Questions
regarding Twin Lakes Redevelopment proposal
(Revised @ 5:25 PM 3/18/05)
The questions below are listed in the order they were submitted. Questions that have been answered by city officials or any member of the development team appear in black and have a link to the answer. New questions will be forwarded to the City Council, City Manager, the Developer and members of the Twin Lakes Stakeholder Panel and will appear in red until answered. The first 39 questions were uploaded to this page on 8/7/04.
Posting policies: [1] Questioners will not be identified. [2] All people answering a question will be identified. [3] All postings pass through a moderator. [4] We reserve the right to edit any questions. [5] All questions and answers must be submitted via e-mail.
The following people have now provided replies to some of the questions below: Neal Beets (Roseville City Manager), Amy Ihlan (Roseville City Council member), Craig Klausing (Roseville Mayor), Tim Kotecki (Twin Lakes Stakeholder panel member), Dean Maschka (Roseville City Council member), and Dan Roe (Twin Lakes Stakeholder panel member). Click here for a grid showing the questions answered by each responder.
If you have a question on the Twin Lakes redevelopment e-mail it to webmaster@rosevillecl.org.
Background:
Rottlund Homes has submitted a proposal to the city of Roseville to redevelop
the 72 acre portion of the Twin Lakes area between Cleveland and Fairview
avenues and county roads C and C2. For a 2003 aerial picture of the area click
here. Their
latest proposal includes 730 residential housing units to be located in two, three and four story buildings,
about 220,000 square feet of office space, and about 350,000 square feet of
retail commercial and restaurant floor space including 150,000 square feet of “big box” retail
(see question #42). For the latest site
plan click here
(1.3 Mb pdf file). For a list of renderings click here. The development, as
currently proposed would require approximately $47 million of public funds to
implement. The parcels in the area currently have B1, B4, I1 or I2 zoning.
See Roseville city
code sections 1005 and 1007 for definitions of what is permitted under those
classifications.
The project, as currently proposed, includes the need for tax increment financing (TIF) See "How TIF Works: Basic Mechanics" an article published by the Minnesota House Research Department for an explanation of TIF.
Click here to see the documents describing this proposal that were submitted to the Roseville Planning Commission for its October 6, 2004 meeting. There is 47.8 Mb of information in 26 different pdf files ranging in size from 9 Kb to 5.5 Mb. The entire collection of files would take approximately 2 minutes to download using a 3000 kb/sec high speed cable connection or about 2 hours using a 56 kb/sec dialup connection. It consists of about 1000 pages once printed out.
The Roseville city website has an extensive amount of information available on the Twin Lakes project.
There are also a number of newspaper articles on Twin Lakes. To view these just click on the "Newspaper articles" link at the left and just scroll down the list or use your browsers search function (CTRL - F) with the term "Twin Lakes".
Why can't the master developer advance an all housing site plan? Click here for answer.
Has an analysis been done to determine the amount of tax money it would receive if the area were redeveloped with all housing? Click here for answer.
Is the master builder under any contractual obligation to include big box retail as part of the project? Click here for answer.
Has the city gotten a second opinion on whether the small retail shops proposed would require a big box retail engine to be viable? Click here for answer.
Centre Pointe was developed over the past few years with no retail component, other than three motels. Since this presumably has been successful, why is it now maintained that Twin Lakes must not only have a significant amount of retail, but also a "big box" retail store as a necessary "engine" to make the project feasible? Click here for answer.
How much tax money does Roseville collect (and get to keep) from the existing properties and is the cessation of these payments included in the project’s economic analysis? Click here for the answer.
The last citizens group that dealt with
the master plan regarding the Twin Lakes area indicated that they
specifically did not want retail. Why is the city now entertaining
adding retail there? Click here for
answer.
7.A
Why is the Roseville City Council considering a Twin Lakes Proposal which contradicts the Community-Based Vista 2000 recommendations?
See answer to number 7 above.
What are the economic realities of having Roseville buy the properties in Twin Lakes so the city could dictate what was built there? Click here for answer.
If the city owned the property is this the project we would be trying to build? Click here for answer.
What is the projected impact of the Twin Lakes redevelopment on existing and future traffic generation numbers? Click here for answer.
Why can't existing landowners be compelled to clean up contaminated property to current MPCA standards? Click here for answer.
Is the cost for pollution abatement for the entire project area known at this time? If so, what is it, and is it included in the project cost estimate? Click here for answer.
What risks are the development team assuming? Click here for answer.
What is the estimated cost of the anticipated shortfall in funding of the current Twin Lakes proposal to the city of Roseville, and how does this break down in additional real estate taxes to the average Roseville homeowner? Click here for answer.
What is the benefit to Roseville that would warrant a $47M public financing of the development? [the $47 million figure has been revised down to $40 million including $27 million of tax increment financing plus approximately $6.5 million in grants from other levels of government plus another $6.5 million in what amounts to another type of tax increment financing for what is known as a Hazardous Substance Sub-district - webmaster] Click here for answer.
Is the public investment adequately protected (performance bonds, letter of credit, solid financials)? Click here for answer.
Has an assessment been completed on this proposal that identifies what the potential downside risk to Roseville taxpayers is if the project fails to meet expectations? Click here for answer.
Why did the city choose an exclusive developer to prepare a proposal for redevelopment of the sizable and conveniently located Twin Lakes area, rather than opening it up to competitive proposals through the preparation of an RFP (Request for Proposal)? Click here for answer.
Was the process used to select the current master developer fair and open? Click here for answer.
Since only one proposal has been presented to us how are we suppose to tell whether this is the best we can do? Click here for answer.
What has the city done to entice companies that meet the current zoning to move into the area? Click here for answer.
Medtronic is reportedly looking for space for a corporate office expansion. Has the city contacted them to see if the Twin Lakes site would be of interest to them? If not, why? If yes, what was their answer? Click here for answer.
If it can be demonstrated that Roseville citizens were willing to “staff” the alternative development process recommended in the minority report from the Stakeholders Committee (click here to see report and scroll to the fifth page), would the city council be willing to shelve this effort and use that process which would be citizen driven instead of developer driven? Click here for answer.
Given that this area is one of the most accessible in terms of highway access and travel time to anywhere in the entire metro area, and that it currently isn’t costing Roseville taxpayers anything (if fact we currently get tax money from the existing businesses), why can’t we wait until the office building market turns around and get a development that meets our current master plan which was developed by means of a consensus process involving many citizens quite recently? Click here for answer.
Will property owners adjacent to the redevelopment area be compensated if their property values go down due to this project? Click here for answer.
How much of the property do the development team members own or have options to buy? Click here for answer.
Does the $47 million figure include relocation costs for the existing businesses? Click here for answer.
Has an analysis been done to quantify the potential adverse affect on existing retail businesses, especially Rosedale and Har-Mar, if the proposed amount of retail space is added at this location? Click here for answer.
How soon does Roseville have to decide whether or not to proceed with this proposal? Click here for answer.
If the city were to approve the current proposal, how soon would the developer be contractually obligated to finish the project? Click here for answer.
What are the pros and cons for implementing this proposal? Click here for answer.
Does the Twin Lakes development moratorium issued by the Council prevent anyone from taking out a building permit in the area or does it exclude the master developer thereby effectively granting them a temporary monopoly in the area and can the Council rescind or modify the moratorium at will? Click here for answer.
If the project, as currently proposed, is built can the city provide a table that would show how much more every homeowner would have to pay in taxes every year? Click here for answer.
Have any of the consultants hired
directly or indirectly by the city to provide services related to the
Rottlund proposal ever worked for Rottlund or any of the other development
team members (Ryan, Roseville Properties, or Welsch Properties)? Click
here for answer.
34.A
Are
there qualified consultants available to advise the city on this project
who, as a matter of policy, never work for developers so as to avoid the
potential for conflicts of interest? Click here
for answer.
Have all the members of the development team provided the city with references to officials in other communities they have recently worked in. If not, why? If so, how did the city officials in other communities rate the development team members in terms of the quality of project they ultimately delivered and how closely it came to what they promised. Click here for answer.
Have all the members of the development team provided the city with references to recent buyers of their buildings. If not, why? If so, how did the buyers rate their satisfaction with their buildings and their experience with the development team member? Click here for answer.
Will all the members of the development team be required to post performance bonds and will there be an escrow account for an amount of time to cover any issues that may arise? Click here for answer
Will the city's contract with the developer guarantee that the entire project will be built on time and not just the big box retail store? Click here for answer.
The city has an ordinance that requires it to periodically solicit proposals for all professional services. What is the solicitation frequency required by law for urban planning consulting services? What was the date and what were the results from the most recent solicitation? Click here for answer.
A recent news media story cited an August 2, 2004 report by the UC Berkley Labor Center which asserted that Wal-Mart's low wages caused their employees to rely on public assistance more than the employees of other retailers and, therefore, created a hidden cost to the community. Does this apply to Costco in Roseville? Click here for answer
What criteria must the Twin Lakes development proposal meet in order to gain your approval? Click here for answer.
Have the developers guaranteed that Costco will be the big box if the plan goes forward? Is there a formal agreement to that effect? Does the plan allow the developers to lease to some other retailer instead, such Wal-Mart or Fleet Farm, if they so choose? Click here for answer.
Some are saying the developers want to put a Best Buy store in Twin Lakes, along with the big box. Is that true? Does that mean the Best Buy store off B2 will be vacated? Click here for answer.
What is the justification for the potential use of eminent domain by the City Council to acquire the portions of the Twin Lakes district which are not controlled by the developers? Is a mixed use development like Twin Lakes a public benefit sufficient to justify the use of eminent domain? Click here for answer.
The developers want the City to pay the costs of cleaning up pollution in Twin Lakes. Why isn’t that the responsibility of the current landowners, or the parties who polluted the area in the first place? Has the City demanded that current or previous landowners clean up the pollution they caused? Click here for answer.
According to City policy, in order to receive tax increment financing (TIF) “the developer shall demonstrate that the project as proposed cannot be built without tax increment assistance from the City.” (City of Roseville Tax Increment Policy, page 2) How has this been demonstrated by the developer? Click here for answer.
According to City policy, in order to receive tax increment financing ( TIF) proposed projects “shall be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations”. (City of Roseville Tax Increment Policy, page 2) But the June 26, 2001 amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the area specifically states that “Retail is not encouraged, especially large scale regional and subregional big box developments”. (‘Twin Lakes Business Park Master Plan: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan’, page 20) Since the current plan involves big box retail, doesn’t that mean TIF cannot be used? Click here for answer.
State of Minnesota law requires that any “tax increment financing ( TIF) plan conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole”. (469.175, subsection 3, b (3)) But the Twin Lakes part of the Comprehensive Plan specifically recommends against big box retail (see above). Since the current proposal involves big box retail, doesn’t that mean TIF cannot be used? Click here for answer.
There seem to
be two scenarios being talked about regarding financing for Twin
Lakes. The first is known as pay-as-you-go where the developers secure
their own financing and simply use the increase in collected property taxes
resulting from the project to pay off their lender, partners or bond
holders. Under these conditions if the developer and/or the project go
bankrupt their lender, partners or bond holders would absorb all of the loss
and the city would not under any circumstances have to bail them out and
there would be no adverse effect on the city's credit rating. The
second is known as pay-up-front where the city would issue revenue bonds
that would not have the City's full faith and credit backing.
However, this could expose the city to risk because historically Minnesota City Councils
have been unwilling to let their revenue bonds go into default. The City's name is on the bonds and the implications for both bad publicity and a stain on the City's credit history
could exert very strong pressure on a future Council to use a public revenue source to prevent the default.
History also shows that going after the developer would most likely prove to be a legal nightmare and a waste of time and money since the development project will probably either no longer exist or be in bankruptcy.
Which scenario is to be used for Twin Lakes? Click here
for answer.
49A.Assuming
that the bonds are not backed by the full faith and credit of the city,
would their default in any way harm the city's credit rating? Is there
any other type of bond that could be used for this project that would not
put a future council under pressure to use a public revenue source to prevent the
default?
Has the city used pay-up-front financing for past tax increment financing (TIF) projects? What, if any, problems did it cause and how were they resolved. Click here for answer.
We keep hearing that time is of the essence and we must act now to get this development. Please explain why. Click here for answer.
What is the estimated additional cost to the city for police and fire protection and infrastructure (roadway, sewers etc) maintenance if this project is built? Is the current tax income from the existing properties, which the city will continue to receive, adequate to pay these costs? Click here for answer.
How many of the 72 acres involved in this phase of the project have environmental assessments and remedial action plans been completed for? According to those plans how much will the pollution abatement cost, who pays for it, and who would pay if there is a cost overrun? Why can't those responsible for the pollution be required to clean it up? Is there any chance that the city could be stuck with a large piece of polluted land that it could not afford to clean up? Click here for answer.
With almost 730 new owner occupied homes, presumably there will be additional children attending Roseville schools. Since the increase in property taxes caused by the new development are given back to the developer to pay for the improvements, where does the money needed to pay for the additional students come from? Click here for answer.
The term conduit financing has been used in regard to the bonds that will be sold to finance the project. Can you explain this method of financing and how it affects the city's debt load, bonding power, and in particular how a default on this type of financing would affect the city's bond and credit rating? Click here for answer.
Is there a type of retail that could be placed in Twin Lakes that would compliment and have a positive effect on our existing retailers? Click here for answer.
Since the current property owners are not legally required to clean up any of the existing pollution would the redevelopment actually be beneficial because it would require cleanup? Click here for answer.
The recent re-lighting of the Highway 36/I-35W interchange spilled unwanted light into a wide residential area all around the intersection. Will the city require the use of full cutoff lighting to eliminate light pollution in the area surrounding the new retail properties? Click here for answers.
Does storm water currently run into Langton Lake? Will the redevelopment increase or decrease the amount of impermeable surface in this area? By how much? If it is expected to increase, what will be done to protect the lake from additional runoff and will that merely keep the lake at its current quality or improve it? Click here for answer.
Some parts of the walkway around Langton Lake are quite secluded. Have these areas been prone to criminal activity? Will the development improve security in these areas? How? Click here for answer.
According to a report issued by the Citizens League, Roseville is 88th out of 108 metropolitan communities in the amount of 2003 property tax paid on a $160,000 home (Belle Plaine was highest at $1048; Roseville was at $412; and West Lakeland Township was lowest at $65). Where would Roseville have fallen on this list if earlier councils had not taken advantage of tax increment financing (TIF) for past projects? Click here for answer.
Assuming that past TIF projects would not have been built, what would we be missing from Roseville today? How reasonable is it to assume they would not have been built? Click here for answer.
How much tax increment financing (TIF) will be needed for this project? If one were to look at the three largest past Roseville projects that used TIF, what would the value of the TIF be in today's dollars? Click here for answer.
Does the proposal before the planning commission allow the developers to do any of the following (i) use Langton Lake for run-off; (ii) cut-down trees near Langton Lake; (iii) extend the south end of Langton Lake? Click here for answer.
How much has the city so far spent on lawyers, consultants and facilitators related to the Twin Lakes project? Has the developer paid any of these costs? Click here for answer.
In the first two quarters of 2004 Costco’s profits were $425 million (see Business Week Online) . Why can’t such a profitable corporation finance their own development, instead of relying of public subsidies? Click here for answer.
Do any members of the staff or City Council have personal, business, or social ties to the developers? Have any current members of the City Council ever received campaign donations from the developers or employees or family members of the developers? Click here for answer.
A number of communities surrounding 35W formed the North Metro I-35W Corridor Coalition to discuss development near 35W. What does this group have to say about Roseville's current Twin Lakes proposal for redevelopment? Click here for answer.
Are there air quality standards for residential areas and will they still be met if this project increases traffic by the estimated amount? Click here for answer.
The site plan now before the planning commission appears to most resemble the plan that was least favored by the stakeholder panel. Why is the developer not giving more weight to stakeholder input?
According to the summary report from Shardlow Workshop
10 Plan Revisions
the plan which was least favored (#4) is most similar to the one now before the planning commission
Conceptual
Site Plan dated 9/10/2004. Click here
for answer.
It was stated at the September 20 Council meeting that the developers would ‘advance’ all costs. If they can advance all costs, why can’t they finance the project on their own or through a bank? Click here for answer.
Is it true that this would be the largest single TIF project the city has ever undertaken? Click here for answer.
Could the traffic problems local residents are concerned about be alleviated by constructing the roadways so that the new residential properties are accessible from Cleveland, C2 or Fairview and the commercial properties accessible only from Cleveland and County Road C? Click here for answer.
Question 49 raises the concern that even though Roseville revenue bonds do not legally bind the city they "could expose the city to risk because historically Minnesota City Councils have been unwilling to let their revenue bonds go into default. The City's name is on the bonds and the implications for both bad publicity and a stain on the City's credit history could exert very strong pressure on a future Council to use a public revenue source to prevent the default." Has any city in the state done this when faced with a project that defaulted? Click here for answer.
If Roseville revenue bonds were sold to the general public to finance this project and they went into default, it's not hard to imagine a future scene in the council chamber with many retired Roseville couples who had "invested in their beloved city" pleading with the city to come to their rescue because their retirement savings had been decimated. Under these circumstances a future council would feel understandably pressured to make their citizens whole. Assuming that the Council would feel much less pressure to make sophisticated buyers whole, can Roseville revenue bonds be sold with a legally binding provision that limits their ownership only to institutional buyers who could be presumed to be sophisticated enough not to need a city bailout? Click here for answer.
Over many years the ratio of developer funds to TIF funds for redevelopment projects across the state has averaged somewhere around 10 to 1. According to published information, the ratio the developer is seeking for this project is somewhere around 3 or 4 to 1. What ratio does the council feel is appropriate for the Twin Lakes project? Click here for answer.
In the past 10 or 12 years Roseville has used the pay-as-you-go method for financing TIF projects which meant that the city did not sell any bonds and the developers had to secure their own financing with the debt paid from the increase in property taxes caused by the increase in property value brought about by the new buildings. This scheme leaves virtually all the risk with the developer. Conflicting statements have been made - some indicating that only pay-as-you-go will be used and others that would allow pay-up-front financing which would entail the city issuing revenue bonds based on the future income stream of increased property taxes due to the improvements. If this project is approved is it the council's intent to continue using risk free pay-as-you-go financing or to allow more risky pay-up-front financing? Click here for answer.
Position papers on the Twin Lakes Redevelopment that have been sent to us by various city officials can be viewed by clicking here.
The speaking notes used by J Michael Noonan, Vice President of Rottlund Homes the master developer, at a Twin Lakes redevelopment presentation given on 7/12/04 can be viewed by clicking here.
A copy of a handout that was given to people at a Twin Lakes open house sponsored by the master developer Rottlund Home on 10/21/04 can be viewed by clicking here.
Documents submitted by the developer in response to the Citizen Environmental Review Petition can be seen by clicking here.
This page has been viewed
times
