Laserfiche WebLink
CC Work Session <br />Meeting Date: 05/23/2023 <br />Information <br />Title: <br />Review Proposal for Market Rate Apartment on City Owned Land in the COR <br />2.1. <br />Purpose/Background: <br />The purpose of this case is to review a proposal from Norhart to construct a Market Rate Apartment project on <br />City -owned land in the COR and to receive guidance on the sale of City owned land. <br />On March 28 2023, the City Council reviewed a number of varying development proposals on Parcel 46. The <br />proposals reviewed included two separate single-family housing projects on the northern part of the site and a 150 <br />unit market rate apartment on the site north of the hotel and south of the future West Ramsey Parkway. The heart <br />of the discussion on March 28 was spent on the 2 single family housing projects on the majority of the parcel. <br />The item only had 20 minutes set aside for work session discussion, so there wasn't time to further discuss the <br />Council position relating to the sale of City -owned land for apartments. Consensus of the Council on March 28, <br />2023 was to bring back the discussion relating to the sale of City -owned property for a market rate <br />apartment project to a future work session. <br />Norhart has updated their proposal to include information relating to the market in Ramsey and submitted a Letter <br />of Intent to purchase a +/- 3.2 acre site north of the proposed hotel project. Norhart has expressed an <br />unwillingness to accept a restricted use agreement prohibiting short-term apartment rentals under six months for <br />this site. The proposal includes a 5000 SF retail/office component on the first floor to meet the spirit of the COR <br />mixed -use vision. The project is amenity rich and would be considered a "high -end" apartment product. The <br />Developer is not asking for any assistance with this project. Marybeth Wise, from Norhart will be in <br />attendance to answer questions relating to the proposed project. <br />Parcel 46 is located within TIF District No 14 which runs through 2040. Staff shared some tax estimates <br />from the varying proposals on March 28, 2023 and attached updated information. Based on other market rate <br />apartment projects in the COR Staff estimated that the Norhart project would have a tax assessed value of <br />$37,500,000. Based on the estimates provided, the market -rate apartment project had the highest local tax <br />revenue per acre value at $120,000. The single family housing project by Capstone had a rate of about <br />$16,708/acre. The large format retailer concept came in at about $20,000 per acre in local taxes. If the proposed <br />Norhart project was completed by December 31, 2024, it would be fully taxable for taxes Payable 2026. <br />Preliminary TIF calculations based on 15 years of increment (2026-2040) for the apartment project are estimated <br />to be close to $5,600,000 (379K X 15) on 3.2 acres of land. <br />In 2020, the City Council communicated to staff that it wanted a "pause" on the sale of City -owned land <br />for apartments in the COR. One item relating to the pause was the need for more commercial/retail <br />development before considering more apartments on City land in the COR. Since 2020, the City has <br />seen the following projects competed in the COR: Gigi's Salon (9,000 SF), O'Reilly Auto Parts (7,000 <br />SF), West Armstrong Retail (15,000 SF) and Northstar Marketplace retail (7,200 SF). We currently <br />have a 5,000 SF COR Trust Bank, a 98 unit Hilton Home2 Hotel and a 20,600 square foot Aldi, under <br />purchase agreement and engaged in the site plan process. Staff would like to know if a "pause" on <br />apartments in the COR is still the consensus of the Council or if they are now open to the possibility of <br />selling city land for apartments. <br />Planning Staff has reviewed the proposed site location, and it is currently zoned COR 2B. If the Council was <br />supportive of the project, a re -zone to COR 1, COR 4c, or another accommodating district would likely be needed <br />if the project were to move forward on the proposed site. Based on previous discussion with the City Council <br />