Loading...
CR 2012-127 (MN Dept of Employment and ED Contamiation Cleanup Grant)-4co City of Hopkins November 7, 2012 Council Report 2012-127 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONTAMINATION CLEANUP GRANT Proposed Action Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Approve Resolution 2012-081, authorizing an application to Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development Contamination Cleanup grant funds for the Gallery Flats development. Overview The Contamination Cleanup Grant program was established to award grants to clean contaminated sites to allow for redevelopment. The purpose of the Contamination Cleanup Grant Program is to reduce the potential threat to public health and the environment, create new jobs, increase the tax base, and provide other public benefits by redeveloping polluted and unproductive sites. This DEED grant program includes funds for environmental investigation and clean up, as well as demolition and environmental consultant fees. The total appropriation for this grant program for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 is approximately $14.9 million. Staff is recommending an application requesting $50,000 of these funds for soil excavation and asbestos abatement on the Gallery Flats (Lutheran Digest/Park Nicollet) site. Primary Issues to Consider • What does the application consist of? • Why should Hopkins apply for MN DEED funding? • What other sources are being sought for contamination investigation and cleanup on the Gallery Flats site? Supporting Information • Resolution 2012-081 • 2012 MN DEED application — Gallery Flats on Lutheran Digest/Park Nicollet sites Tara Beard Community Development Coordinator Financial Impact: $ 0 Budgeted: Y/N Source: _PIR fund (501) Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): Notes: Council Report 2012-127 Page 2 Analysis of Issues What does the application consist of? The application requires site information, site evaluation, contamination investigation and cleanup information, and a project budget. DEED funding requires that their grant funds pay for no more than 75% of eligible costs. Why should Hopkins apply for MN DEED funding? TBRA and other sources of environmental funding are excellent ways to support redevelopment projects without an impact to the city budget. The improved environmental condition of property in Hopkins is a benefit to the entire community. What other sources are being sought for contamination investigation and cleanup on the Gallery Flats site? The table below summarizes past and pending grant applications for environmental investigation and cleanup for the Gallery Flats project. The grant application pertaining to this report is highlighted. Type Source Amount Status Date Committed /Estimated Commitment Date Metropolitan Council TBRA $294,500 Committed April 25, 2012 Metropolitan Council TBRA S26,200 Committed June 27, 2012 Metropolitan Council TBRA 515,000 Pending January 2012 County Program ERF 596.000 Pending December 2012 State Program DEED 550.000 Pending December 2012 Federal Program EPA 580,000 Conunitted April 2012 TOTAL $561,700 Alternatives The Council has the following alternatives: Approve resolution 2012-081 as is Approve resolution 2012-081 with changes 0 Deny resolution 2012-081 and opt not to apply for MN DEED funding CITY OF HOPKINS HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012-081 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CONTAMINATION CLEANUP GRANT APPLICATION SUBMITTED TO DEED AND COMMITTING LOCAL MATCH AND AUTHORIZING CONTRACT SIGNATURE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council has approved the Contamination Cleanup grant application submitted to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) on November 7, 2012, by the city of Hopkins for the Gallery Flats (Park Nicollet/Lutheran Digest) site. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city of Hopkins will act as the legal sponsor for the project contained in the Contamination Cleanup Grant Program to be submitted on November 1, 2012 and that the city of Hopkins is hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Employment and Economic Development for funding of this project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city of Hopkins has the legal authority to apply for financial assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sources and amounts of the local match identified in the application are committed to the project identified. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Hopkins has not violated any Federal, State or local laws pertaining to fraud, bribery, graft, kickbacks, collusion, conflict of interest or other unlawful or corrupt practice. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon approval of its application by the state, the city of Hopkins may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above - referenced project(s), and that the City of Hopkins certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulation as stated in all contract agreements. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mayor and the Clerk are hereby authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant. I CERTIFY THAT the above resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins on November 7, 2012. SIGNED: WITNESSED: Mayor (Date) City Clerk (Date) POSITIVELY �� FY 12-13 Jq� DepartmaM of Employment and Economic Oavelopm rit 1st National Bank Building 332 Minnesota Street, Suite E200 St. Paul, MN 55101-1351 Contamination Cleanup Grant Application and Part 1 of the Revolving Loan Application Cover Page Applicant (Public Entity): City of Hopkins Head of Applicant Agency: Mr. Mike Mornson, City Manager (ex. Mayor) Applicant Address: 1010 First Street South City: Hopkins Zip Code: 55343 Project Contact Person for Public Entity: Ms. Tara Beard Phone: 952-548-6343 E-mail: tbeardL&hopkinsmn.com Mailing Address: 1010 First Street S, Hopkins, MN 55343 Project Manager for this project from the Public Entity, in the event of an award Name Ms. Tara Beard Phone 952-548-6343 E-mail: tbeard u,hopkinsmn.com Mailing Address: 1010 First Street S, Hopkins, MN 55343 Application Author: Ms. Tara Beard and Mr. John Findley, The Javelin Group, Inc. Author's Phone and email: John Findley, 952-380-3668 ifindl y cr,thejavelingroupinc.com Provide a written executive summary of the project, including the applicant's involvement in the project to date and how the applicant intends to manage the project should a grant be awarded. (See Attachment) Cleanup FY 12-13 I. SITE IDENTIFICATION AND HISTORY SITE INFORMATION Name of Site: Former Park Nicollet Clinic/Lutheran Brotherhood Redevelopment Site Address: 31 - 9th Ave S. & 815 1 st Street S. City, County or Township: Hopkins Zip Code: 55343 Acreage of Site: 1.81 acres If City is applicant, what form of government? Minnesota Legislative District # 44A Sq. Ft. of Site: 78,748 sq. ft. Home Rule Charter _X_ Statutory City IC (Note: The Minnesota Legislature has a tool to look up legislative district numbers. You must have a precise address and know the zip code of the site. Go to: http: and use the "Who represents me?" tool. 2. Is the site located within a designated Transit Improvement Area (TIA?) X *Yes No *If yes, please provide Station Area nalne:_Hopkins Station Southwest LRT Corridor 3. A. Current property owner(s): Royal Scots Enterprises, Inc. & City of Hopkins When was the property purchased? 1992 & 3/2011 For what amount? Unk & $1.68M From whom was the property purchased? Hopkins Savings & Loan, Park Nicollet Clinic_ B. Who will develop the site? Klodt Development LLC Will the developer own the property at any time? _X_Yes No When was/will the property be purchased? 2012 For what amount? $735,000 & $1.12 M for a total of $1,855,000. C. Are eminent domain proceedings necessary to acquire the property on which the cleanup and redevelopment will occur? No If so, explain any difficulties anticipated in accomplishing the project. D. Who will own the project site after development? Sidal Realty When was/will the property be purchased? 2015 For what alnount? $24,750,000 4. Provide a legal description of the site. Park Nicollet Parcels: Real property in the City of Hopkins. County oI'll ennepin. State ol"Minnesota. described as follows: Parcel 1: The South 36 feet of lot 13. and all of Lots 14.15.16.17 18 19 and ?t)_ Block 4. "\\ 1.1)l MINNEAPOLIS". Hennepin County, Minnesota together Milli the East hal: of the :n.❑tcd alley in ,.id Block 4. lying between the westerly extension of the North line of the South 36 Icet of ,�iid Lot 13. and the \yesterly extension of the South line of said Lot 14, and including that part of the acated alley in said Block 4 lying between the westerly extension of the North line of said Lot 15 and the \V'estcrly extension of the South line of said Lot 17. all in "West Cleanup FY 12-13 Minneapolis", except those portions embraced within the following -described two tracts: Exception Tract A: Lot 13, except the North 14 feet thereof, and the North 18 feet of Lot 14, Block 4, together with the easterly half of the vacated alley in said Block 4, lying between the Westerly extension of the South line of the North 14 feet of said Lot 13, and the westerly extension of the South line of the North 18 feet of said Lot 14, all in "WEST MINNEAPOLIS", Hennepin County, Minnesota. Exception Tract B: That part of Lots 15 and 16, Block 4, "WEST MINNEAPOLIS", described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast comer of said Lot 15; thence Southerly along the East line of said Lot 16 a distance of 8.49 feet; thence Westerly, deflecting 89 degrees 42 minutes 54 seconds to the right a distance of 127.44 feet; thence Northerly, deflecting 90 degrees to the right a distance of 50.00 feet; thence Easterly, deflecting 90 degrees to the right a distance of 127.69 feet to the East line of said Lot 15; thence South along said East line to the point of beginning. Parcel 2: Tract A: Lot 13, except the North 14 feet thereof, and the North 18 feet of Lot 14, Block 4, together with the easterly half of the vacated alley in said Block 4, lying between the Westerly extension of the South line of the North 14 feet of said Lot 13, and the westerly extension of the South line of the North 18 feet of said Lot 14, all in "WEST MINNEAPOLIS", Hennepin County, Minnesota. Tract B: That part of Lots 15 and 16, Block 4, "WEST MINNEAPOLIS", described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast comer of said Lot 15; thence Southerly along the East line of said Lot 16 a distance of 8.49 feet; thence Westerly, deflecting 89 degrees 42 minutes 54 seconds to the right a distance of 127.44 feet; thence Northerly, deflecting 90 degrees to the right a distance of 50.00 feet; thence Easterly, deflecting 90 degrees to the right a distance of 127.69 feet to the East line of said Lot 15; thence South along said East line to the point of beginning. Tract C: Non-exclusive easement for driveway and access purposes over, across and upon the North 14 Feet of Lot 13, Block 4, "WEST MINNEAPOLIS", Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Easement in Gross) Lutheran Diaest Parcel: Lots 21, 22, 23 and 24, Block 4, West Minneapolis, Hennepin County, Minnesota, together with that part of the vacated alley adjoining Lots 21 and 22 accruing thereto. SITE VALUATION: ASSESSMENT OR APPRAISAL 5. If you are applying for cleanup grant funds you may submit either assessed value information or an appraisal. If you are applying for a revolving loan, you must submit an appraisal and may not submit assessor's information in place of an appraisal. Attach an appraisal completed by a qualified independent appraiser licensed under chapter 82B using accepted appraisal methodology which shows the current market value (pre -cleanup) of the property, separately taking into account the effect of the contaminants on the market value. This value should include both the value of the land and, if applicable, any buildings on the Site. Along with the appraisal, please include the projected value after cleanup and development. Current Appraised Value Projected Value Attach documentation showing the assessed value of the property for the latest year, as determined by the local assessor, shown on the most recent valuation notice used under Minn. Stat. § 273.121. Along with the assessed value, please include the projected value after cleanup and development. Cleanup MAIM&] Current Assessed Value $389,000 Projected Value $24,750,000 MAPS AND SITE FEATURES 6. Attach an accurate and legible site and location map showing locations of prominent and relevant site features such as buildings, retaining walls, etc. (NOTE: maps shall include property boundaries, a north arrow and bar scale). The map(s) should show the following: • The current condition of the site including labeled structures; • The proposed development of the site including labeled structures; and • The location(s) of contamination. Adding photographs is recommended. CURRENT AND FUTURE SITE USE 7. Zoning/Land Use: A. Current: Industrial Commercial Mixed-use X Other (Specify) B. After Cleanup: Industrial Mixed-use X Other (Specify) Residential Commercial Residential 8. If a change in zoning is necessary, please provide a schedule of required approvals. N/A 9. Current economic condition: Vacant lot Developed site Other 10. How many buildings are currently on site? Industrial How many are occupied? If vacant, for how long? Commercial 2 How many are occupied? 0 If vacant, for how long? 3eay rs Residential How many are occupied? If vacant, for how long? 11. Year building(s) was/were built: Lutheran Digest— 1960, Park Nicollet Clinic 1977 with an addition in 1981 12. Please describe the condition of the buildings on the site. The lots and buildings are vacant blighted eyesores. The clinic building has holes in walls and other interior destruction that poses an injury hazard to people entering the building. Vandalism has been a problem including a small fire started in 2011. 13. Is demolition required for RAP implementation? No Is demolition addressed in the RAP? Yes, the RAP specifies asbestos/hazardous materials will be addressed prior to demolition. 14. Please describe how site redevelopment will spur adjacent development. There are multiple Cleanup 4 FY 12-13 sites along the 8th Avenue corridor where additional redevelopment is being encouraged by the City. A successful multi -use redevelopment with the proposed streetscape improvements would demonstrate the commitment to developing the 8th Avenue corridor and be a strong catalyst to continued redevelopments to link downtown Hopkins with the new LRT station. SITE HISTORY 15. Please attach a brief synopsis on the history and general background of this site. This includes but is not limited to former uses of the site, known and/or suspected causes of contamination, etc. Also describe the current condition of the site and include a description of existing structures and existing occupants of the site. (See Attached) H. CONTAMINATION 16. Is applicant enrolled in an MPCA Program? VIC Prog. I.D. VP28110 VIC Project Manager: Rick Jolley Phone: 651-757-2475 PBP Prog. I.D. 4090 PBP Proj. Manager: Jessica Ebertz_ Phone: 651-757-2328 LUST Prog. I.D. LUST Proj. Manager Phone: Other 17. Name(s) of current environmental consultant Consultant Company: The Javelin Group Inc. Consultant Name: John Findley —Phone: -952-380-3668 18. What contaminants have been identified at the site? Arsenic, mercury and asbestos in soil 19. What is the likely source of the contamination? Historic fill and building debris burial 20. To qualify for cleanup funding, you must attach a copy of the approved RAP and final approval of your Response Action Plan from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. (See Attached) 21. Summary of Contamination Information: A. Provide a concise description of the identified contamination and proposed RAP. The description should include the occurrence of the contamination (i.e., are there distinct areas of contamination or is contamination widely disseminated across the site? Is the contamination at the surface or at depth?). Since underground parking will be included in the new building design, a remedial investigation was completed for both sites that included gridding the site into approximate 501x50' cells. Samples were collected from each cell in the 0'-5' depth and the 5'-10' depth intervals to determine the degree of contamination for each resulting block. Three blocks totaling 1,300 yd were identified on the Park Nicollet site that had petroleum and mercury contamination in excess of the residential SRVs or petroleum criteria for reuse as unregulated fill. A Met Council TOD grant was obtained for the excavation and Cleanup 5 FY 12-13 landfill disposal of this soil and for soil corrections on the Park Nicollet portion of the site. On the Lutheran Digest Parcel eight (8) blocks of soil totaling 3,848 yd were identified that had buried building material debris with asbestos mixed in and arsenic concentrations that exceeded the residential SRV that make it unacceptable for reuse as unregulated fill so that it must be landfilled. B. Complete the following table for soil contamination (be sure to include areas of contamination that have been identified at the site but will not be treated or removed as part of the approved RAP): General contaminant type (i.e., Total volume of Total volume of Remedy RAP Cleanup Goal DRO, VOCs, metals, etc.) identified identified contamin- metals, etc. (i.e., residential the plume extends off-site. contaminated soil ated soil to be SRVs, industrial (cyds) remediated (cyds) SRVs, etc.) Park Nicollet site Metals (800) (800) Landfill Residential SRV (Previously Funded) Park Nicollet Site DRO (500) (500) Landfill Unregulated Fill (Previously Funded) Criteria Lutheran Digest Metals & 3,848 3,848 Landfill Residential SRV, Buried Building Debris <I% asbestos, with Asbestos in soil Unregulated Fill Criteria C. Complete the following table for groundwater contamination. If no or limited groundwater investigation has been conducted, indicate this. Also indicate if a groundwater investigation was conducted but no contamination was detected. General contaminant Affected aquifer (i.e., Approximate dimensions of Remedy type (i.e., DRO, VOCs, water table, deeper contaminant plume on-site. Specify if metals, etc. aquifers) the plume extends off-site. No Groundwater Assessment Was Completed D. List all compounds comprising the identified release in soil and the corresponding average and maximum concentration for each compound. Also include petroleum in the table. If distinct areas of contamination are present at the site, please describe separately. (NOTE: It is acceptable to provide an overview with estimated average and maximum concentrations if the amount of analytical data is overwhelming.) (Note: for PAHs, please provide individual compound concentrations or Benzo(a)pyrene equivalent concentrations for the carcinogenic PAH compounds.) Cleanup IWARS&I Compound Tier I SRV (residential) Average Concentration Maximum Concentration Mercury (Pk Nicollet cell D3 0'-5' depth) 0.5 mg/kg 0.12 mg/kg 0.12 mg/kg Arsenic (Pk Nicollet cell B-5 0'-5' depth) 9 mg/kg 9.7 mg/kg 9.7 mg/kg Arsenic (Lutheran D cell E-1 0'-5' depth) 9 mg/kg 16.3 mg/kg 18.3 mg/kg Arsenic (Lutheran D cell E-2 5'-10' depth) 9 mg/kg 11.7 mg/kg 11.7 mg/kg Asbestos in soil <1% 14.5% 22% E. Please do the same as in D. for groundwater. Compound HRL Average Concentration Maximum Concentration No Groundwater Assessment Was Completed F. If groundwater at the site is contaminated, note the geologic makeup of the affected aquifer (sand/gravel, till, lacustrine clay, etc.), and the estimated average linear velocity (be sure to indicate how this number was determined). Not Applicable G. Briefly describe possible exposure scenarios posed by identified contamination at the site (i.e., ingestion or human contact with contaminated soil, consumption of contaminated groundwater, ecological impacts, etc.), and nearby receptors that could be affected by contaminants migrating from site (high value wetland/creeks/ rivers, etc.). The potential for exposure is direct contact with contaminated soil. Area children can potentially come into contact with the contaminated soil and put their fingers in their mouth that results in consumption of soil contamination. H. If you are requesting costs for soil vapor mitigation, you must have supporting data. N/A III. COST ANALYSIS: INVESTIGATION, CLEANUP AND PROJECT COST BUDGET 22. What is the total of all eligible investigation, cleanup and project costs for the site? $180,320.50 23. How much grant funding are you requesting from DEED (cannot be more than 75% of the cost listed in the question above)? $50,000.00 24. Please fill out the following budget table to identify the investigation costs, cleanup costs and project costs for the site as defined in the instruction section of this application. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Cleanup IWAIFFAW BUDGET (Luther Digest Site Only, Park Nicollet Site Previously Funded) Eligible Activities for Investigation and % Complete Dams) Completed Total Cost RAP Development Luther Digest/Park Nicollet Site (previously Funded) 100 2011-2012 = Investi s Subtotal Eligible Activities for Soil & Groundwater %complete DatLysl completed Total Cost Cleanup Soil excavation, loading, hauling & 0% $134,680.00 landfill disposal Excavation Oversight and 0% $26,277.50 Implementation Report B. Cleanup Costs Subtotal $160,957.50 C. Total A & B This is your total cleanup cost* $160,957.50 Other Project Activities Necessary to Bio Complete Date) s) Completed Total Cost Implement the RAP Asbestos abatement and monitoring 011 $19,363.00 Project Cost Subtotal $19,363.00 E. Total A, B & D $180,320.50 25. What is the breakdown of sources for the above budget? Amount _$50,000.00_ $15,000.00 _$96,000.00_ Source DEED Grant Status (Committed, pending decision date) Pendinu _Met Council TBRA Grant Pending _Hennepin Co ERF Grant Pending $19,320.50 Klodt Inc. Committed — unrestricted match _$180,320.50_ TOTAL (should equal Total in line E above) *(12% of the above cleanup costs in line C must be paid xvith unrestricted funds. as defined on page V; Please indicate which source(s) will contribute to the unrestricted match.) 26. Is all of the project"s financing in place? (i.e. cleanup, construction. operations) The development has been pre -sold to a local real estate management company. Construction funding solicitations are in progress with Wells Fargo, TCF and US Bank. The construction funding commitment will be in place by the end of November 2012. 27. If requesting project costs, please explain why these costs are necessary to remediate the contamination. Not Applicable 28. If any of the activities listed above are partially or fully completed, how were those activities financed? If work has occurred, please submit the invoices for which you will be seeking Cleanup 8 FY 12-13 reimbursement. Not Applicable 29. If you are requesting acquisition costs and the amount for acquisition is different from the appraised or assessed value, please explain why there is a difference. Not Applicable ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCES 30. Please indicate whether you have applied for or received all funds available to you from other funding sources. If you applied for or received funds, please list the amount(s) below. Source Requested or received all funds available (Y or N)? Amount(s) requested or received? Date(s) requested or received? Met Council Investigation Grant Park Nicollet $30,000 Yes $24,264.23 2/17/12 Met Council Investigation Grant Lutheran Digest $26,250 No $16,785.88 10/5/12 Met Council TOD Cleanup & LCDA Development Grants Park Nicollet $294,500 (Park Nicollet Site Only) No $0.00 Not Applicable -County ERF Grant PetroFund ACRRA MPCA Funding EPA Other (Specify) COST RECOVERY 31. Has the site been identified as a state or federal Superf ind site? Yes X No 32. Based on question 19, are there any existing or former businesses or landowners who may have caused or contributed to the contamination on the site? X Yes No If yes, who? It is unknown when or who caused contamination of the site. What is the status of the business (in operation, sold, closed, moved)? Closed 33. What efforts have been made to recover some or all of the cleanup costs from the party(ies)? It is unknown when or who caused contamination of the site so no efforts have been made to recover costs. It is unlikely that recent businesses contributed to the site impacts. There is a mechanism to recover costs from the responsible party if this grant receives funding. See Minn. Stat. § I I6J.557 for further details. No Cleanup FY 12-13 FINANCIAL INFORMATION 34. Please submit a copy of the applicant's most current audit. or financial statement if an audit is not available. If this information is available electronically, you may submit the web address in lieu of a paper copy. Iittl . 1-1 , .h�11, 35. Is there a possibility that the site will be cleaned up without DEED honey? _X_ Yes _ No Explain your answer to the question above: If DEED does not award a grant, Met Council or Hennepin County ERF may make up the difference. If no grant is awarded then the cleanup maybe completed by the developer, but it could result in delay of the project and/or an increase in the rental rates that will make the rental units less affordable to the community. IV. DEVELOPMENT PLAN AFTER CLEANUP 36. Describe in detail the Development Plan for the site after implementation of the RAP? (Number of buildings or housing units, square footage, etc.). The proposed Hopkins Gallery Flats is a multi -use development with approximately 163 market rate and affordable rental apartments (including 1 unit @ 60% AMI) incorporated into one 4 -story apartment building (60,585 SF) and one 5 story building (77,188 SF) that will share a below grade parking garage (61,810 SF). The apartments will be studio, 1 and 2 bedroom units, and the indoor parking ratio will be about 1.01 stalls per dwelling unit. Landscaping will include a central courtyard (17,874 SF). Pavement areas include 23 surface parking spaces (21,428 SF). The ground floor of the 5 - story building will be mixed-use space adapted for retail, office, live/work, or residential space that faces the 8th Avenue promenade that connects the Hopkins Light Rail Station and Downtown Hopkins. There will be additional off street parking for visitors that will be screened from the surrounding streets. This development is part of the City of Hopkins redevelopment efforts for 8th Avenue, which is the vital link that connects Downtown Hopkins to the Hopkins Light Rail Station. The project will commence in the Spring of 2013 and be completed summer 2014. 37. Describe how the project advances or promotes the growth of the green economy as defined in Minn. Stat. § 116J.437. (see https://www.revisor.Ieg.state.lun.us/statutes/?id=116J ) The proposed redevelopment will advance and promote the growth of a green economy primarily through implementation of a strategy to reduce carbon emissions that incorporates utilization of existing infrastructure and promoting the use of mass transit. The project is located within one block of the proposed Hopkins LRT station and within 4 blocks of 4 bus lines. The high density residential development and work from home spaces will improve utilization of mass transit and reduce carbon emissions. The project will also preserve the quality of surface waters by routing precipitation through an infiltration structure rather than increasing streamflow during storm events that are the primary contributor to surface water quality degradation. Cleanup 10 FY 12-13 38. Have all of the required local/city approvals necessary for this project to proceed been obtained (planning commission, zoning, etc.) If not, what remains to be done and what is the process for completing the process of obtaining approvals? All city land use approvals have been obtained. These include the preliminary and final plat, site plan approval, rezoning to mixed use and a PUD overlay. 39. What is the estimated cost of the Development (construction costs not including the cleanup costs)? $ 24,750,000 Of these how much is public? $ 338,800 private? $ 24,411,200 40. Is all of the financing in place for the final development of the site? If yes, attach evidence that funds for the project have been secured. If not, what is the process to secure the funds and the timeline for securing them? The development has been pre -sold to a local real estate management company. Construction funding solicitations are in progress with Wells Fargo, TCF and US Bank. The construction funding commitment will be in place by the end of November 2012. 41. If the site will be redeveloped for residential use, provide the following data: RENTAL: Total number of units 163 Monthly rental cost per unit 800 - $1,585 Number of affordable units* I (a, 60% AMI & 87 0) 80% AMI Level of affordability 1 A) 60% AMI & 87 A 80% AMI Construction cost per unit $ 152,000 OWNER OCCUPIED: Total number of units 0 Purchase price per unit $ Number of affordable units/homes* Level of affordability Construction cost per unit $ 42. If affordable units will not be constructed on-site as part of this development, will the developer be contributing to off-site affordable units? Not Applicable If so, how many? Where in the applicant's jurisdiction will they be located? 43. Are you applying for HUD financing? No If yes, have you received an "Invitation to Apply" Cleanup I I FY 12-13 from HUD (attach a copy, if so). If not, where are you in the HUD financing process? PROPERTY TAXES 44. What are the property taxes on the site for the current year (prior to cleanup)? $14,475.14 45. What is the projected property tax on the site after redevelopment? $ 495,000 A. How were the figures in Questions 44 and 45 determined? The current taxes were determined from the Hennepin County web page which was also used to determine the tax rate for 2 newer nearby apartments that were both 2% so this tax rate was applied to the known completed apartment sale price. B. Who determined them? The Javelin Group_ JOB CREATION & RETENTION 46. Project the number of new jobs created after cleanup and development of the site. (Jobs that did not exist in Minnesota prior to development) NEW JOBS TABLE Position Title Total # of Full -Time Jobs Total # of Part -Time Jobs Expected Hiring Date Property Manager I 11 /2013 Assistant Property Manager 1 12/2013 Leasing Agent 1 1 /2014 Leasing Agent 1 1/2014 Assistant Manager 1 6/2014 Maintenance 2 5 '2014 Maintenance 2 8/2014 Work from Home Business Owners 3 2014 Retail Employees 3 2014 Total New Jobs: Cleanup 12 FTEs FY 12-13 47. Project the number of retained jobs after cleanup and development of the site. (Jobs that existed either on-site or elsewhere in Minnesota prior to development) RETAINED JOBS TABLE Position Title Total # of Full -Time Jobs Total # of Part- Time Jobs Former Location of Retained Jobs Building Demolition Excavation Response Action Cleanup Concrete Superstructure Exterior Finish IntaA4,r Finish Total Retained Jobs: 0 FTEs PROJECT SCHEDULE 48. Provide a detailed project schedule outlining the individual tasks and schedules of the overall project (for both cleanup and redevelopment of the site). Indicate on this form the expected month and year of individual tasks involved in the project. At a minimum, time lines should include response actions/cleanup activities, demolition, construction start and end date, and any other project activities. SCHEDULED TASKS BY YEAR AND MONTH YEAR 2014 O©0©O00©0©ODO©0©00 ©�©t Secure Site Building Hazmat Abatement Building Demolition Excavation Response Action Cleanup Concrete Superstructure Exterior Finish IntaA4,r Finish East Building Occu ancy West Building Occupancy Cleanup Completion date 5/30/2013 Construction Completion date 8/30/2014 49. Please list any factors which would change or delay this schedule. We do not foresee any delays in commencement of construction. Possible delays could be due to winter construction delays or natural disasters. Cleanup 13 FY 12-13 THIRD PARTY/COMPANY COMMITMENT INFORMATION 50. If there is a commitment from a third party to develop on the site after cleanup, please complete the following: Third Party/Company Name: Klodt Development, LLC Contact Person: Mr. John Bell Title: VP of Construction Phone Number (include area code): 612-374-1770 51. Do you have an executed development agreement? X_ Yes No 52. Please attach a commitment letter from the developer or other commitment documentation, such as a development agreement. (If you cannot obtain a commitment letter from the developer, please explain.) (See Attached) V. PAYMENT INFORMATION Most grant payments take place through electronic funds transfer (EFT). To ensure proper payment, a Vendor Number assigned by Minnesota Management & Budget is required. Vendor information is available at lit Ili: u,III h.,i.iI�'.nln.0 , \ C,I(.10I_-res0urres Financial Contact Person: Ms. Tara Beard Telephone Number (include area code): 952-548-6343 State of Minnesota Vendor Number (if known): 0000197688 If a Minnesota Vendor Number is not available, please supply: Federal Employer Identification Number: Cleanup 14