Laserfiche WebLink
NIA city of <br /> 44INEW <br /> H ON <br /> the city that works for you <br /> Council Worksession <br /> May 22, 2012 <br /> Present: Dave Jacobsen, Mayor <br /> Char Samuelson, Councilmember <br /> Mary Burg, Councilmember <br /> Paul Jacobsen, Councilmember <br /> Gina Bauman, Councilmember <br /> Absent: None <br /> Staff in Attendance: Dean Lotter, City Manager <br /> Grant Fernelius, Community Development Director <br /> Janice Gundlach, City Planner <br /> Others in Attendance: Mark Ruff, Ehlers <br /> Jeanne Vogt, Ehlers <br /> Stacie Kvilvang, Ehlers <br /> Update on Financial Projection for New Brighton Exchange: <br /> The meeting was called to order at 5:30 PM. City Manager Dean Lotter gave a brief overview of the work <br /> session meeting agenda to the City Council. The work session meeting included the following topics: 1)to <br /> provide a financial update on New Brighton Exchange (NBE); and 2) discuss recent interest by a national <br /> builder for a tract of land on the west side of Old Highway 8. Staff is looking for feedback from Council on the <br /> information provided. <br /> Mark Ruff(Ehlers) introduced his team to the City Council. Community Development Director Grant Fernelius <br /> indicated that it had been a couple of years since the last financial update was provided to the City Council. <br /> Over the course of the last few months, staff has been working with the City's development partners (Colliers <br /> and Ryan) and Ehlers to update the financial model for the New Brighton Exchange project. The purpose of <br /> this exercise is to look at the potential tax increment that might be generated for the project under different <br /> development assumptions; and ultimately determine if there will be sufficient resources to cover the City's debt <br /> service obligations in the future. <br /> Initially, staff prepared two different scenarios (one more optimistic; and one more conservative). The EDC <br /> also reviewed the information and suggested that two additional scenarios be examined: the minimum level of <br /> development needed to support the bonds and what would happen if there was no development at all. <br /> Concept Plan 1: 730 units of housing; 590,000 square of commercial development; $176 million of <br /> market value; $2.49 million of annual tax increment; $48.8 million of gross tax <br /> increment. Build-out: 2013-2016. <br /> Concept Plan 2: 460 units of housing; 559,000 square of commercial development; $144 million of <br /> market value; $2.16 million of annual tax increment; $41.1 million of gross tax <br /> increment. Build-out: 2013-2017. <br /> 1 <br />