Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008.06.16 EDA Packet AGENDA CITY OF HUGO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MONDAY, JUNE 169 2008- 8:30 AM 8:30 am 1. Call to Order 8:31 am 2. Roll Call 8:32 am 3. Approval of Minutes EDA Meeting of May 19,2007 8:35 am 4. Discussion SAC/WAC Fee's • Jamie Wallerstedt,WSB & Associates 9:15 am 5. Discussion on TIF Certification and Hugo Commons TIF Application • Paul Steinman, Springsted 10:00 am 6. Update on Downtown Redevelopment 10:15 am 7. Discussion on Marketing and Promotion of the City Following the May 25 Tornado 10:30 am 8. Adjournment BACKGROUND MEMO FOR THE EDA MEETING OF MONDAY, JUNE 169 2008 3. Approval of Minutes for EDA meeting of May 19,2008 City staff recommends that the EDA approve the minutes for the May 19, 2008 EDA meeting as presented. 4. Discussion SAC/WAC Fee's Jamie Wallerstedt from WSB & Associates presented to the EDA the research for the options for the City's SAC/WAC fees. The EDA asked staff to research the SAC/WAC connection fee's for the City. Jamie Wallerstedt provided the EDA with alternative calculations/distribution of costs. She gave real world examples of three options in both residential and commercial. Granger asked if the EDA could get a spreadsheet that outlined the options. Wallerstedt stated that she could do that. The EDA decided to talk about this issue again at its June meeting. In your packet is the spreadsheet that was provided by Jamie Wallerstedt. 5. Discussion on TIF Certification and Hugo Commons TIF Application Paul Steinman from Springsted will give a presentation on TIF Certification and will provide options for the EDA to consider. There will also be discussion on the TIF Application for Hugo Commons (former End Zone site). 6. Update on Downtown Redevelopment Staff will update the EDA on the progress of the downtown redevelopment projects. 7. Discussion on Marketing and Promotion of the City Following the Mav 25 Tornado The City has repeatedly received praise for its efforts in managing the recovery process following the disaster. The city staff believes the extraordinary media coverage the City has received during the past few weeks has cast a positive spotlight on the attitude and professionalism found within the City of Hugo. Staff would like to discuss with the EDA ways to promote the City during this unique time as a good place to locate a business. MINUTES FOR THE EDA MEETING OF MAY 19,2008 EDA Vice President Phil Klein called the meeting to order at 8:35 am. PRESENT: Jan Arcand, Jim Bever, Tom Denaway, Mike Granger Phil Klein, and Brian Thistle ABSENT: Fran Miron CITY STAFF PRESENT: City Administrator Mike Ericson, Community Development Director Bryan Bear, Associate Planner Rachel Simone, City Engineer Jay Kennedy APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE EDA MEETING OF APRIL 21,2008 Denaway made motion, Thistle seconded, to approve the minutes for the EDA meeting of April 21, 2008. All aye. Motion carried. UPDATE ON BR&E SUBCOMMITTE Staff provided an update to the EDA on the BR&E subcommittee meeting. The BR&E subcommittee met on Friday May 2, 2008 for introduction of members and discussion on the work plan. They appointed Brian Thistle as Chair and Steven Larson as Vice Chair. During the discussion on the work plan the subcommittee wanted to make sure that businesses were aware of the committee. They decided to recommend to staff that a section of the EDA portion of the City website talk about the BR&E subcommittee, have a member be on "That's Hugo Today" cable access show, and possibly have a write up in the Citizen Newspaper. The subcommittee members are researching possible grants for business in Hugo and will bring their ideas to the next meeting. DISCUSSION ON METRO MSP ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WEBSITE FOR THE MINNEAPOLIS-SAINT PAUL MINNESOTA REGION Staff presented the new Metro MSP Economic Development Website that is dedicated to providing information to residents, businesses and Cities in regards to economic development. "Metro MSP region"refers to Minnesota's 11-county Twin Cities metro area. It includes the anchor cities of Minneapolis, Saint Paul and Bloomington as well as the counties of Anoka, Carver, Chisago, Dakota, Hennepin, Isanti, Ramsey, Scott, Sherburne, Washington and Wright. There is a section of the site that includes properties available search and planned development areas. It has a GIS component so users can see exactly where the property is and can see an aerial view of the property. DISCUSSION SAC/WAC FEE'S Jay Kennedy and Jamie Wallerstedt from WSB &Associates presented to the EDA the research for the options for the City's SAC/WAC fees. The EDA asked staff to research the SAC/WAC connection fee's for the City. Jamie Wallerstedt provided the EDA with alternative calculations/distribution of costs. She gave real world examples of three options in both residential and commercial. Granger asked if the EDA could get a spreadsheet that outlined the options. Wallerstedt stated that she could do that. Bryan stated that it's the way that it is collected that is problem. Owners are surprised of the costs. Some other cities split the cost between developers and owners. There may be a different way to formulate the calculation. The City needs that same amount of money in the end. The EDA decided to talk about this issue again at its meeting on June 19, 2008. UPDATE ON DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT CD Director updated the EDA on the progress of the downtown redevelopment projects. He gave an update on the End Zone site plan and TIF application. The applicant has submitted a site plan application that was considered the May 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting and a revised TIF application will be submitted soon. CD Director gave an update on the redevelopment plans for Carpenters Restaurant, Chuck Lowell's property on Finale Avenue, and the City owned properties. DISCUSSION ON TIF CERTIFICATION Staff has been in contact with Springsted on the timing of certification of the district and will discuss it with the EDA at their June 19, 2008 meeting BLUE HERON GRILL—SITE VISIT/RIBBON CUTTING The EDA was invited to the ribbon cutting ceremony for Blue Heron Grill Restaurant. ADJOURNMENT Klein made a motion, seconded by Denaway, to adjourn at 10:00 am. City of Hugo,MN Utility Rate Analysis WSB Project No. 168 7-5 7 Trunk Fees (Paid at the Time of Plat) WAC/SAC Fees (Paid at the Time of Connection) Developable Number of Sewer Trunk Per Total Sewer Water Trunk Per Total Water Trunk 2030 Land Use Designation Acres SAC/WAC Units Unit Trunk Fee Unit Fee SAC Fee Per Unit Total SAC Fee WAC Fee Per Unit Total WAC Fee Total Utility Fees Example Low Density Residential Existing Fees 100 200 N/A N/A N/A N/A $2,200 $440,000 $2,200 $440,000 $880,000 Option 1 Approximate Fees 100 200 $1,500 $300,000 $1,800 $360,000 $700 $140,000 $500 $100,000 $900,000 Option 2 Approximate Fees 100 200 $1,900 $380,000 $2,400 $480,000 $700 $140,000 $500 $100,000 $1,100,000 Example Commercial Existing Fees 1 10 N/A N/A N/A N/A $2,200 $22,000 $2,200 $22,000 $44,000 Option 1 Approximate Fees 1 10 $1,500 $15,000 $1,800 $18,000 $700 $7,000 $500 $5,000 $45,000 Option 2 Approximate Fees 1 10 $550 $5,500 $700 $7,000 $700 $7,000 $500 $5,000 $24,500 Water's Edge South (Residential) Existing Fees 119 534 N/A N/A N/A N/A $2,200 $1,174,800 $2,200 $1,174,800 $2,349,600 Option 1 Approximate Fees 119 534 $1,500 $801,000 $1,800 $961,200 $700 $373,800 $500 $267,000 $2,403,000 i Option 2 Approximate Fees 119 534 $1,900 $1,014,600 $2,400 $1,281,600 $700 $373,800 $500 $267,000 $2,937,000 Blue Heron Grill(Commercial) Existing Fees 2.2 27 N/A N/A N/A N/A $2,200 $59,400 $2,200 $59,400 $118,800 Option 1 Approximate Fees 2.2 27 $1,500 $40,500 $1,800 $48,600 $700 $18,900 $500 $13,500 $121,500 Option 2 Approximate Fees 2.2 27 $550 $14,850 $700 $18,900 $700 $18,900 $500 $13,500 $66,150 Option 1 = Uniform fee per WAC/SAC unit Option 2 = Uniform fee per acre with all residential properties weighted the same Utility Rate Analysis City of Hugo,MN WSB Project No. 168 7-5 7 C.Wocuments and Settingsl interniLocal Settingsl Temportuy Internet FilesIOLK61`1061108-Utility Fee Summary(2)Example ,y. NAM .�--St Y, -pluA� S ;� 9► •�� A... �� . w I City ofHygo, Minnesota APPLICATION FOR TAX INCREMENT A. APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Corporation/Partnership Development Partners Hugo LLC Address 2734 County Rd. D East, White Bear Lake,MN 55110 Primary Contact William M.Lentsch Address 2734 County Rd.D East, White Bear Lake,MN 55110 Phone 651-748-8888 Fax 651-379-5089 Email blentschgcitiesrealestate.com On a separate sheet,please provide the following: • Brief description of the corporation/partnership's business, including history,principal product or service,etc. Attach as Exhibit A. • Brief description of the proposed project. Attach as Exhibit B. • List names of officers and shareholders/partners with more than five percent(5%)interest in the corporation/partnership. Attach as Exhibit C. • A but-for analysis. Attach as Exhibit D. Attorney Name Address Phone Fax Email Accountant Name Address Phone Fax Email Contractor Name D.K. Dockendorf Address 2728 County Road D East Phone 651-248-3227 Fax 651-770-1204 Email dalekdkdockendorfinc.com Engineer Name Address Phone Fax Email Architect Name Caulfield Architectural Design Address 9388 Erin Court,Woodbury,MN 55129 Phone 651-769-6865 Fax 651-459-1358 Email brucecaulfieldp_msn.com B. PROJECT INFORMATION The project will be: ❑ Industrial Greenfield: X New Construction ❑ Expansion X Commercial Redevelopment: ❑ New Construction ❑ Rehabilitation ❑ Industrial Redevelopment: ❑ New Construction ❑ Rehabilitation ❑ Housing Redevelopment: ❑ New Construction ❑ Rehabilitation ❑ Mixed Use Redevelopment: ❑ New Construction ❑ Rehabilitation ❑ Other Please explain the basic components of the project proposed, i.e.,amount of new commercial square footage,numbers of housing units(rental or owner occupied),etc. The proposed retail building will consist of approximately 23,000 S/F of space with a variety of suite sizes to fit the future tenants needs. - 1 - City of Hugo, Minnesota The project will be: ❑ Owner Occupied X Leased Space If leased space,please attach a list of names and addresses of future lessees and indicate the status of commitments or lease agreements. Attach as Exhibit E. N/A at this time Project Address 13891 Forest Boulevard North, Hugo, NM 55038 Legal Description See attached Exhibit F Site Plan Attached: X Yes ❑ No Amount of Tax Increment Requested for: Building Demolition $ 61,490.00 Environmental Remediation $ Public Improvements $ 90,000.00(utilities,curb and gutter) Site Improvements $ 169,010.00 Land Acquisition $ (Land Acquisition shall not exceed 50%of total subsidy request) Total Subsidy Requested $ 543,100.00 over 25 years 6%_$59,143/year Current Assessed Value on Project Site: $ 541,600.00 Current Real Estate Taxes on Project Site: $ 12,340.00 City $ 4,305.80 County $ 3,198.90 School District $ 510.38 Estimated Assessed Value upon Completion: $ 4,500,000.00 Phase I $ Phase II $ Estimated Real Estate Taxes upon Completion: Phase I $ 73,250.00 Phase II $ N/A Construction Start Date: 8-1-08 Construction Completion Date: 2-1-09 If Phased Project: N/A Year %Construction Completed N/A Year %Construction Completed C. PUBLIC PURPOSE It is the policy of the City of Hugo that the use of Tax Increment Financing should result in a benefit to the public. Please indicate how this project will serve a public purpose. X Job Creation: Number of existing jobs 0 Number of jobs created by project 96 X Increase in Tax Base - 2 - City of Hugo, Minnesota X Enhancement or diversification of the city's economic base. ❑ New industrial development which will result in additional private investment in the area. X The project contributes to the fulfillment of the City's development or redevelopment objectives. X Removal of blight or the rehabilitation of a high profile or priority downtown site. ❑ Other: D. SOURCES& USES SOURCES NAME AMOUNT Bank Loan Unknown $ 3,500,000—80%of cost Other Private Funds $ Equity $ 853,490 Fed Grant/Loan $ State Grant/Loan $ Other Loans $ ID Bonds $ Tax Increment $ 543,100*** TOTAL $ **Note: Tax Increment is not an upfront funding source as it will be provided only on a pay-as-you- go basis. Developer needs to identify funding sources to cover ALL costs up front,absent Tax Increment. ***This will be used either to improve ROI to the Investors or to reduce up-front equity USES See Attached Exhibit G AMOUNT Land Acquisition $ Site Development $ Construction $ Machinery&Equipment $ Architectural& Engineering Fees $ Legal Fees $ Interest During Construction $ Debt Service Reserve $ Contingencies $ TOTAL $ E. ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION Applicants will also be required to provide the following documentation. ❑ A) Written business plan, including a description of the business,ownership/management,date established,products and services,and future plans ❑ B) Financial Statements for Past Two Years Profit& Loss Statement Balance Sheet N/A—new entity ❑ C) Current Financial Statements Profit&Loss Statement to Date - 3 - Qi y of Hugo, Minnesota Balance Sheet to Date N/A—new entity ❑ D) Two Year Financial Projections To Come ❑ F) Personal Financial Statements of all Major Shareholders Profit&Loss Current Tax Return To Come ❑ G) Letter of Commitment from Applicant Pledging to Complete During the Proposed Project Duration To Come ❑ H) Letter of Commitment from the Other Sources of Financing, Stating Terms and Conditions of their Participation in Project To Come X 1) Non refundable application fee of$2,500 X J) Check for$10,000 to be placed in escrow to be used by the City to complete analysis of the subsidy requested,and to pay costs associated with Attorney's fees for the TIF Agreement (unused portion to be refunded) The undersigned certifies that all information provided in this application is true and correct to the best of the undersigned's knowledge. The undersigned authorizes the City of Hugo to check credit references and verify financial and other information. The undersigned also agrees to provide any additional information as may be requested by the City after the filing of this application. Applicant Name Development Partners Hugo LLC Date May 22,2008 By Its Managing Member -4 - City of Hygo, Minnesota TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PROPOSAL REVIEW WORKSHEET Redevelopment Districts 1. The project meets the criteria set forth in Section III of the City's Tax Increment Financing policy. X a) Meets minimum thresholds for size,value,and tax capacity. X b) Meets at least one of the objectives in Section III and satisfies the provision set forth in Section IV. X c) Demonstrates need for TIF with the but-for analysis. X e) Consistent with all city plans and ordinances. X f) Serves at least two public purpose as defined in Section IV. It serves 5 objectives—some of the jobs will have livable wage and benefits. All jobs are expected to pay higher than minimum wage. 2. Ratio of Private to Public Investment in Project: Points: $3,810,390 Private investment 5:1 5 $ 543,100 Public investment 4:1 4 7.02:1 Ratio Private to Public Financing 3:1 3 2:1 2 Less than 2:1 1 3. Structure of Financing: Points: X < 10%of Subsidy Requested for Land Acq. 5 ❑ 11%-20%of Subsidy Requested for Land Acq. 4 ❑ 21%-30%of Subsidy Requested for Land Acq. 3 ❑ 31%-40%of Subsidy Requested for Land Acq. 2 ❑ 41%-50%of Subsidy Requested for Land Acq. 1 4. Type of Project: Points: ❑ 100%Owner Occupied 5 X Mix Owner Occupied&Investment 4 ❑ Investment Property 3 5. Use: Points: X Retail 5 ❑ Office/Commercial 5 ❑ Mixed-use 5 ❑ Housing 3 ❑ Industrial 1 6. Type of Development: Points: X Redevelopment of Substandard Structures 5 ❑ Development of Vacant Land 3 City of Hygo, Minnesota 7. Job Creation/Wage Level: Points: X 15+Full Time Equivalent(FTE)Jobs,$15-$20 per hour 5 X 10-14 FTE's,$10414 per hour 4 X 1-9 FTE's,$749 per hour 3 Employees Managers Hourly Wages Coffee Shop 6 2 $7.00-$16.00 Restaurant Franchise 6 2 $7.00-$16.00 Florist/Gift Shop 4 1 $6.50-$13.00 Media Retailer 8 2 $6.50-$16.00 Beauty Salon 10 2 $20.00-$40.00 Cell Phone Retailer 6 2 $10.00-$18.00 Sporting Goods 5 1 $8.00-$16.00 Accounting Service 8 2 $20.00-$42.00 Financial Service 8 2 $20.00-$50.00 Real Estate Service 5 1 $10.00-$25.00 Dry Cleaner 4 1 $6.50-$15.00 Health Service 6 2 $18.00-$34.00 8. Assessed Value: Points: X 7+times current 5 ❑ 6 times current 4 ❑ 5 times current 3 ❑ 4 times current 2 ❑ 3 times current 1 9. The project will pay annual property taxes in the first fully Points: assessed year of$73,250 50,000+5 35,000+4 20,000+3 10,000+2 Under 10,000 1 10. Likelihood that the project will result in unsubsidized,spin-off Points: development. High 5 Moderate 3 X Low 1 ON o Hu o, Minnesota Sub-Total Points: 40 of a possible 45 points. 11. Bonus Points: Points: X The project will be 100%Pay-as-you-go TIF 3 points X The project meets the goals of downtown redevelopment 2 points Total Points: 45 Overall Project Analysis: 40-48 Points Max Remaining Term 35-39 Points 65-75%of Remaining Term 25-34 Points 40-50%of Remaining Term 15-24 Points 25-30%of Remaining Term 0-14 Points Not Eligible City of Hugo, Minnesota EXHIBIT A The principles of Development Partners, LLC have been involved in numerous projects ranging from residential to commercial properties. The projects have included but are not limited to Creekridge View located in White Bear Township. This SFR Development was built in 1993 including 28 executive lots. The SFR development named The Doth Addition was built in 1994 in Shoreview. Mendota Woods located in Mendota Heights was built in 1996 including 14 SFR lots. Hidden Lake Pointe Townhomes, built in 2004 in White Bear Lake. This development consists of 14 units including detached floor plans as well as twin homes. The Hidden Lake Office Park in White Bear Lake was built in 2005. This 8-unit office condo project consists of 3 separate buildings. The ponds of Ramsey,located in Ramsey began in 2001. This development included 120 Townhome lots and 82 SFR lots. Eagles Landing is located in the Bald Eagle Industrial Park in Hugo and is a 17,920 S/F Office Warehouse to be built. Cityof Hugo, Minnesota EXHIBIT B The proposed retail building will consist of approximately 23,000 S/F of space with a variety of suite sizes to fit the future tenants needs. The unique shape of this building which allows for strong visibility on Hwy 61 along with the plaza area and front door parking are just a few of the many attractive features to this building. We have noted some examples of tenants on the proposed plan in which we anticipate will be utilizing these spaces. We are forecasting business including but not limited to a coffee shop that may offer a small amount of sandwiches or bakery items as well as some sort of a small food business that may offer wine or beer to accompany its menu. The plaza area with outside tables will be very attractive to these types of vendors. We also anticipate businesses such as health and beauty retailer, cell phone retailer, physical therapist, message therapist as well as a gift or book store. The site allows for a variety of businesses and opens up the Hugo community to some that were not able to extend their business here in the past. The site also will allow for outdoor vendors such as local craft fairs, farmers markets and specialty items that are made locally. City of Ago, Minnesota EXHIBIT C William A Lentsch Dale K. Dockendorf Remainder of Investors to be identified EXHIBIT D HILJGO COMMONS PROFORMA EFFECT ON RETURN ON EQUITY INVESTMENT OF NO TIF ......................................................................................................................... WITHOUT TIF WITH TIF r..............................................T...................I.............T.......................................................................................................................... .............................................................................................................. SQ FT RENT/SQ FT SQ FT RENT/SQ FT L ........................................L................................. .............................................................. ................................................. ........................................................................................................... RETAIL 23,000 $16.80 $386,400 RETAIL 23,000 $16.80 $386,400 ......................................... $o fv TIF $59,143 ..............................................Z................................. ........................................................................................................................ ........................................................................... ................................ TOTAL 23,000 $386,400 TOTAL 23,000 $445,543 ?................................................. .....................................z...................................................................... VACANCY 10% $38,640 E VACANCY 100% $38,640 ........................... ................................................. .................................... ......................................... EFFECTIVE RENT $347,760 EFFECTIVE RENT $406,903 ....................................................................................................................r...........................T.......................................................................................................................................................................... RE TAX ON VACANCY $3.88 sq.ft. $8,924 RE TAX ON VACANCY $8,924 .......................................................................................................... CAM ON VACANCY $3.95 $9,085 CAM ON VACANCY $9,085 ................. ......................... ................................ .............................................. ................................. ............................................................. ................................................. ............................................................................ ............................... 1 NOI $329,751 NOI $388,894 :.............................................. ................................. ....................................................................... ................................................. .................................... ........................................ ..................... DEBT $326,252 DEBT $326,252 1 ................................................i................................. ............................................................. ................................................. .................................... ........................................................................ 1 CASH FLOW $3,499 CASH FLOW $62,642 ..................................&............................................................. ................................................. ........................................................................................................... EQUITY $853,490 1 EQUITY $853,490 ............................................... ................................. ............................................................. .............................................................................................................................................................. E RETURN **0.41% RETURN **7.340/o .................................................................................................o........................................................................................................ ........................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................... BLDG VAIJSQFT TOT VAL 23,000 $160.87 $3,700,000 COST: $183.85 $4,353,490 WITHOUT DE- VELOPER FEE DEBT AS PERCENT OF COST 800/0 1 DEBT $3,500,000 1 EQUITY $853,490 RETURN ON EQUITY GOAL 10% $85,349 DEBT PMT 7% 20 YR $326,252 ..................... ...... .... ..... ............. ** Need to get to a 10%annual return HUGO COMMONS PROFORMA EFFECTS ON RENTS OF NO TIF ...........................................................................................................................................................I .................................................................................................................................................................... WITHOUT TIF WITH TIF ....................................................................................................................................................... ................................................. ................................. .............................................................................. SQ FT RENT/SQ FT SQ FT RENT/SQ FT ................................................................................................................ ...................................... ................................................. ................................. ............................................................................... RETAIL 23,000 $20.10 $462,300 RETAIL 23,000 $16.80 $386,400 1 ............................................................................ ............................................................................. i TIF $0 TIF $59,143 ........................................................................... ........................................................................... ................................................. ................................. ................................. ............................................ TOTAL $462,300 TOTAL $445,543 ........................................................................... .................................... ...................................... ..................................................................................................................... ........................................... VACANCY 10% $46,230 VACANCY 10% $38,640 ........................................................................... I EFFECTIVE RENT $416,070 E E EFFECTIVE RENT $406,903 ............................................................................ ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... RE TAX ON VACANCY $3.88 sq.ft. $8,924 RE TAX ON VACANCY $3.88 sq.ft. $8,924 .................................................. ................................................Z,......................................i ................................................. ................................. ............................................................................. CAM ON VACANCY $3.95 $9,085 CAM ON VACANCY $3.95 $9,085 .......................I................................................... .................................... .................?................................................................................... ................................. ........................................... ................................................................................................................ ...................................... ................................................................................... ............................................................................. NOI $398,061 is NOI $388,894 .......................................................................... .................................... ...................................................I.......................................... ................................. ................................. ............................................ DEBT $326,252 DEBT $326,252 ........................................................................... .................................... ...................................... ................................................. ................................. .............................................................................. CASH FLOW $72,809 CASH FLOW $62,642 ................................................................................................................ ...................................... ................................................................................................................................................................. I EQUITY $853,490 EQUITY $853,490 ................................................................................................................r..............................................r...................................................................................r..............................................................................n RETURN 8.53% E RETURN "734% ............................................................................. I.................................... ..............................................;................................................................................... ............................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................................. BLDG VALJSQ FT TOT VAL 23,000 $160.87 $3,700,000 COST: $183.85 $4,353,490 WITHOUT DE- VELOPER FEE DEBT AS PERCENT OF COST 80% DEBT $3,500,000 I EQUITY $853,490 RETURN ON EQUITY GOAL 10% $85,349 I DEBT PMT 7% 20 YR $326,252 ............................................................................................................................................................. ** Need to get to a 10% annual return City of Hugo, Minnesota EXHIBIT E Not known at this time. To be provided. City ofHugo, Minnesota EXHIBIT F All that part of the North lt2 of the Northwest IA of Section 29,Township3l,Mange 21,described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the South line of said tract and the East line of State I iighway leo.61,as ttow widened to 111 feet; thence North 11 degrees 51 minutes East,along said Highway line a distance of$01.4 feet to the actual point of beginning of the tract to be described;thence Easterly and parallel with the South line of said North i,'2 of NW 14 a distance of 400 feet;theucc Northerly at right angles to last course a distance of 357.26 feel;thence Westerly and parallel with the South line of said North 112 of NW 1,4 a distance of 325.23 feet to its intersection with the East line of State Highway No.61,as nu-.v widened to 111 feet;thence South t 1 degrees 51 minutes West along said Highway line a distance of 36S.0 feet to the actual point of beginning.Washington County, Mitutesota. City of Hugo, Minnesota EXHIBIT G See Attached Sworn Construction Statement. Sworn Construction Statement PROPERTY ADDRESS Frenchman Centre(Previous End Zone Bar) Hugo, MN 55038 23,123 S/F ITEM FURNISHED BY Development Shell Combined 1. Plans Caulfield &Associates $15,600.00 2. Survey& Engineering Alliant Engineering $21,400.00 3. Building Permit/SAC City of Hugo $45,000.00 4. Demo $61,490.00 5. Excavating/Grading $92,000.00 6. Footings $45,000.00 7. Foundation/Slab $71,000.00 8. Site Utilities $75,000.00 9. Asphalt $65,000.00 10. Reinforcing Steel Rebar $25,000.00 11. Curb&Gutter $15,000.00 12. Sanitary Sewer/Storm See Site Utitlities 13. Steel Framing $305,000.00 14. Interior Framing $35,000.00 15. Steel Joist See Framing 16. Waterproofing $15,000.00 17. Windows/Doors $65,000.00 18. Buildout Allowance $20/SF $400,000.00 19. Roofing $76,000.00 20. Insulation $23,500.00 21. Caulking $10,000.00 22. Acoustical Ceiling $80,000.00 23. Electrical $90,000.00 24. Plumbing/HVAC $200,000.00 25. Aluminum Entrances $200,000.00 26. Face Brick/Stone $125,000.00 27. Pavers $60,000.00 28. Interest $125,000.00 29. Phase I, Environmental s,Atty Fees $26,000.00 30. Conveyance Fee $5,000.00 31. Fire Sprinkler $46,000.00 Page 1 of 14 32. Garage Door $3,000.00 33. Landscaping/Retaining Walls $85,000.00 34. EFIS $163,000.00 37. Leasing Commission $210,000.00 38. Dumpster $2,500.00 39. Land Costs $1,070,000.00 40. Cont. Profit/Overhead $225,000.00 41. Closing Costs $80,000.00 42. Builders Risk Insurance $12,000.00 43. General Condition Site Supervision/Site Trailer/Etc. $85,000.00 TOTALS $4,353,490.001 Page 2 of 14 /, ,' l i� / i ��` - ,� , � �� "tee ' � Y _.. ,� 1�� � i �'-"'`�� � ��. Si e; �' �/ �`` I� , l! (_� \�• .� � � ��� 11 J �' �; rte- i � ���"Y ��rtia� �•�`. �� �Ily �. 1 �.. �: ti �^ . _._�_._ � �. ,,, .� ,r _: V S. }� �. ! , Ih .. n �� t � i E •�:i� E I�� . � �� � H' -.---------. `��� �, _, ��� {1 5 5 �\� 1r ss i. �I�t M� ■� [t � W .� �.. , ��' ;1�� =� � Y j 1- . - t� t� �� ���, ;�, `,�� V '■ ■ 1 .l' �:�� ,,i�: `, • �� � �, , `�: ,�� t -----Original Message----- From: Paul Steinman [mailto:psteinman@springsted.com] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 4:54 PM To: Bryan Bear Cc: Mikaela Huot; Ron Otkin; Rachel; Ippel, Mary Subject: RE: Hugo Downtown Redevelopment TIF District Here are our choices as it currently sits, with Frenchman Centre sort of out there in the background. 1) certify before June 30, 08. First possible receipt of increment in 09 2) certify after June 30, 08. First possible receipt of increment in 10 (which would include the first increment associated with Frenchman Centre if they build it in 08) 3) modify the TIF Plan to identify the specific year (if after 2010) in which we want to start receiving increment. The problem with this is, we are still guessing at the year we want first increment. In order to narrow these choices down I need to know the date of first demolition of the building which the council found substandard. (Rachel - can you identify this date?) Here is what we generally struggle with on these issues. Each year that passes, the value of the properties in the district generally rise (although maybe that's not the case currently). Remember that the base value will be set at the time of certification, therefore, the more the values rise in the district, the higher the base value will be. (High base value bad, low base value good) To complicate that is the fact that the base value includes the value of the parcels with the demolished buildings PRIOR to the demolition. Want more complication? What could happen because of all the demolition of buildings that has occurred and the possible stagnation in values now as an effect of the general housing market, is that Frenchman Centre could get built and assessed at the assumed value, and very little increment flows into the district. An example to illustrate this point would be assume our base value is $100, then demolition occurred which removed $25 of value. At that point the first $25 of new value created does not generate any increment, it only gets us back to the base value. Then as value is created over and above the base value, increment will be generated. We are trying to balance all of this entirely to avoid getting a TIF check from the County for some nominal amount of tax increment because that year is then counted as our first year of increment meaning we only have 25 remaining. Ideally we want our first year of increment to have the largest impact possible. Paul T. Steinman Vice President/Consultant Springsted Incorporated 380 Jackson Street, Suite 300 St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2887