2010-082 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO.2010-082 = The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan) for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 (District),pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1799, all inclusive, as amended (Act), as required by Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 of the Act, are as follows: 1. Finding that Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 is a renewal and renovation district as defined in Section 469.174, Subdivision IOa of the Act. The District consists of two parcels and three buildings, with plans to redevelop the area for senior housing purposes. At least 70 percent of the area of the parcels in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. One building(more than 20 percent of the buildings in the District), is structurally substandard as defined in the Act, and one building(more than 30 percent of the buildings in the District) requires substantial renovation or clearance to remove existing conditions, such as those existing conditions defined in the Act. (See Appendix F of the TIF Plan.) - 2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments far the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan. The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact that the redevelopment proposed in the TIF Plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment. There are higher costs associated with redeveloping the site due to accommodating existing residents in their current units until the new facility is constructed; relocating existing residents to the new facility; and site - constraints related to topography, grading,demolition and utilities for constructing the new facility adjacent to the existing facility. In addition, increased landscaping will be required to provide an adequate buffer and screening from the adjacent single-family homes. Due to these higher costs of redevelopment on the parcels this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The developer was asked for and provided a letter and a proforma as justification that the developer would not have gone forward without tax increment assistance.(See attachment in Appendix G of the TIF Plan.) The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan: The above finding explained why the proposed redevelopment would not likely occur without tax increment assistance. It is possible that some redevelopment of the existing senior housing complex would go forward without assistance, but the unique costs of this effort (described above)mean that without assistance, any alternative redevelopment would necessarily be carried out at a smaller scale, and most likely over a longer period of time. It is impossible to predict what an alternative market value would be if no tax increment assistance were provided, but it is certain that the alternative redevelopment would produce significantly less value than the comprehensive, high quality development that is proposed under the TIF Plan. There is no reasonable likelihood that an alternate, unassisted development would add as much as $9,972,625 in market value(which is the alternate threshold