 C 5,009 33-028-24-44-0075 107,100 CC 3,327 33-028-24-44-0076 119,700 CC 3,906 33-028-24-44-0077 91,200 C 4,195 33-028-24-44-0078 78,100 CC 2,343 33-028-24-44-0080 283,500 CC 11,441 33-028-24-44-0081 78,700 C 3,620 33-028-24-44-0082 91,200 C 4,195 33-028-24-44-0083 128,300 CC 4,302 33-028-24-44-0084 135,100 C 6,215 33-028-24-44-0085 87,200 CC 2,616 33-028-24-44-0086 75,100 C 3,455 33-028-24-44-0087 230,600 CC 9,008 33-028-24-44-0088 128,400 CC 4,306 33-028-24-44-0089 393,100 CC 16,483 33-028-24-44-0090 216,600 CC 8,364 33-028-24-44-0091 110,600 CC 3,488 33-028-24-44-0092 53,800 C 2,475 33-028-24-44.0093 53,800 C 2,475 33-028-24-44-0094 100,300 CC 3,014 33-028-24-44-0095 55,400 CC 1,662 33-028-24-44-0095 64,000 R 640 33-028-24-44-0096 232,000 C 10,672 33-028-24-44-0097 148,100 CC 5,213. 33-028-24-44-0099 295,100 CC 11,975 33-028-24-44-0100 221,100 C 10,171 33-028-24-44-0101 150.800 CC .5,337 B-18 RI100-18 ~ Prepared by Publicorp Inc. -Please review all assumptions. CSM94F 0311G/94 .City of Rtchfietd • C.3.M.. Projoct Phase t And It • 64.00 - 39b Intletion Devolopment Ty~- ' alai! i'traso 1 A alai! phase I 8 stall Phase I C Retailphase tf D t~etssu'Phase fl C etail Phase II E eteil Phase It F t~etall PtursQ II G Retail H Relatl t ReteN J Retail K Retali L Retail M Retau N R'etaif s-..,_ O .. Page 2 • Market Squaro Tax Taxes 2,859,800 1,583,100 • 2,216,400 1,583,100 1,583,100 1,293,400 864,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14,623,200 ' 4G,000 131,tRf1 :;?;4.W ' 42,000 122,343 : ~ : ::' •; ~ ;•!!4t~t7 25,000 72,823 . r::.:::4,00 95,000 101,D52 ', : •' ~; ; : 4. t~0. 25,000 72,823 ; • ; •:; ! :4 ap 26,000 72,823 ,.. .::~ ::'. ?400 20,425 69,497 ; ; , .:.:: `4:i~0 13,500 99,324 ;'::;.:; ~A,00 p 0 :' : •:.::.:4:04: 0 0 :~'. ::::::: X4:00 0 0. '::::;':;4:00. 0 0 . ' :. ' ~ :: +1:•pp. 0 0 ' ; :-:4.00 0 0' • •~ 4'.00; 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 19D4 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1994 1684 1994 1094 1998 1998 1996 1998 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 1996 1998 1996 1968 .. .. .. ~TNCR~i~I~~FLO~-~ .,. Be~InNnp Period Annual Project Firs. Ots. ~ Captured Semi-Annual Admfn Seml•Annual Endtn Period 9 Baia Tax Tax Tex Capacity Tax Gross Tex Payrtwni Net7ex Yre. Mth, Yr. Ca~acl~~Cepaci~ "1.5,0091 Ca t Incroment 10.00/, tncroment _ Yn. Mth. Yr. .0 0~4 17 021 -71,021 " t5"• "~~~" ~~~'0 0.5~b8 1 1994 0.5 08-01 1994 11,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 02-07 1995 1.0 02-01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 08.01 1995 1.6 08.01 1995 71,021 71,021 0 0 0 0 0 2.0 02-01 1996 2.0 02.01 1998 71,0?1 326,248 48,937 206,269. 141,837 14,184 127,473 2.5 08-01. 1998 2.5 08-01 1998 71,021 326,248 48,937 206,289 141,637 14,164 127,473 3.0 02-01 1997 3.0 02-01 1997 228,101 872,887 100,900 345,668 237,333 23,733 213,800 3,5 0801 1997 9.5 08.01 1997 226,101 672,667 100,900 345,666 237,333 23,733 213,800 4,0 02-01 1998 4.0 02.01 1998 226,101 892,847 103,927 382,818 249,110 24,911 224,199 4,5 08-01 1998 4.5 08-01 1998 226,101 892,847 103,827 982,819 249,110 24,911 224,199 5.0 02-01 1999 5.0 02.01 1999 226,101 713,633 107,045 380,487 281,240 28,124 235,116 5.5 p8-01 1999 5.5 08-01 1999 226,101 713,633 107,045 980,487 261,240 28,124 235,116 8.0 02.01 2000 8.0 02.01 2000 226,101 735,042 110,258 398,665 273,735 27,373 248,387 8.5 06.01 2000 8.5 OB•Ot 2000 228,101 735,042 110,258 398,665 273,735 27,373 248,381 7.0 02.01 2001 7.0 02-01 2001 228,101 ' 757,093 113,584 417,428 286,604 28,860 257,944 T.6 08-01 2001 7.5 08-01 2001 226,101 757,493 113,564 417,428 288,804 28,860 257,944 8.0 02-01 2002 8.0 02-01 2002 226,101 719,806 116,971 438,734 299,859 26,986 269,813 8,5 OS-01 2002 8.5 08-01 2002 226,101 779,806 116,971 438;734 289,859 29,986 ?89,813 9.0 02.01 2003 9.0 02.01 2003 226,101 803,200 120,480 456,819 313,612 91,351 282,181 9.5 08.01 2003 9s oe-0/ 2003 226,101 803,200 120,480 468,819 913,512 91,351 282,181 10.0 02.01 2004 . 10.0 02-01 2004 226,101 827,296 124,094 477,101 ~ 327,575 32,757 294,817 10.5 08.01 2001 10.5 0&01 2004 226,101 827,?96 1?4,094 471,101 927,575 82,767 294,817 11,0 02.01 2005 11,0 02-OS 2005 228,101 852,115 127,817. 496,197 ~ 942,059 94,208 307,853 ~ 11.8 OB•01 2005 11,5 08.01 2005 228,101 852,115 127,817 498,197 342,059 34,208 907,853 12.0 OZ-01 200$ 12,0 02.01 2006 226,101 877,878 131,852 b19,928 958,978 35,898 321,281 12.5 OB-01 2008 .12:5 OB-01 2006 226,101 877,678 131,852 519,928 356,978 35,698 321,281 13,0 42.01 2007 13.0 02-01 2007 226,101 904,009 135,601. 642,307 372,345 37,?34 335,110 ~ 13,6 08.01 2007 13.5 08-01 2007 226,101 904,009. 135,801 542,307 372,345 37,234 33b,110 ~ 14.0.02-0i 2008 14,0 02-0i 2008 226,101 931,129 1.39,669 685,359 988,172 98,8!7 349,355 14.5 08-01 2006 14,5 0&01 ~ 2008 226,101 ~ x31,129 139,689 6x5,359 388,172 38,817 349,355 15.0 02-01 2009 16.0 02-01 2009 228,101 959,063 143,659 689,103 404,475 40,447 384,027 16.5 08.01 2009 13.5 08.01 .2009. 228,101 959,063 .143,859 b89,103 4Q4,47b 40,447 961,027 18.0 02.01 2010 -16.0 02.01 2010 228,101 987,835 148,175 813,559 421,288 42,127 979,140 16.6 08.01 2010 16.5 08-01 2010 226,101 987,835 148,175 819,659 421,288 42,127 379,140 17.0 02-01 2011 17,0 OZ-01 2011 ?26,101 1,017,470 152,820 836,748 X38,681 ~ 49,858 994,705 17.5 08-01 2011 17.5 08-01 2011 26,101 1.017,470 152.6?0 $38,74Q, 438 681 43 394 705 18.0 02.01 2012 _ _ Tozat.s _ ~ ~2s ,022 a~~ oar .. - -SENT VALtj~- , ~ .,. ~ ,277,284 427,7 8 3,8 9 6513 . ' B-19 R1100.18 prepared by Publicorp InC. - Ploaso fAVlbw ntl ascuftlptions. GSM94F APPENDIX C IMPACTS ON TAXING JURISDICTIONS C-1 ' cal DisPa~ties Election Change With Fis • • ~-2 IMPACT ON TAXING JURISDICTIONS - lath Fiscal Disparities Election Change The purpose of analyzing impacts on taxing jurisdictions is to (a.) determine how tax increment assistance provided to a proposed development project impacts taxing jurisdictions; (b.) determine the level of impact as it relates to tax base; and (c.) determine the amount of taxes a taxing entity would need to levy in order to increase their respective tax base by the amount the project brings in absent the project. If the "But For" test were not met, construction would not occur. That is, without the creation and existence of the tax increment district, construction would not occur because the cost of developing the proposed project by a private developer would be prohibitive. Acceptable rates of return on project investment could not be met and risk would be too high. Development would not move forward. Construction would not occur without the assistance of the city. In light of this, the impact to taxing jurisdictions would be $0. Foregone would be the benefits of a new construction project, increase overall tax base, and other project objectives. The estimated impact of the ILN Tax Increment District would be as follows if the project were built without tax increment financing: IMPACT ON TAX BASE The following table displays captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rates and tax capacities are the payable 1994 figures for all jurisdictions. The potential taxes column is the estimate of the amount of taxes each jurisdiction would theoretically have to raise ~ if the goal of taxing entities was to raise tax base equal to that of the project without constructing the project. IMPACT ON TAX RATES In addition; the impact on the school district does not include the effect of state aid for education upon school district funding. C-3 Without Fiscal Disparities Election Change • • C-4 IMPACT ON TAXING JURISDICTIONS - l~thout Fiscal Disparities Election Change The purpose of analyzing impacts ontaxing jurisdictions is to (a.) determine how tax increment assistance provided to a proposed development project impacts taxing jurisdictions; (b.) determine the level of impact as it relates to tax base; and (c.) determine the amount of taxes a taxing entity would need to levy in order to increase their respective tax base by the amount the project brings in absent the project. If the "But For" test were not met, construction would not occur. That is, without the creation and existence of the tax increment district, construction would not occur because the cost of developing the proposed project by a private developer would be prohibitive. Acceptable rates of return on project investment could not be met and risk would be too high. Development would not move forward. Construction would not occur without the assistance of the city. In light of this, the impact to taxing jurisdictions would be $0. Foregone would be the benefits of a new construction project, increase overall tax base, and other project objectives. The estimated impact of the ILN Tax Increment District would be as follows if the project were .built without tax increment financing: IMPACT ON TAX BASE The following table displays captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rates and tax capacities are the payable 1994 figures for all jurisdictions. The potential taxes column is the estimate of the amount of taxes each jurisdiction would theoretically have to raise if the goal of taxing entities was to raise tax base equal to that of the project without constructing the project. IMPACT ON TAX RATES Current Ca tured Potential . Taxin Enti Taz Rate Taz Ca aci Taxes Henne in Count 37.441 34s,666 129,421. Ci of Richfield 26.164 345,666 90,440 School District 280 66.190 345,666 228,796 Other 7. s24 34s,666 26,008 Total - 137.319 34s,666 474,665 In addition, the impact on the school district does not include the effect of state aid for education upon school district funding. C-s HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 12 Agenda March 21, 1994 Issue Statement: Discussion of alternatives for providing financial assistance to CSM Corporation, Shops at Lyndale. Background• CSM needs tax increment assistance to redevelop the proposed site for Shops at Lyndale. The redevelopment of this type of site is the basic reason for which urban renewal/redevelopment programs were created beginning in the 1950's. The area is improved with buildings. The cost to purchase and clear the land for redevelopment must be assisted since competitive rents paid by users of the site are insufficient to pay for redevelopment. This is exactly the same situation as existed in 1975 when the HRA and City Council decided to establish the LHN project. Unlike the LHN, the tax increment available in the ILN is reduced by payments to the fiscal disparities pool. CSM indicates that they require an amount of assistance greater than the available tax increment, estimated at $2.8 million. This does not include the fiscal disparities payment. Two alternatives are available for providing the additional assistance: request the City Council to make the required fiscal -~ disparities contributions from non-ILN property, or provide an additional offsetting land write down for Phase I. The first alternative for discussion is switching the source of the fiscal disparities contribution. In 1992, the State Legislature modified existing state law at the request of the City Council. The .modification made it possible for the City Council to elect to make the required fiscal disparities contributions for non-residential development in the ILN from that portion of Richfield outside the ILN. On September 28, 1992 the City Council ".approved" the legislation making implementation possible at a later date. The fiscal disparities law was enacted by the State Legislature in the early 1970's. It requires metropolitan area communities to share a portion of the growth in their nonresidential tax base. .Communities share up to 40$ of that growth, the remaining part is retained within the community. Currently, Richfield's contribution is approximately 15.5$. The majority of Richfield's growth in nonresidential tax base has taken place within redevelopment projects. The LHN, established in 1975, is a pre-1979 tax increment financing district (TIF) and thus, is exempt from paying fiscal disparities. All the tax base growth within the project is available for project costs. As a . result of the tax increment laws of 1979, projects created thereafter are not exempt. Nonresidential tax base growth is -, post 1979 districts resulting from redevelopment had to be shared through the fiscal disparities pool. At the time a project was established, the community either elected to contribute the excess to fiscal disparities directly from the project, in effect making it a project expense, or to pay the contribution from property outside the district.. In 1985, when the ILN was established, it was decided that the fiscal disparities contribution would come from within the project. The context, within which this decision was made, is important to recall. In the fall of 1985, at the same time the Planning Commission, HRA and City Council were considering the establishment of the ILN,. a corporation known as CDR was executing development contracts with minimum value agreements of approximately $70 million. The development was programmed for the Cloverleaf site which was virtually undeveloped. The assistance needed by the developer was relatively modest. There were to be ample funds available for not only upgrading 77th Street within the ILN but also. for the fiscal disparities contribution. In 1994, the situation is significantly different. The Cloverleaf site is still vacant. The area which CSM seeks to redevelop between Emerson and Lyndale Avenues is a high cost area. The costs put this site at a competitive disadvantage with other commercial areas. Also, the number of years which can provide a tax increment for debt amortization is now at 16 rather than the 25 which was initially available. Publicorp Inc., financial advisor to the HRA, has completed an analysis and projected the financial impact of this proposed change. If the fiscal disparities contribution was shifted from the ILN to the balance of the City, an additional estimated $863,000 in present value of tax increment revenue would be available over the remaining life of the district or until the year 2012. The impact of the availability of these additional funds on the feasibility of redevelopment would be significant. The impact on properties outside the district would be relatively minimal. For example, on a homesteaded property valued at $85,000, the taxes would increase an estimated $2.26 annually. On a commercial property valued at $500,000 the taxes would increase an estimated $49.36. Publicorp representatives will be available at the March 21, 1994 meeting to answer questions. On September 16, 1991 when the HRA considered the need for the fiscal disparities shift, they also established a process which would be followed to implement such a shift. The process statement is attached. A resolution which the HRA would be requested to adopt, should a fiscal disparities shift be desired, is attached. The second alternative is to simply provide a land write down as part of Phase I from the redevelopment bonds of 1988. The suggested write down would be $600,000 which, although less than the projected present value of the stream of payments,. is a set value payable up front and not subject to probable fluctuation over time. The $600,00 would be paid in two installments; $500,000 for Phase I and $100,000 for Phase II. There are sufficient funds in the ILN account to make these payments. Recommended .Motion: Discuss the two options and direct staff to present that option which is most desirable at the March 28, 1994 concurrent City Council and HRA meeting. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The .change in economic conditions between 1985 and 1994 is significant. 2. CSM is requesting that the modification be made to increase the amount of tax increment available to help offset the high cost of land assembly and the loss of nine years of potential tax increment since the ILN was first established. 3. The process for implementing such a change adapted by the HRA is being followed. 4. The impact on property outside the ILN is relatively minimal- while at the same time significantly impacts the feasibility of redevelopment in the ILN. ' 5. The alternate proposal would not extend the tax impact beyond the ILN while still favorably impacting the feasibility of the project, albeit to a lesser degree. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Delay action. 2. Reject the request. Discussion/Decision Mode: Action must be taken at the March 28, 1994 meeting of this project is to continue. Resp~ct~~ly submitted, Jam~s(~. Prosser Exe ive Director JDP:cak _-_----- ~_ CAM ~orporatc~~i --~- 2561 Territorial Road • St. Paul, MN 55114-1500.612/646-1717 • FAX 612/646-2404 March 15, 1994 Mr. James D. Prosser City Manager City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, IVIN 55423-2599 Re: Shops at Lyndale NWC I-494 and Lyndale Avenue Dear Mr. Prosser: Enclosed please find the "But For" analyses for our proposed development of the above captioned project. We have prepared an analysis for each of Phases I and II, and for the project on an. overall basis. This analysis shows that without tax increment assistance, our return on equity for Phase I would only be 0.86%, but with the assistance becomes 10.04%. The return on equity for Phase II without assistance is only 4,85%, but becomes 11.89% with assistance. Overall, both phases of the project would only generate a return of 2. $1 % without assistance, and a return of 10.94.% with assistance. Given the risks involved in today's real estate development market, this project would not proceed with an overall return on equity of only 2.81 %. However, with assistance, the indicated return would be sufficient to proceed. There are several issues we would like to highlight in the analysis. First, the present value of the TIF assistance can be viewed as a land write down, even though our proposal is fora "pay as you go" TIF note. If the present value of the TIF payments is applied to the cost of acquiring the property, the net effect is to reduce the land cost to a level that provides for a rate of return sufficient to allow the' project to proceed, given the maximum rent payable by Tenants of the project. Mr. James D. Prosser March 15, 1994 Page 2 Second, the analysis shows that it is necessary to use an inflation factor for the "pay as you go" payments. The Tax Increment figure we used was prepared by .Sid Inman of Publicorp, with property taxes of $4.00 psf and a 3 % inflation factor. The Income Statement shows income derived from base rent, and the recovery of the expenses of operating the property. In order to induce the Tenants to sign Long term leases for the project, we have had to limit their contribution towards these operating expenses. If the takes go beyond this cap, our effective net rent is reduced, reducing our return on equity. In order to maintain the return necessary for the project to proceed, the development agreement must provide for the recapture of all of the tax increment, including that portion attributable to the rise in the market value of the property due to inflation. Third, we have a continuing incentive for the development of Phase II. Because the return on equity in Phase II is greater than Phase I, Phase II is required to earn the overall return on equity necessary for this project to proceed.. This should provide additional comfort to .the members of the HRA regarding our desire to proceed with both phases of the development. Should you have any questions on the enclosed analysis, please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience. I look forward to reviewing this matter with you in greater detail as warranted. Sincerely t, r ~` Murray Ko Acquisition ec: Bfuce Palmborg Byron Wallace John Dean Dave Garland Bill Franke Sid Inman SHOPS AT LYNDALE BUT FOR ANALYSIS CITY QF RICHFIELD '.-Mar-94 WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT WITH TAX INCREMENT PHASE I 112,404 SQUARE FEET SOURCES RND USE5 SOURCES AND USES SOURCES 50URCE5 ~ ~ . MQRTGAGE 9,644.327 75.4=: 6,783,303 53.4: Ei~UITY 3,241,44^c 25.4: 3,24i,44c 25.4: TAX INCREMENT 2,$21,424 2^2.0~ TOTAL SOURCES 12,845,769 104.Qr: 12,805,769 USES USES LAND 5,370,300 41.9: 5,370,340 41.9;. DEMOLITION 200,000 1.b: 244,044 1.6; ENViRONMENTALfSOIL TESTING 50,404 0.4% 50,000 0.4:: SOIL GQRRECTION 125,440 1.4'r.' 125,044 1.0~: QFFSITE WATER PONDING 104,004 0.8~: 104,000 4.8~ TOTAL LAIdD_CQSTS 5,845,344 45.b~:~ 5,845,304 45.6f RETAIL 1 TURNKEY 45,444 x+34.00 1,530,044 . 11.9 1,534,440 11,9% ~:ETAIL ? TURNKEY 42,444 434.40 1,428,000 21.2r 1,42$,444 11.2f RETAIL 3 TURNKEY 25,044 X36.44 900,!`00 7.0r 944,044 7.4:: -°'ETAIL 4 TURNKEY 0 4 ,_.:ETAiL 5 TURNKEY 0 0 RETAIL b TURNKEY 4 0 SMALL SHOPS 0 0 PADS 4 4 SITEWORK 112,000 X9.00 1,408,404 7.9: 1,048,400 7.9~ CONST. CONTINGENCY 3.0:: ~ 145,980 1.1~ 145,984 1.1~: TOTAL GONSRUCTIQN CASTS 5,411,980 39.1: 5,411,984 39.1: ARCHTTECTUREIENGINEERING X2,50 280,404 2.2~ 280,044 2.2~ SURVEYITITLE X0.15 16,$00 0.1%: 16,800 0,1~ LEASING FEE51'MARKETING X3.50 392,004 3.1 392,040 3.1': OItERHEAD X1.00 112,040 4.9~ 112,440 CQNSTRUCTION INTEREST 8.5% 990,937 7.7 990,937 7.7 LOAN PLACEMENT FEES 100,444 0.8 144,000 SOFT COST CONTINGENCY 3.0: 5b,752 56,752 ----------- 4.0': ----------- 0.4~: TOTAL SOFT COSTS 1,948,489 15.2 1,948,489 TOTAL PR03£CT COS75 12,805,7b9 100.0:: 12,$05,7b9 SHOPS AT LYNDALE RUT FOR Ah~ALYSIS CITY OF RICHFIELD -Mar-94 RETAIL f RETAIL 2 RETAIL 3 RETAIL 4 RETAIL 5 RETAIL 6 SMALL SHOPS FADS TOTAL MENTAL INCOME EXPENSE RECOVERY GAM TAXES INSURANCE MANAGEMENT FEES TtlTRL RECOVERIES POTENT-s AL GROSS INCOME LftEDIT/VACANCY RESERVE EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME OPERATING EXPENSES --------------- CAM TAXES INSURANCE MGMT FEES STRUCTURRL RESERVES TOTAL EXPENSES NE7 OE'ERATING INCOME MORTGAGE PAYMENT WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT INCOME STATEMENT 45,000 X12.00 540,000 rr2,000 X10.00 420,000 25,000 X11.50 287,500 1,247,500 1.25 FSF 4.04'FSF O.iO FSF 1.25 FSF 4.00 FSF 0.10 FSF 5.0::INCOME 0.25 PSF 144,400 448,404 11,200 0 599, 200 1,846,700 7.0:: (129,269) 1,717,431 140,004 448,000 11,200 62,375 28,040 b89,575 1,027,$56 20 YEAR TERM 8, 5 :INTEREST 9,b44,327 PRINCIPAL NET Ih~OME RETURN ON EQUITY 1,000,183 27,b73 0.86 20 YEAR TERM 8. S::INTER£ST WITH TAX INCREPiENT INCOME STATEMENT 544,000 420,000 287,544 1,247,500 140,004 448,000 11,200 599,^c00 1,$4b,700 ~129,2b9) 1,T°17,431 144,004 448,000 11,244 62,375 28,000 689,575 1,027,85b 746,405 321,452 14.04 SHOPS AT LYNDALE $UT FQR ANALY5IS CITY QF RICHFIELD ~.-Mar-94 PHASE II 116,475 SCIUARE FEET MORTGAGE EQUITY TAX INCREMENT TOTAL 50URCES LAND DEMOLITION ENVIkONMENTAL/SAIL TESTING SOIL GORREGTION QFFSITE WATER PQNDING TQTAL LAND CASTS WITHOUT TAX INCREMENT SOURCES AND USES SOURCES 4,170,071 75»Or: 3,056,b90 25,0•: 1LtL2b,7b2 USES 4,5b2,b48 300,000 50,000 75,000 0 4,9$7,608 104.0•: 37.3 "'. ~~: 0.4%: 4.6~ 0.0% 40.8% 1dITH TAX INGREMENT SOURCES AND USES SOURGES ~ _`: 7.102,926 58.2: 3,456,690 25.4: .,067,155 ib.9'r. 12,22b,7b1 USES 4,56.2,608 340,000 50,004 75,000 0 4,987,608 37.3.': 2.5~ 0.4.: 0.6~: 0.0~ 44.Sf RETAIL 1 TURNKEY 0 0~ O.Of 4 0.41 RETAIL 2 TURNKEY 0 4 0.0. 0 0.0:: RETAIL 3 TURNKEY 0 4 O.Of 0 O.Of `ETAIL 4 TURNKEY 35,000 X34.00 1,190,000 9.7% 1,190,000 9.7:: ..ETAIL 5 TURNKEY 25,000 X34.04 850,000 7.0 850,000 7.0% RETAIL 5 TURNKEY 25,044 X34.00 850,000 7.0•: 850,000 7.4~: SMALL SHOP'S 20,475 X35.00 71b,b25 5.9 7ib,625 5.9 :' FADS 11,000 X45.00 495,000 4.4~ 495,000 4.0 STTEWQRK iib,475 X9.00 1,048,275 8.b 1,048,275 8.6: GONST. CONTINGENCY 3,4:: 154,497 1.3~ 154,497 1.3:: TOTAL GONSRUCTION CAST S 5,344,397 43.4: 5,304,397 43.4f ARCHITECTURElENGINEERI NG X2.50 291,188 2.4~: 291.188 2.4.. SURVEY/TITLE X0.15 17,471 4.2 17,471 0.2 LEASING FEES/MARKETING $3.50 447,663 3.3': 447.bb3 3.3 OVERHEAD X1.40 iib,475 f.Of 116,475 1.0 CONSTRUCTION INTEREST 8.5~: 945,608 7.7~ 945,608 7.7:: LOAN PLACEMENT FEES 300,000 4.8~ 100,400 4.8~: SOFT CAST CONTINGENCY 3.0:: 5b,352 ------ 4.5f 56,352 ----------- 0.5:: TOTAL SOFT COSTS ----- 1,934.756 15.8: 1.934,756 25.8': TQTAL PROJECT COSTS i2,22b,762 100.4 12,226,7bi 100.0: SHOPS AT LYNDALE BUT FOR ANALYSIS CITY OF RICHFIELD Mar-94 RETAIL i RETAIL 2 RETAIL 3 RETAIL 4 RETAIL 5 RETAIL b SMALL SHOPS FADS TOTAL REhtTAL INCOME EXPENSE RECOVERY ----------------- CAM TAXES INSURANCE MANAGEMENT FEES TOTAL RECOVERIES 'ITENTIAL GROSS INCOME CREDYTEdACANCY RESERVE EFFECTIVE GR055 INCOME OPERATING EXPENSES GAM TAXES INSURANCE MGMT FEES STRUCTURAL RESERVES TOTAL. EXPENSES NET OPERATING INCOME MORTGAGE PAYMENT 0 0 0 35,000 25,000 25,040 20,475 11,000 1.25' PSF 4.00 P5F 0.10 PSF 5.0 41ITHOUT TAX INGPSEMENT INCOME STRTEM~NT 0 0 0 X11.00 3s5,oo0 X14.25 256-,250 X10.54 26c,500 X12.00 245,700 X15.00 165,000 1,3.14.450 1.25 PSF 4.00 PSF O.iO PSF 5.0 :INCOME 0.25 P°F 20 YEAR TERM 8.5~INTEREST 9,170,0?i PRINCIPAL NET INCOME RETURN ON EQUITY 145,594 4b5,944 11,648 20,535 643,676 1,958,126 7.4~: (137,069) 1,821,057 145,594 4b5,900 11,b48 b5,7^c3 29,119 717,983 1,103,075 954,960 148,115 4.85: 20 YEAR TERM g,5'riNTERES7 ~IITH TAX INCREMENT INCOME STATEMENT 0 0 a 385,000 2:~b, 250 ^c62,540 245,704 165,000 1,314,454 145,594 465,940 11,b48 b43,676 1,95$,126 {137,OF~9) 1,8^c1,057 145,594 465,900 11,648 65,723 29,119 717,983 1,103,075 739,689 363,386 11.89 SHOWS AT LYNDALE RUT FOk ANALYSIS CTT'f OF kICHFIELD i-Mar-94 PHASES IlII 228,475 SQUARE FEET MORTGAGE EttUITY TAX INCREMENT TOTAL SOURCES LRND DEMOLITION- ENVIRONMENTAL/SOIL TESTING SOIL CORRECTION OFFSITE WATER PONDING TOTAL LAND COSTS kETAIL 1 TURNKEY. 45,040 RETAIL 2 TURNKEY 42,000 kETAIL 3 TURNKEY 25,004 CTAIL 4 TURNKEY 35,000 r+ETAIL 5 TURNKEY 25,040 RETAIL 6 Tl;RP~i{EY <^5,400 SMALL SHOPS 20,475 PADS 11,040 SITEWOkK 228,475 COSTT. CONTINGENCY 3.0:~~ TOTAL CONSkUCTION COSTS ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING SUkVEY/TITLE. LEASING FEES/MAkK£TING Ot~ERHEAD CONSTRUCTION INTEREST LOAN PLACEMENT FEES 50FT COST CONTINGENCY 3.0~ TOTAL SOFT COSTS TOTAL PROJECT COSTS WITHOUT TAX iNCkEMENT WITH TAX INCREMENT SOURCES AND USES SOURCES AND USES SOUkCES SOURCES ~ ~ (8,774,398 75.0: 13,$$6,21.9 55.5':. b,258,i32 25.4: 6,258,132 25.0% 4,888,179 19.5: 25,032,530 104.4•'. 25,032,530 usES usEs 9,932,908 39.5: 9,°32,908 39.5:: 540,000 2.0:: 500,000 2.0%, 140,444 4.4~ I44,444 4.4=; 200,440 4.$: 244}440 4.8f 100,040 -------- - 0.4%: 144,044 ----------- 0.4{ - - 10,832,948 43.1 10,832,908 43.1: 534.00 1,530,440 b.i: 1,530,000 b.i~: 53b.00 1,512,000 b.0%: (,522,440 6.4f 53b.00 900,000 3.b% 900,000 3.6{ 534.00 1,194,000 4.7%; 1,190,400 4.7r: 534.00 850,400 3.4% .850,444 3.4~ 534.00 850,040 3.4. 854x000 3,4f 535.00 716,6^c5 2.9% 71b,625 ^c.9f 545.00 495,400 2.0% 495,000 2.0%. 59.40 2,056,275 $.2% 2,056,275 8.2^: 342, 997 1.2%: 342, 997 1. %: 10,402,897 41.4x: 14,442,897 41.4%: 52.54 571,188 2.3~: 571,188 2.3E 50.15 34,271 0.1% 34,27E 0.1 53.50 799,663 3.2: 799,663 3.2 51.00 22$,475 0.9: 228,475 4.9%= 8.5: 1,943,899 7.7% 1,943,899 7.7 240,000 0.8:: 240,404 4.8f 113,325 4.5~: 113,325 4,5% 3,894,820 15.5 3,894,820 15.5: 25,126,625 100.0: 25,iZb,b25 104.0%: SHOPS AT LYNDALE BUT FOfi ANALYSIS CITY OF RTGHFIELD 1-Mar-94 fiETAIL 1 RETAIL s: RETAIL 3 RETAIL 4 RETAIL 5 kETAIL 6 SMALL SHOPS FADS TOTAL RENTAL IhtCOME EXPENSE RECOVERY CAM TAXES INSURANCE MANAGEMENT FEES TDTAL RECOVERIES lTENTIAL GROSS INCOME CREDITlVACANCY RESERVE EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME OPERATING EXPENSES ------------------ CAM TAXES INSURANCE MGM7 FEES STRLfCTURAL kESERVES TOTAL EXPENSES NET OPERATING INC019E MORTGAGE PAYMENT ~lITHOUT TAX INCREMENT INCOME STATEMENT 45,404 ~i2.04 540,400 42,444 X14.04 40,004 25,004 X11.50 287,544 35,000 X11.04 385,000 25,040 X10,25 25b,254 25.,000 $10.50 "262,500. 20,475 X12.40 245,704 11,000 ~i5.00 ib5,004 2,56!,950. 1.25 PSF 4.00 FSF 0.10 PSF 5. a:: 1.25 PSF 4.00 PSF 4.10 PSF 5.0'r.INCOME 0.25 PSF 24 YEAR 7EftM 8.5 :INTEkEST 1$,774,398 PRINCIPAL NET INCOME °ETURN Ohl EQUITY 285,594 913,904 22,$48 24,535 1,242,876 3,804,$2b 7.0: f26b,338) 3,538,488 85,594 913,900 22,84$ 128,098 57,119 1,407,558 2,1.34,931 20 YEAk TEkM 8.5~INTEREST 1,955,143 175,788 2.81: ~tITH TAX INCREMENT INCOME STATEMENT 540,400 420,040 287,500 385,000 5b, 254 2b2,500 245,700 ib5,400 2,561,950 285,594 913,900 22,848 1,242,87b 3,804,826 (2bb,338) 3,538,488 285,594 913,940 21,848 128,098 57,119 1,407,558 ,130,931 1,446,094 684,837 10.94f PROCESS TO BE FOLLOWED WHEN CONSIDERATION IS BEING GIVEN TO SHIFTING THE ILN FISCAL DISFARITIES CONTRIBUTION. ~ss~unptions '. A. The state legislature adopts legislation permitting the shifting of the contribution from the. project to the entire City upon authorization by the City Council. H. A development concept proposal has been submitted, end; 1. Meets the goals and objectives of the ILN Redevelopment Plan end is in compliance with the C-3 zoning district. 2. Data analysis indicates it is financially feasible. The • impact of the fiscal disparities contribution on the ~~ ~ feasibility would be reported upon including the need to - shift the contribution from the ILN to the entire City. C. The financial background of the developer is acceptable. D. The developer has paid the non-refundable development fee. rocess '. -When the above assumptions have been met, the following process would be followed. 1. Subject to direction from the HRA, public information meetings would be~scheduled at which the development concept, = would be presented. The developer would be responsible for presenting the development concept and responding to comments. If there is a need to shift the fiscal disparities contribution to make the development feasible, that infornation would be included in their presefitation.. 2. A joint meeting of the HRA end City Council would be scheduled. 3. A staff report would be presented including Items A-D above. The report would include public comments and the developer's response to these comments as well as further analysis of. the fiscal disparities issue.' ~ ~. 4. The HRA may be requested to approve or reject the concept. An action to approve would include, if appropriate, a request to the~City Council to have•the fiscal disparities • contribution for the project made by the entire City. If the action is to reject the development concept, the HRA would state their reasons .for the rejection. 5. At the request of the HRA, the City Council may act on the• fiscal disparities request from the HRA et the joint meeting. 6. Staff would implement the actions of the HRA end City Council. ~ ~. HRA RESOLUTION N0. THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA REQUESTING THE RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE THE ELECTION PROVIDED FOR IN MINNESOTA LAW$ 1992, CHAPTER 511 WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "Authority") has, by action of this date, approved the execution of a contract for private redevelopment (the "Contract") of lands lying within the Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet Redevelopment project Area and within the Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District for the Project Area (the "TIF District"); and WHEREAS, the Contract provides for furnishing the redeveloper with economic assistance in the absence of which redevelopment would not be feasible; and WHEREAS, in order to provide the redeveloper with the necessary and appropriate level of economic assistance, it is necessary that the City of Richfield take action to elect that fiscal disparities contributions no longer be made from the TIF District for the remaining life of the TIF District; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield was authorized to make such election by Minnesota Laws 1992, Chapter 511, Article 9, Section 26. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. The Authority, having determined that the redevelopment of land within the Project Area in accordance with the provisions of the Contract is in the vital best interests of the residents of the City of Richfield, does hereby respectfully request that the City Council of the City of Richfield elect, pursuant to the above referenced statute, to follow the method of computation contained in Minnesota Statutes, $ 469.177, subd, 3(a). Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March, 1994. Thomas E. Harms, Chair ATTEST: Vern Luettinger, Secretary HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 11 Agenda March 21, 1994 Issue Statement• Review of a resolution authorizing condemnation and quick take of Phase I, The Shops at Lyndale, ILN Redevelopment Project. Background: The CSM Corporation has proposed the redevelopment of the portion of the ILN south of 77th Street between Emerson and Lyndale Avenues. The proposal presented. to the HRA on March 14, 1994 envisioned approximately 231,000 square feet of retail space and a restaurant all with supporting parking. Phase I of approximately 112,000 square feet would be located between Emerson and Colfax Avenues. CSM indicated that a timely opening of Phase I prior to the 1994 holiday shopping season is critical to securing tenants. To assure a November opening, initiation of construction during July is necessary. CSM is requesting the HRA to authorize condemnation and quick take. Quick take would provide title and possession to the property within 90 days or approximately July 1, 1994. CSM reports that they are hopeful of reaching a negotiated settlement with several of the property owners. Some, of the property owners while agreeing to a negotiated purchase, . may want a "friendly" condemnation to realize certain benefits under the federal tax code. The properties to be included are as follows: Emerson Avenue Congregational Church Southtown Village Apartments Cutler Animal Hospital Troy & Bill's Ultimate Detailers Tandem Press Vacant parcel owned by Robert Adelmann While the HRA would initiate the condemnation action, CSM would provide the required court deposits as required and fund the related expenses so that HRA monies would not be utilized. To this end, CSM has deposited $10,000 with the HRA against which legal, Publicorp and administrative costs will be charged. Recommended Motion: Discuss the request by CSM for the HRA to use condemnation. A decision on the matter is not needed until the concurrent HRA and City Council meetings on March 28, 1994. The resolution to be considered on March 28, 1994 is attached. Basis of Recommendation: 1. This action is consistent with state law and the redevelopment plan. 2. CSM has tenants who must be assured of space availability during November or they will likely become tenants in commercial space in an adjoining community. 3. Negotiations between CSM and some of the property owners will negate the need for condemnation on some parcels. It will however, be necessary on others. 4. CSM will provide the court deposit when it is needed. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Delay action. 2. Refuse the request. Discussion/Decision Mode: To benefit from this development "window of opportunity," the HRA should take action to assure the timely availability of the Phase I.site. Respe tf lly submitted, Jame D. Prosser Exec tive Director JDP:ds RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA AUTHORIZING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS TO ACQUIRE CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "HRA") is a housing and redevelopment authority duly constituted and organized under law, with all of the powers enumerated in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the."Act"); and WHEREAS, the HRA is authorized to develop and carry out redevelopment plans and redevelopment projects, as those terms are respectively defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.002, subdivisions 16 and 14; and WHEREAS, the HRA adopted a redevelopment plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") and a tax increment financing plan (the "TIF Plan") for the area in the City of Richfield generally known as the Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet area (the "Project Area") on October 21, 1985; and WHEREAS, changes in the public and private improvements _ proposed to be constructed within the Project Area occurred and necessitated adopting subsequent modifications to the Plans, identified as Modification Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, which were approved by the HRA and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield on the respective dates in 1985, 1989, 1993, and 1994; and WHEREAS, the Plans, as modified, contemplate the acquisition of certain real property (the "Property") which is located in the Project Area and which is more particularly described below in this resolution; and WHEREAS, no owners of adjacent parcels to the Property described in this resolution, displaced persons or businesses from among those properties, or other persons or businesses within the Project Area have demonstrated the technical and financial capability to carry out the proposed redevelopment; and WHEREAS, the HRA has, by action of this date, approved the execution of a contract for private redevelopment (the "Contract") of land lying within the Project Area; and WHEREAS, the Contract requires the HRA to acquire title to and possession of the Property no later than NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. It is necessary to acquire the Property as described below in the resolution in order for the HRA to carry out the purposes of the Plans, as modified, and the Act, to eliminate and prevent the development or spread of conditions of blight found to exist by the City and the HRA and to assure full utilization of property which is vacant, unused, underused, and inappropriately used. 2. Acquisition of the Property by eminent domain, in the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 117, is deemed to be necessary and for a public purpose and is herby authorized. 3. The HRA deems it necessary for the reason set forth in the Plans, as modified, and in order to fulfill the HRA's obligations under the Contract, to proceed without delay under Minnesota Statutes, Section 117.042, to acquire title to and possession of the Property prior to the filing of a final report of commissioners. 4. The HRA's attorney and staff are authorized and directed to commence eminent domain proceedings to acquire fee simple absolute title to the Property, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 117.042 and to pay to the owner(s) or into court, a sum of money to secure compensation to the owners of the Property, which amount shall be equal to petitioner's approved appraisal of value as determined by staff. 5. The property to be acquired is described as follows: That part of the West 320 feet of the South Half of Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 33, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying south of the North 30 feet thereof and also lying northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 50 feet northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the west line of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 33 distant 75 feet north of the southwest corner thereof; thence run easterly to a point on the east line of said Southeast Quarter of Southeast Quarter distant 145 feet north of the southeast corner thereof and said described line there terminating. Together with the the East Half of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 33 except the following described parts thereof: The North 30 feet of said East Half; The West 30 feet of the South 210 feet of the North 240 feet of said East Half; That part thereof lying southerly of the .northerly right-of- way line of Interstate Highway No. 494. Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of March 1994. Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson ATTEST: Vern Luettinger, Secretary 1 MAR 17 '94 10 41 HOLMES & GRAVEN P.5 I/F Kl.Y ~ ~ '~~ ~ •..++ -~ --- I J~ ~ " i - i .:tea........ ..1..,~...... ... t 1f t .. ~p a r ., ! - r ate. .. . ~ "Q1bd1Y f I I` _ !'fir ~• t I•~ ,~ ij 1 `~M.1lA j IMYiSq ,, ~ 1~= K r~ ~-IE N i •~ S ~ ,; .3fi <t .g • .y .6 .. .F .$ .~ .F .f .~1 r } ~ ~~ • i • s ~ . ^ • •• ~• f .i i ,g i r ,~ - ,i .. ,~ .j ra ,~ ,~~ ,~ .. .. + .~. .q. ,ti . . ~w .~. .y i~ ,~ „ ,.~ y - ~ { j { _ _ ~ a ~ M ~' " V • XY~~IXi a +~~./ {q .v :n •'. ,,g .; .6 ~ ` i ~ • ~ I ~ . ~: .t ~ .i .!1 Y? .~ ~, EIi I Ea a re .i •i .a f: 1 t • !'• ~ l f 5 M ~ ' i ~,. ~. - .. ~ ~ ~ '~ 1• `• IF` if r~ l~ 1~ 1~ fk 1~ r~~.g'~.s~ cr ~ i ~ ~as~~s yw- .,. ~ <r ~ .. r • 0{ a y f f. .., ._ - ~~ I HT 1U711~~ i r ~.. rr •~ ": i I I Y k i 1 •~ I fl • . •A •3 •i -1 •i "ff •3 !iq Y3~ 'i _-.-: ~ ~ :~ ,: ' • ~ w r T ~ ..~. ~. ~ rS iE •i "1 fi i~ <i il; .! .s "~ aA "{ _~ ~r{ r ,1 ~ QifYYU ~ ~ „~M,. r ~. y y ~ c 1 ~' ~ ~..~ 1. - ~~.~ IF I!` t ! IJ~,// y !i j! 1 tir y r. / I 1 ~ L . 1 M. fV ~ J{r T~.rR+xT.....~ .. • ^~~ I ~~wsr y ~ s. r•• , C ...r Q...~ .•~A~_r .~` f SZ 9 .5 !~ i tl .f _~.` .i t ....} f.~ I N ....~ i ` I ~~ • ~s~ j ~ tYI »~ A i Y ~•u ~~', •i A40 tit! 7 r-~.~w.~. •w~.~.r~;n....~. • ~ .. S.. ~<r ... ~ab0 .. .. .. '3 t t :off'--•~- ' ~ ~.. Y; ' - ~\fl ~ tN Y S ]AY YVd7C3 ! ~ A ~ •i' . rr I {>• ~ ~~ -, -~ ...R .~ ! ~..~ ..~...~.. HAt..A..4.A ' l 1 ~ ' 111 >wR ~ .~ ° '~ I 1 ~ {< ! 1. ~Y ~• ~ f ;~ r f ..~... .. -R.S.. .. .... .. . .. ... ti; it ...YJ nl 71 ~. ' j f J. + S ,< '~ I ~ ~ ~~ Z s1 ,... •~• ~ F. ~.-.~.~..... .. . .~. ..~. r:.ww. 1•a V~~ r• a r, I ' f ! . •, a ' ~~ '~ C~. e -+ ~ ' ~F~' r . -~~ ~~ a ..r. .YJi. yn ~ JkIL.... ..... .~... .. ~_.. ^_.~,~.~,T.•N,.~..rr+ar{wV•~•'.'.'.'~. ..~~..r l .~.P.. •.y.'wM~ .~ Y 1 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HRA Letter No. 10 Agenda March 21, 1994 Issue Statement: Update on prior HRA authorization for staff to draft an agreement with TOLD Development Company to market and facilitate redevelopment of the Cloverleaf site. Background: The HRA purchased this 13 acre Cloverleaf property in 1992 from the. Resolution Trust Corporation. The purchase provided the HRA with the opportunity to prevent inappropriate development on the site and to seek appropriate development at the opportune time. TOLD submitted a proposal in January to market and facilitate development of the site. No agreement has been entered into but they have been in contact with potential users of the site and desire consideration of their position relative to development by their contacts. A representative of TOLD will be present at the March 21, 1994 meeting. Recommended Motion: Discuss and direct staff as to parameters for an agreement with TOLD Development Company. Basis of Recommendation: 1. An agreement could be drafted to protect and achieve the objectives of the HRA and TOLD Development Company. 2. Staff has had first hand knowledge of TOLD for several years. They are a successful and reputable developer. 3. A relationship with TOLD could put the HRA and the Cloverleaf site in an aggressive marketing position. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Reject the TOLD proposal. 2. See other potential marketing/development proposals. Discussion/Decision Mode: TOLD believes there is a "window of opportunity" and would like to take advantage of as much of that time as possible. Respectfully submitted, Jam Prosser Exec ive Director JDP:ds