Loading...
276479 WHITE - CITY CLERK f'L��*�Y� CANARY - E ARTMENT COUIICII N v (v BI.UE - MAYOR G I T Y O F S A I N T PA U L File� N O. ouncil Resolution Presented By � Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date 'vdHEREAS, the City of Saint Paul and the Port Authority are undertaking an industrial development and redevelopment project identified as Energy Park; and WHEREAS, implementation of Energy Fark Program and Project will require substantial local public expenditures, which expenditure and program will significantly increase taxable valuations in the project area and the City's real property tax base; and WHEREAS, it appears necessary to the program undertaking to employ tax increment financing under the Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act (Act) ; and to involve the Housing and Redevelopm�nt Authority of the City of Saint Paul , Minnesota (HRA) in said program for that purpose. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Saint Paul that the Director, Department of Planning and Economic Development, on behalf of the City and as HRA staff, is hereby authorized and directed to prepare a tax increment financing plan under the Act for the Energy Park Project and to prepare all other documents and to take all other necessary or desireable actions preliminary to HRA Board, City Planning Commission or City Council consideration of the formulation, creation and approval of such a plan and a tax increment financing district as may be required under the Act or other applicable statute. COUNCILMEN Yeas Nays uestgd by Department of: Hunt �,� Levine In Favo[ McMM�he°�• B snoweite� �__ Against Y Tedesco ��� MAR � p 1gg� Form Approv by C' o Ado,�fi�ed by Cou il: Date — �' L ertified ssed b C .il S�cretary BY Ap by ;Nayor: Dat R 13 1981 Approve Mayor for u ission to Council By _ _ BY �t.►�t�� M,4R 2 1 1981 • - � , :� , . �;�t**�.� CITY OF` SAINT PAUL o� '� OFFICE OF THE MAYOR �y•,�.a ��}, ,��� � �nimu . Fv�d9'3 f J � in �ui � � ���- �` 347 CITY HALL ��� SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 GEORGE LATIMER (612) 298-4323 MAYOR February 23, 1981 TO: City Council President Ron Maddox and Members of the City Council RE: ENERGY PARK UPDATE Dear Council Members: Attached for your information are copies of two recent letters: One to Council 46 dated February 17, 1981 and one to the Environmental Quality Board dated February 17, 1981. Both letters are on the subject of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet submitted to the Environmental Quality Board on February 17, 1981 for the Como Shops alternative in Energy Park. Como Shops Site As you are aware, negotiations with Burlington Northern on acquisition of land owned by them for inclusion in Energy Park have been proceeding for some months. The negotiations originally focused on the BN's trailer-on-flat car site (TOFC) in the westerly portion of Energy Park. When it became apparent that acquisition of that particular site from BN would be a long and costly process, focus shifted to the Como Shops site in the easterly portion of Energy Park directly south of Como Park. In anticipation of the possibility of resolving the impasse with BN through acquisition of the Como Shops site, the City and Port Authority on February 17 jointly submitted to the Environmental Quality Board an alternative EAW detailing the impacts the shift to the Como Shops would have. The land use, in either instance, would be principally residential. There are, I think, a number of advantages to the use of the Como Shops site for residential redevelopment as opposed to the TOFC site. One of the principal advantages is the proximity of Como Park to the future residents of Energy Park. This will permit those residents to satisfy some of their recreational needs at an existing city facility, rather than requiring redevelopment of surrounding neighborhood parks or major development of recreation resources within Energy Park itself. Another advantage of shifting the residential land use to the Como Shops site is that a major industrial land use will be removed from between a principal regional park in the city of Saint Paul and a residential neighborhood. This cannot help but have a favorable effect upon the surrounding areas. Furthermore, it may be possible to reuse some of the existing Como Shops buildings by rehabilitating them for residential and even some light commercial uses. Page Two - There are some disadvantages to the shift to the Como Shops alternative. Principal among these is some slight reduction in acreage available for industrial development and the shift of attention away frorn redevelopment of Burlington Pond as a neighborhood amenity. The loss of acreage, from approximately 245 acres to approximately 218 acres, is particularly ' distressing to me because it directly affects our estimates of the number of jobs which we expect will be generated by Energy Park. We now believe that Energy Park will ultimately provide about 4,800 jobs as opposed to the original estimate of 6,000. The final and significant disadvantage is that the Como Shops site is anticipated to cost a good deal more to acquire than would have the TOFC site. TIF for Energy Park This brings me to the second of three portions of this letter, the section discussing financing of Energy Park. Staff inembers of the Development Division are exploring the feasibility of establishing a tax increment district in, and perhaps around, Energy Park. A new tax increment financing district is being studied as a means of generating additional revenues for land acquisition and developrnent of public improvements related to Energy Park. There are four reasons additional public financing may be required for Energy Park: 1. The Urban Development Action Grant for Energy Park included $1.25 million for land acquisition which was subsequently disallowed by HUD. The reason HUD disallowed the $1.25 million was because the land consists of parcels which Wilder Foundation will be acquiring, and for which the Port Authority will be receiving payment. 2. The costs of acquisition of railroad land are in excess of the amount anticipated when the UDAG agreement was signed. The shortfalls for acquisition, particularly under the Como Shops alternative, must be made up from local sources. 3. The UDAG included no federal funding for development of the Concourse. The Concourse is an important aspect of the original Energy Park concept and one which will be developed in stages. The public participation and funding for the first stage must be provided for from local resources. 4. Our planning efforts with Council 46 have identified a number of community concerns which may represent potential spillover effects from Energy Park to the surrounding neighborhoods. Council 46 has been particularly concerned about increases in traffic volumes on some of the adjoining streets, about noise from that traffic and about the impact of Energy Park on nearby recreational facilities. Assuming these spillover effects prove fo be of consequence to the neighborhoods around Energy Park, funds will have to be available to mitigate these impacts insofar as possible. The UDAG provides no funding for measures of this sort. Such funding would have to come from local resources. For these reasons, then, it appears that creation of a tax increment financing district would provide a vehicle for addressing the need for unforeseen, additional public funding. We will be refining the figures over the course of the next several weeks in order to present ihe case to you as realistically as possible. On March 11, a resolution of intent and direction regarding an Energy Park tax increment financing district will be on the HRA Board agenda. ;;:`���K �����`'� CITY OF SAINT PAUL �,r. o,�,,, _�. ;,,,� �� �� �3: DEPARTMENT OF Pl_.q�!NiNG AND ECONOMIC D�R/�LOPMENT :� ,�itlli 411�1: >� :� i���t 1`J1�Ig , �" �Q' 25 West Founh Street,Saint Paul,Minnesoq,55102 �.w , a .,,,4,:.R,....•�•''~ . GEORGE LATIMER MAYOR Tuesday, February 17, 1981 � ; T0: Members of Council 46 � _ FR: Steve Wellington, Administratvr of Developmen�f� t RE: Como- Shops Alternative EAI�� � - Enclosed for your information and review are copies of the EAlJ on the Como Shops a� ternative configuration of Fnergy Park. The consulting firm of BRW did an amazing job, I believe, of reviewing and revising the originai figures and materials in a very short time. Please note, however, that BRW did not use addenda as I understood they wo�ld. All appendices have been rewritten throug��- out to reflect the changes this alternative presents. I look forward to discussing the Como Shops Alternative with you at the special meeting Thursday evening. I believe that you will. find there are many positive aspects of this alternative which r�:commend it. I do not wish to influence your objectivity with re�ard to the two alternatives, of course, but I do ask that you approach the Como Shops alternative with an open mind. . . . cc: i:en Dzuc,an . Gregory Haupt . . . . . . . . � ( . _"'.^;irg ryti.;,� ,������9 Page Three - Timeline The last itern of information I am presenting to you is a partia! Energy Park decision timeline which sets the deadlines that must be met in order to secure UDAG commitments and to ensure timely development of Energy Park. This timeline will be added to, updated and provided to you periodically to keep you abreast of this very complex project. Thank you for your continued support of the Energy Park concept. If you desire further information, Steve Wellington or his staff will be pleased to provide it. He may be reached at 292-6039. Sincerely, I eor ati r Mayo Attachment: Timeline cc: Port Authority Board CIB Committee Planning Commission Board of County Commissioners Board of School Commissioners Early Notification System Counc il 46 Department Directors E. A. Kraut Ken Dzugan Steve Wellington Gregory Haupt James Hart ' �.�:'�,� � �_� I T Y ()F' .�:1 I�"i ��_�. I . ]. ����I ��� -....,1.: . �'.:*.:'_'� ."1 4:,.� �' =_�` -� i . Ol�l�'ICI: '�i' '1'* ; y t� _ : - �;, � .T 7. �!._11:()1: �i►��'� l a! '_ =�i_'_.:.t'' =ll . . . 'r. ���. '�,�1_' _ .. � Glinl�C:l: 1..\Tt>I(:R :;•.L7 CiTY H.\.[.f. ?1.1YOlt • _. . .. . . S<\I\T.}:1i;7..�II\�LgY)'f.\ �,±at0_' !(f 1'3'/ 3 t�8-•i:2`=;3 • . Mr. Arthur Sidner, Chairman � Environmenta� Quality Board ° � � " � " � Room 100 Capitol Square Building 550 Cedar Street Saint Paul , Minnesota 55101 RE: Environmental Assessment 4Jorksheet on the Energy Par�c Como Shops Alternative Dear Nr. Sidner: You are a�vare, I'rr: sure, of the discussions occurring b2tt•reen Burlington Northern . and the Port Authority regarding use of BPt land in Saint Paul 's Energy Park. The original EAtd filed ���ith your office ��ay 22, 1980 included 8�t`s trailer-on- flat car (TOCF) yard in Energy Par� and identified it for conversion to residential land use. Enclosed for your reviea� and for publication are seven (7} copies af an EA:�! on an alternative confiyuration for Energy Park. This alternaiive, ►vhicn ti�ie are calling the Como Shops Alternative, excludes the TOFC facil►ty �rom Energy Park and replaces it tivith the BN's Corno Shops. The land, and perhaps som� af the buiTdings, on the Coroo Shops site could be converted princinally to residen�ial land use. At this �oint, then, you have the o��iginal Energy Fark EA!�! and t�z EAW for th� Como . Shops Alternative before you. 41e request th�at both of tnem stand until the rather complex negotiations Htith BN and the coop�rative planning erfort �rith Council 46 bears fruit and one or the other Energy Park configurations is decided upon. Sincerely yours, ; �?, � . n j �j �,� � � , �-- . �_ < . ;J���.��,�,sl=+ �.`: ���,:1._,�t.��.��;: ��_:t�•�'::; "' , , � , i�."t�".�'_;� 1/" � �`�� � . D � � � EUGEi�E�A. KRAUT � KE�IraETN DZUGAN pE��� - Port Authorit of . GY REICNERT Y Coordina�or, Saint Paul Planning Administrator Saint Paul Energy Park Project GL:dma cc: P�is. Mary Sullivan TENTATIVE SCHEDULE FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF ENERGY PARK MASTER PLAN AND ENERGY PARK REDEVELOPMENT PLAN (FIRST VERSION: 2/23/81) DAY/DATE ACTION � 1981 FEBRUARY Tues. 2/17 Submittal to Environmental Quality Board of Como Shops Alternative Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Thurs. 2/19 Special meeting with Council 46 to discuss Como Shops Alternative EAW Fri. 2/20 Initial staff review of feasibility of Energy Park Tax Increment Financing District (TIFD). PED begins redrafting Energy Park Master Plan Mon. 2/23 Council 46 meeting with HUD on Energy Park UDAG Wed. 2/25 ENS notice of PED staff intent to submit to HRA Board a resolution of intent (a) supporting establishment of Energy Park TIFD and (b) instructing staff to begin preparation of Chapter 273 redevelopment plan MARCH Mon. 3/2 Council 46 meeting Mon. 3/9 Council 46 meeting Wed. 3/11 Resolution of intent and instruction adopted by HRA Board Mon. 3/16 Distribution of redrafted Energy Park Master Plan and draft redevelopment plan to Council 46, Planning Commission, CIB Committee and Energy Park Management Team Mon. 3/23 Council 46 meeting Tues. 3/24 End of 30-day period for review of Como Shops Alternative EAW Unknown Planning Commission (committee) weekly meeting for Energy Park Master Plan (EPMP) and redevelopment plan review Mon. 3/30 Council 46 meeting Tues. 3/31 Submittal to Secretary, U.S. HUD of evidentiary materials required, including certification of acquisition funds (YIII) ' . . �'."-+�r � '4'a;rs ' . ;� ��� !� APRIL Unknown Planning Commission (committee) weekly meeting for EPMP and redevelopment plan review Fri. 4/3 Mayor updates department directors on EPMP and redevelopment plan at weekly policy meeting Mon. 4/6 Council 46 meeting Unknown Planning Commission (committee) weekly meeting for EPMP and redevelopment plan review Thurs. 4/9 Presentation of draft Energy Park Redevelopment Plan to CIB Committee Fri. 4/10 ENS notice sent advising of Planning Commission public hearing May 8 on EPMP and redevelopment plan Mon. 4/13 Council 46 meeting Unknown Planning Commission (ommittee) weekly meeting for EPMP and redevelopment plan review Mon. 4/20 Council 46 meeting Unknown Planning Commission (committee) weekly meeting for EPMP and redevelopment plan review Mon. 4/27 Council 46 meeting Unknown Planning Commission (committee) weekly meeting for EPMP and redevelopment plan review MAY Fri. 5/1 (1)Planning Commission (committee) recommendations regarding EPMP and redevelopment plan mailed to Planning Commission, Board of County Commissioners and Board of School Commissioners. Transmittal letter identifies Council 46 concerns not incorpt�rated in committee recommend- ations; letter may also identify Energy Park Management Team concerns not incorporated in committee recommendations (2)Notice published and sent to ENS advising of City Council public hearing May 28 on Energy Park Redevelopment Plan and Energy Park Master Plan (3)Follow-up by Mayor with department directors on EPMP Fri. 5/8 Planning Commission public hearing on EPMP and redevelopment plan; recommendations to Mayor and City Council Thurs. S/14 CIB Committee recommendations on Energy Park Redevelopment Plan to Mayor and HRA Board � Thurs. 5/21 Finance, Management and Personnel Committee reviews Energy Park Redevelopment Plan Wed. S/27 HRA Board action on Energy Park Redevelopment Plan Thurs. 5/28 City Council public hearing on Energy Park Master Plan and Energy Park Redevelopment Plan; approval of Energy Park Master Plan and Energy Park Redevelopment Plan; approval of Energy Park Tax Increment Financing District and creation of same as a redevelopment district ��_.:__ti._ , Cx��k fl�+' ���7I�'`� .�"��-�AT3�C,� _%"��:;�'�.�.x.. � /�., -.�: .. j F .;; , ;'.''� �;; ,��`�' O:E'F'x�:G O-H fi rI I; C i'�Y" CO�7�ti C�r., 1`��.:.--•. .11�'.;� ' � / �� �� � '! 'y.: -'�;i i"`.1 � - Si r: :yy �if -� . .. � ��.• , j::,i . :� .�� • �''ti —I �;�•�\. .��,' Do�e . March 5, 1981 �`<..;'"� C � �e� l`�� � 1 i L�. C. l'`i � 4'� � t'1 � � 7� n : Sair�� P�c�3 Gi#��r �c����^�� -`; ��C O �#? = G C�Tl�i fi 7�L ��7 FI NANCE, MANAGEMENT AND PERSON�VEL George McMahon ; ��Q�fm�;�� ���;�es i`he �oi ioaving - �e�a�� c�r, �C. F. � �fi�lti4t)C£ �7� � ��Sl�Il9�tAil � ' . • , ' � ���i�i ' � ���...� : At i ts meeti ng of �larck� 5, 1981., the Fi nance Commi ttee, recorr�nended approval of ._the following: 1 . Resolution transferring �325,000 from specified contingent reserve to budget. . fund for tree planting. (11745-GP4) . . _ 2. Resolution transferring $80,000 in surplus funds from completed portion of St. Anthony_Park� Sewer Project to fund segment of Arlington-Arkwright Storm. Sewer System Project. � (11776-GM) � • � 3.� �Resolution amending 1981 CIB Budget to reflect GDBG Year VII Entitlement of $.10,176,000. (11766-GM) _ \ - 4. Resolution approving� preparation of tax increment financing plan for Energy Park Project. (11783-GM) - � 5. Resolution approving•.amendment changing current three-year agreement with Police Supervisory Group by adding HMO-P1innesota as an additional ootion for �health insurance coverage. (11741-GM) � 6. Resolution removing title of Interpreter/Health from Section 3.M (Specia� . Employment)(Ungraded) of Civil Service Rules and placing it in Section 3.l (Technical )(Ungraded). (11742-GM) � 7. Resolution replacing class specification for Water Chemist I. (11743-GM) (CONTINUED . . . ) . � . � � i � a # �.'i"ti` �U1I.T. SEVE;�"t�! FIA02 ,� 5:11\1' P��UL, 2Ei\`t:.SJT�� S.5lQ' 1 . `y .'r� __ • ,. �,� ;�;,��::� �:,.������ , __ . , . ,_. _ _ . --���. � � b:.� . . . . . . ��. . .-� . .:.-.. _i . . . . .. .. . ' . �P1:Af�lAfIQN Ofi ADMINTSTRATiV� t��ti)�KS, ' _ �: . ,:R����.UTdt�tS, AND OROINAN�ES = . , DAT�: 2 Mare�h 19��. ; , ��������� �� i'0: N9AYOR����ORGE LATIMER �-':�.� ,� —�� � ; :. ' FR(�1. Steve T�ellfngton, PED ° . . ::j{�• �nergp Park Taa Increment Financi�g D#etri�at � , �;:.., , ACTIOW REQUfSTED Signrttir� on attached reaolution gpprovi�g ft far .`#�bu►3,tt$� to C�ty C�[�#.l. . , q"� ��� ' � � .. � ...'...�. . .. .. ' .. . ,.. � 1 . . . . . � � . ... � . ... . ' . ,- .'1 :. .,�. . �.�.z, ` � � �PURPOS� AND RATIONALE FOR THTS ACTIOPI: ' - � Tb.e �e�►Alution eatablishes City Couneil supp�� far :PED ��eation of ' � dc►euments in eugport of aa En�rgq Park �IFD. ,, ,, , . , ATTACtIMENTS: � � _ , , , $�ol��iat� , , . , � � ��. � _ . - _,.�.;�.,.,.