Laserfiche WebLink
FINANCIAL SECURITIES REQUIRED BY CODE - <br />PRIVATE VERUS PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT <br /> By: Sandra Ashley Helling, Finance Officer <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />At a previous Council meeting, Staff was directed to place the subject of financial securities required by code for <br />private versus public developments on a future Finance Committee agenda. This became a mauer of concern when <br />the final plat and Development Agreement for Amber Ridge were approved by Council. <br /> <br />As Council will recall, Tony Emmerich, a developer of Amber Ridge, requested partial or full relief from the <br />fmancial security requirement for a private improvement project. City Code states the developer is to pledge a <br />Letter of Credit in an amount equal to 125% of the project cost. It was the position of the developers that the <br />City's requirement of 125% is unreasonable due to the fact banks now are more restricted as to the percent of <br />market value they can loan. It was further the position of the developers that the City of Ramsey's 125% <br />requirement is higher than those of other cities. <br /> <br />Observations: <br /> <br />Attached hereto is a copy of a survey taken by our Zoning Administrator. It is noted that the Cities of Plymouth <br />and Dayton require 100%, Champlin is 110%, Apply Valley is the same as Ramsey at 125% while Blame, Lino <br />Lakes, Coon Rapids and Brooklyn Park are at 150%. In the City of Andover, all improvement projects are public. <br /> <br />Also attached is an article appearing in the May 1, 1993 issue of the West Sherburne Tribune. This article states <br />Developer Tony Emmerich has received final plat approval in the City of Big Lake for a 66 lot development. <br />Construction was scheduled to begin on May 17 and Mr. Emmerich posted a Letter of Credit as security for the <br />$400,000 in private improvements. <br /> <br />Staff Recommendation: <br /> <br />It is recommended that staff continue to monitor banking requirements that could impact development feasibility <br />and the security requirements of other cities. It is further recommended no amendment to financial securities <br />required for private development projects be made at this time. <br /> <br />Finance Committee Action: <br /> <br />Based on discussion. <br /> <br />Review Checklist: <br /> <br />Finance Officer <br /> <br />FC: 5/25/93 <br /> <br />/! <br /> <br /> <br />