Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/02/2017 EDAC Minutes 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES DATE: November 02, 2017 MEMBERS PRESENT: Thomas Colgan, Jim Schueller, Nathan Vojtech, Julie Schwartz, Chad Wagner, Don Johnson, Lou Masonick, Michael Ruhland, Patrick Kohler MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Grochala, Kirsten Barsness, Joe Widing APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Mr. Schuller to approve the minutes from October 05, 2017. The motion was seconded by Mr. Masonick and passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Lino Lakes Tax Increment and Abatement Financial Incentives Policy (Cont.) The discussion continued on policy in relation to tax abatement. Ms. Barsness began the discussion with Section IV. Policies. Committee members expressed concern that considering upfront financing on a case by case basis could be seen as arbitrary and capricious. Mr. Grochala explained that most upfront financing requests related to construction of public improvements. The Council would need to weigh these independently. Ms. Barsness stated that the amount for private equity in a project is required to be 20% for abatement or TIF. Committee members asked if the 20% was a hard line or flexible, but agreed that 20% is a good number. The Committee members discussed the provision regarding property price in excess of market value. There was agreement that public assistance should not be used to cover an inflated land price. However, Mr. Grochala noted that there may be projects where the land selling price is not supported by market value, which is often the case with redevelopment. Many times an existing building holds value for the current owner but not for the redevelopment purposes. The committee agreed to remove the language. 2 Ms. Barsness questioned the language in relation to extraordinary environmental impacts from projects receiving public financing. Mr. Grochala stated that he would like to remove that language stating that it is unnessary and difficult to define “extraordinary”. Most large projects are subject to environmental review. Committee members asked if language in the policy was negotiable or firm. Ms. Barsness replied that everything is a negotiation, but the language gives the city the ability to negotiate from a better position. Mr. Grochala stated that generically there is a base of items required for each project and is going to be required whether the project was requesting funds or not. Discussion moved on to Section V. Project Qualifications. Ms. Barsness asked if the city wants to limit what projects could be used for. Mr. Grochala explained that both TIF and Abatement required a public purpose and had fairly specific use requirements in place. The Committee recommended that the language be removed from the policy. Ms. Barsness asked if language about the requirements of a project should remain as is. Mr. Grochala stated he would like to add a clause about public improvement to the policy. Mr. Grochala stated that the language should be changed from “will not” to “should not” on exceeding the 16% limit on TIF for the value of projects. B. Hodgson Road & County Road J Concept Plan Mr. Grochala presented the background and the staff report for the conceptual development plan for the Morris property north of the intersection. He laid out the guidelines for what the city is looking for on the site as envisioned in the master plan. He presented the concept plan and asked the committee for feedback on it. The Committee thought that the site plan looks ok overall, and that a restaurant would be a good use for corner commercial, but had worries about the effect of adjacent land uses for future commercial on the site. The Committee asked if the intersection on J would be right in right out. Mr. Grochala responded that it is. He also stated that the intersection is at capacity and the city would have to make improvements on its own in relation to new development. The committee asked if the Morris property would spur the development 49 club parcel. Mr. Grochala stated that it is a possibility as the improvements go in for any new development north. 3 The committee stated that the city’s dreams of large scale commercial are not likely and that the residential might just be the way to go as the site has been sitting for over a decade as is. Mr. Grochala agreed and stated that the commercial in the concept plan is likely to be all of the commercial that can be supported on the site. The committee stated that across the street is the best opportunity for larger scale commercial as the current uses are a detriment to development and are zoned for such as well. Mr. Grochala stated that the proposed project could be worth as much as $50 million. The committee agreed that now is the best time for housing construction as the market is favorable. The committee recommends that the City allow the concept to move forward. C. Project Updates There were no project updates for the committee. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:31 AM.