03-21-2018 Community Redevelopment Authority Regular Meeting Packet
Community Redevelopment
Authority (CRA)
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Regular Meeting Packet
Board Members:
Tom Gdowski - Chairman
Glen Murray – Vice Chairman
Sue Pirnie
Glenn Wilson
Krae Dutoit
4:00 PM
City Hall
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 1 / 92
Call to Order
Roll Call
A - SUBMITTAL OF REQUESTS FOR FUTURE ITEMS
Individuals who have appropriate items for City Council consideration should complete the Request for
Future Agenda Items form located at the Information Booth. If the issue can be handled administratively
without Council action, notification will be provided. If the item is scheduled for a meeting or study
session, notification of the date will be given.
B - RESERVE TIME TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS
This is an opportunity for individuals wishing to provide input on any of tonight's agenda items to reserve
time to speak. Please come forward, state your name and address, and the Agenda topic on which you will
be speaking.
DIRECTOR COMMUNICATION
This is an opportunity for the Director to comment on current events, activities, and issues of interest to
the commission.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 2 / 92
Community Redevelopment
Authority (CRA)
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Regular Meeting
Item A1
Agenda
Staff Contact:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 3 / 92
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 4 / 92
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 5 / 92
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
4 p.m. Wednesday, March 21, 2018
1.CALL TO ORDER. The meeting will be called to order by Vice-Chairman Glenn
Murray. This is a public meeting subject to the open meetings laws of the State of
Nebraska. The requirements for an open meeting are posted on the wall in this room
and anyone that wants to find out what those are is welcome to read through them.
2.APPROVAL OF MINUTES. The minutes of the Community Redevelopment
Authority meeting February 14, 2018, are submitted for approval. A MOTION is in
order.
3.APPROVAL OF FINANCIAL REPORTS. Financial reports for the period of
February 1 through February 28, 2018 are submitted for approval. A MOTION is in
order.
4.APPROVAL OF BILLS. Payment of bills in the amount of $122,274.65 is submitted
for approval. A MOTION is in order.
5.REVIEW OF COMMITTED PROJECTS AND CRA PROPERTIES.
6.REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR 408 E 2ND STREET –
WEINRICH DEVELOPMENTS INC The Regional Planning Commission approved
Resolution 2018-06 at its March 21, 2018 meeting. The commission found that the
Redevelopment Plan for Weinrich Developments Inc. is in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan for the City of Grand Island. The redevelopment plan for CRA
Area No. 1 for a Site Specific Redevelopment Plan calls for residential
redevelopment at 408 E. 2nd Street. A MOTION to approve Resolution 267 to
forward the Redevelopment Plan Amendment to the Grand Island City Council is in
order.
7.LIFE SAFETY APPLICTION -301 W THIRD STREET TOM AND LOIS
NIELSEN Tom and Lois Nielsen are proposing to redevelop 301 W. Third to include
one 2-bedroom apartment on the upper floor of this building. The Life Safety grant
allows up to $15,000 per one-bedroom unit on an upper story and up to $20,000 per
two-plus bedroom unit. The maximum grant allowed on this request would be
$20,000. A MOTION is in order.
8.CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING NEW DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR
FAÇADE PROJECTS FUNDED BY THE CRA WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF
THE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT DISTICT. The design committee for the
downtown area has been working on an updated version of design guidelines for the
downtown area since 2015. In October of 2017 the Downtown Improvement District
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 6 / 92
voted to forward the proposed guidelines to the CRA for consideration and approval
as part of the review process for downtown façade grant applications. These
guideline would not apply to privately funded projects though all downtown building
owners are encouraged to follow them.
The CRA approved a similar set of guidelines in 2008. This is an update to those
guidelines.
9.TIF VALUATION STUDY FINAL REPORT
During the fall of 2016 the CRA contracted with Jim Knotwell of Knotwell
Geoanalytics to conduct a review of TIF Projects in Grand Island and determine the if
TIF projects result in an increase in the in valuation on properties near the
redevelopment projects. The full study is attached. Mr. Knotwell has determined that
TIF does matter and does impact the valuation of adjacent properties in a positive
manner. The range of that measurable impact is limited. TIF projects do appear to
slow or reverse downward trends in property valuation. Those downward trends are
indicative of blighted and substandard conditions.
10.DIRECTOR’S REPORT.
This is an opportunity for the director to communicate on going actions and activities
to the board and public.
12. ADJOURNMENT.
Chad Nabity
Director
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 7 / 92
Community Redevelopment
Authority (CRA)
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Regular Meeting
Item B1
Minutes of February 14, 2018 Meeting
Staff Contact:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 8 / 92
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
MINUTES OF
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MEETING OF
February 14th, 2018
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a Meeting of the Community Redevelopment
Authority of the City of Grand Island, Nebraska was conducted on February 14th , 2018 at
City Hall, 100 E. First Street. Notice of the meeting was given in the February 7th , 2018
Grand Island Independent.
1.CALL TO ORDER. Chairman Tom Gdowski called the meeting to order at 4:00
p.m. The following members were present: Gdowski, Krae Dutiot, Glenn Wilson
and Glen Murray. CRA Member Sue Pirnie was absent. Also present were:
Director Chad Nabity, Planning Technician Rashad Moxey, Brian Schultz from the
Grand Island Finance Department, Interim Finance Director Billy Clingman, City
Administrator Marlan Ferguson and Council President Vaughn Minton.
Gdowski stated this was a public meeting subject to the open meeting laws of the
State of Nebraska. He noted that the requirements for an open meeting were
posted on the wall easily accessible to anyone who would like to read through
them.
2.APPROVAL OF MINUTES. A motion for approval of the Minutes for the
January 10th, 2018 meeting was made by Wilson and seconded by Dutoit. Upon
roll call vote, all present voted aye. Motion carried 4-0.
3.APPROVAL OF FINANCIAL REPORTS. Schultz reviewed the financials from
January 1 to January 31. A motion for approval of the financial reports was made
by Dutoit and seconded by Murray. Upon roll call vote, all present voted aye.
Motion carried 4-0.
4.APPROVAL OF BILLS. The bills were reviewed by Gdowski and Nabity. Nabity
explained that there was an addition to the bill of $ 750.00 for the use the software
called MySidewalk, which is jointly used by the CRA, the Regional Planning
Department and Community Development. Nabity stated that the cost of the
software is $3,500.00 in total and is divided by the three users by usage. A motion
was made by Murray and seconded by Dutoit to approve the bills in the amount of
$84,151.16 an increase from the initial bill of $83,401.16. Upon roll call vote, all
present voted aye. Motion carried 4-0.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 9 / 92
5.REVIEW OF COMMITTED PROJECTS & CRA PROPERTY. Nabity said that
the CRA is expecting a request for funds by the Staab Management for payment.
Regarding other projects, Nabity said the Hedde Building project is still on hold.
Nabity went on to explain currently there were not any new updates on the Mendez
project. Nabity reiterated that both the Heddie Building and Mendez project is still
waiting on Vitriolite to be place on both buildings. Nabity then stated Kinkaiders is
expected to move forward with the façade and life safety funds. The Hedde
building has a hold on funds through Life safety and is contingent on the Historic
Tax Credits. Peaceful Root is expected to request funds from the Life Safety. The
South Locust/Fonner Park BID landscaping project is waiting for spring. Nabity
also, stated all contracts were signed between the CRA and Take Flight and the
project is now moving forward. For the remainder of the fiscal year, Nabity
express that the CRA has $75,000 left in the Life Safety Funds, $78,500 within
other projects, $200,000 for land purchases and $100,000 for land sales. To date
the CRA has not used any of the land purchasing fund nor receive any funds for
land sales. The CRA has a total of three properties available. He said the CRA are
in the process of reviewing two projects which may affect two out of the three
properties owned by the CRA.
6.REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR 408 E 2nd – WEINRICH
DEVELOPMENT INC. Nabity said this is a property that The CRA has own for
several years and the Weinrich has made an offer of $15,000 to acquire the
property. The CRA has $12,000 in the property, mowing/cleaning the property
along with paying taxes. The Weinrich is proposing to put a triplex on the
property. Weinrich Development Inc. is looking to use Tax increment financing for
the acquisition of the property, site clearance, tree removal, paving, sidewalk and
utilities. The Weinrich’s proposing the development to be worth $300,000 with
the approximate cost of $216,000 along with Tax Increment Financing. Nabity
explained most of the equity of this project would be considered sweat equity as
the Weinrichs expected to take part in building. Nabity finished by stating that the
location of the property is between two houses and the use proposed is permitted in
this area. Sonya Weinrich, representing of Weinrich Development Inc. said that
each unit is expected to be three bedroom one and a half bath townhouse style
structures.
A motion was made by Murray and seconded by Dutoit to approve the Resolution
264 and Resolution 265. Upon roll call vote, three members present voted aye and
one member abstained (Gdowski) Motion carried 3-1.
7.DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL – PRIMUS DENTAL. Nabity said this is a
request to enter an agreement of purchase with Primus Dental a company out of
Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Primus Dental specializes in building Dental Offices for their
respective clientele. There is a local Dentist interested in occupying the potential
developed building. The CRA has own the property since 2015 and has not had
any offers for this property. The proposed development is expected to fit in with
the surrounding buildings being close to the street and using similar materials such
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 10 / 92
as brick, and EFIS. The proposed development will provide onsite parking for
consumers. Primus Dental is offering to purchase the property from the CRA for
one dollar and is not asking for help through Tax Increment Financing.
Gdowski stated, he reached out to Primus Dental to further gather information
about the company. He found out that it is a family own business and has been
operating for roughly 50 years and sounded creditable. Gdowski’s concern was if
the development fell through what would happen to the property if they acquired it
for $1.00. Primus explained to Gdowski that they would have 15 months to
develop the property or the CRA can take the property back due to provisions in
the contract. The proposed Dental Office is expected to provide services to the
underinsured as well as to individuals with no insurance.
Nabity noted, the Dentist involved with the project chose this location to better
serve her current and possible new patients, as they are mostly located near the U-
Save Pharmacy on 4th street. Nabity reiterated that Primus is not requesting to use
Tax Increment Financing and will have to pay 100% of the property taxes once the
land is acquired.
A motion was made by Wilson and seconded by Murray to approve Resolution
266 to authorize the contract. Upon roll call vote all, voted aye. Motion carried 4-
0.
8. DIRECTOR’S REPORT.
Nabity said there is a LB 874 is one of the TIF bill that is supported by the League
may cause the process to become a little more cumbersome. It appears that
provisions of this bill as currently drafted would require the CRA to prove the “but
for” clause to the State Auditor’s Standard, which does not currently exist. Nabity
concern is that bigger companies will not release their rate of return which can
affect proving the financial “but for”. If this were to occur projects across the state
can be heavily affect.
9.ADJOURNMENT.
Gdowski adjourned the meeting at 4:34 p.m.
The next meeting is scheduled for 4 p.m., Wednesday, March 21st, 2018.
Respectfully submitted
Rashad Moxey
Planning Technician
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 11 / 92
Community Redevelopment
Authority (CRA)
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Regular Meeting
Item C1
February Financial Reports
Staff Contact:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 12 / 92
MONTH ENDED 2017-2018 2018 REMAINING % OF BUDGET
February-18 YEAR TO DATE BUDGET BALANCE USED
CONSOLIDATED
Beginning Cash 667,073 1,092,980
REVENUE:
Property Taxes - CRA 43,366 134,276 472,191 337,915 28.44%
Property Taxes - Lincoln Pool (5,546) 26,847 198,050 171,203 13.56%
Property Taxes -TIF's 49,158 369,257 1,850,874 1,554,373 19.95%
Loan Income (Poplar Street Water Line)- - 10,500 10,500 0.00%
Interest Income - CRA 7 67 300 233 22.20%
Interest Income - TIF'S 1 8 - - #DIV/0!
Land Sales - - 100,000 100,000 0.00%
Other Revenue - CRA - 787 130,000 129,213 0.61%
Other Revenue - TIF's - 14,837 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL REVENUE 86,986 546,077 2,761,915 2,303,439 19.77%
TOTAL RESOURCES 754,059 546,077 3,854,895 2,303,439
EXPENSES
Auditing & Accounting - - 5,000 5,000 0.00%
Legal Services 450 645 3,000 2,355 21.50%
Consulting Services - - 5,000 5,000 0.00%
Contract Services 2,951 17,711 75,000 57,289 23.61%
Printing & Binding - - 1,000 1,000 0.00%
Other Professional Services - 5,146 16,000 10,854 32.16%
General Liability Insurance - - 250 250 0.00%
Postage - - 200 200 0.00%
Life Safety - 175,000 200,000 25,000 87.50%
Legal Notices - 70 500 430 13.94%
Travel & Training - - 1,000 1,000 0.00%
Other Expenditures - - - - #DIV/0!
Office Supplies - - 1,000 1,000 0.00%
Supplies - - 300 300 0.00%
Land - - 200,000 200,000 0.00%
Bond Principal - Lincoln Pool - 175,000 175,000 - 100.00%
Bond Interest - 10,606 20,863 10,257 50.84%
Façade Improvement - - 350,000 350,000 0.00%
Building Improvement 80,000 300,216 554,732 254,516 54.12%
Other Projects - - 150,000 150,000 0.00%
Bond Principal-TIF's - 104,113 1,882,874 1,835,980 5.53%
Bond Interest-TIF's - 6,669 - - #DIV/0!
Interest Expense - - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL EXPENSES 84,151 795,926 3,641,719 2,910,431 21.86%
INCREASE(DECREASE) IN CASH 2,834 (249,849) (879,804)
ENDING CASH 669,907 (249,849) 213,176 -
CRA CASH 202,856
Lincoln Pool Tax Income Balance 90,273
TIF CASH 376,778
Total Cash 669,907
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2018
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 13 / 92
MONTH ENDED 2017-2018 2018 REMAINING % OF BUDGET
February-18 YEAR TO DATE BUDGET BALANCE USED
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2018
GENERAL OPERATIONS:
Property Taxes - CRA 43,366 134,276 472,191 337,915 28.44%
Property Taxes - Lincoln Pool (5,546) 26,847 198,050 171,203 13.56%
Interest Income 7 67 300 233 22.20%
Loan Income (Poplar Street Water Line)- 10,500 10,500 0.00%
Land Sales - 100,000 100,000 0.00%
Other Revenue & Motor Vehicle Tax 787 130,000 129,213 0.61%
TOTAL 37,826 161,976 911,041 749,065 17.78%
GENTLE DENTAL
Property Taxes - - - #DIV/0!
Interest Income 0 1 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 0 1 - - #DIV/0!
PROCON TIF
Property Taxes 534 8,587 - - #DIV/0!
Interest Income 0 4 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 535 8,591 - - #DIV/0!
WALNUT HOUSING PROJECT
Property Taxes 965 24,720 - - #DIV/0!
Interest Income 0 3 - - #DIV/0!
Other Revenue 14,837 - -
TOTAL 965 39,560 - - #DIV/0!
BRUNS PET GROOMING
Property Taxes 288 7,108 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 288 7,108 - - #DIV/0!
GIRARD VET CLINIC
Property Taxes 214 5,287 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 214 5,287 - - #DIV/0!
GEDDES ST APTS-PROCON
Property Taxes 564 564 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 564 564 - - #DIV/0!
SOUTHEAST CROSSING
Property Taxes 311 2,492 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 311 2,492 - - #DIV/0!
POPLAR STREET WATER
Property Taxes 348 6,236 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 348 6,236 - - #DIV/0!
CASEY'S @ FIVE POINTS
Property Taxes 284 284 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 284 284 - - #DIV/0!
SOUTH POINTE HOTEL PROJECT
Property Taxes 1,693 1,693 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 1,693 1,693 - - #DIV/0!
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 14 / 92
MONTH ENDED 2017-2018 2018 REMAINING % OF BUDGET
February-18 YEAR TO DATE BUDGET BALANCE USED
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2018
TODD ENCK PROJECT
Property Taxes 130 130 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 130 130 - - #DIV/0!
JOHN SCHULTE CONSTRUCTION
Property Taxes 143 3,527 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 143 3,527 - - #DIV/0!
PHARMACY PROPERTIES INC
Property Taxes 239 239 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 239 239 - - #DIV/0!
KEN-RAY LLC
Property Taxes 918 918 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 918 918 - - #DIV/0!
TOKEN PROPERTIES RUBY
Property Taxes 60 60 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 60 60 - - #DIV/0!
GORDMAN GRAND ISLAND
Property Taxes 1,077 1,077 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 1,077 1,077 - - #DIV/0!
BAKER DEVELOPMENT INC
Property Taxes 72 72 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 72 72 - - #DIV/0!
STRATFORD PLAZA INC
Property Taxes 667 667 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 667 667 - - #DIV/0!
COPPER CREEK 2013 HOUSES
Property Taxes 1,442 8,646 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL 1,442 8,646 - - #DIV/0!
FUTURE TIF'S
Property Taxes - 1,850,874 1,850,874 0.00%
TOTAL - - 1,850,874 1,850,874 -
CHIEF INDUSTRIES AURORA COOP
Property Taxes 732 732 - (732) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 732 732 - (732) #DIV/0!
TOKEN PROPERTIES KIMBALL ST
Property Taxes 53 1,303 - (1,303) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 53 1,303 - (1,303) #DIV/0!
GI HABITAT OF HUMANITY
Property Taxes 83 83 - (83) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 83 83 - (83) #DIV/0!
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 15 / 92
MONTH ENDED 2017-2018 2018 REMAINING % OF BUDGET
February-18 YEAR TO DATE BUDGET BALANCE USED
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2018
AUTO ONE INC
Property Taxes 254 5,943 - (5,943) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 254 5,943 - (5,943) #DIV/0!
EIG GRAND ISLAND
Property Taxes 1,444 1,444 - (1,444) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 1,444 1,444 - (1,444) #DIV/0!
TOKEN PROPERTIES CARY ST
Property Taxes 169 4,163 - (4,163) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 169 4,163 - (4,163) #DIV/0!
WENN HOUSING PROJECT
Property Taxes 88 88 - (88) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 88 88 - (88) #DIV/0!
COPPER CREEK 2014 HOUSES
Property Taxes 14,013 22,511 - (22,511) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 14,013 22,511 - (22,511) #DIV/0!
TC ENCK BUILDERS
Property Taxes 75 273 - (273) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 75 273 - (273) #DIV/0!
SUPER MARKET DEVELOPERS
Property Taxes 2,465 63,133 - (63,133) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 2,465 63,133 - (63,133) #DIV/0!
MAINSTAY SUITES
Property Taxes 1,293 31,917 - (31,917) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 1,293 31,917 - (31,917) #DIV/0!
TOWER 217
Property Taxes 401 401 - (401) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 401 401 - (401) #DIV/0!
COPPER CREEK 2015 HOUSES
Property Taxes 12,873 24,967 - (24,967) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 12,873 24,967 - (24,967) #DIV/0!
NORTHWEST COMMONS
Property Taxes 2,832 139,542 - (139,542) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 2,832 139,542 - (139,542) #DIV/0!
HABITAT - 8TH & SUPERIOR
Property Taxes 190 190 (190) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 190 190 - (190) #DIV/0!
KAUFMAN BUILDING
Property Taxes 258 258 (258) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 258 258 - (258) #DIV/0!
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 16 / 92
MONTH ENDED 2017-2018 2018 REMAINING % OF BUDGET
February-18 YEAR TO DATE BUDGET BALANCE USED
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2018
TALON APARTMENTS
Property Taxes 1,173 56,941 (56,941) #DIV/0!
TOTAL 1,173 56,941 - (56,941) #DIV/0!
VICTORY PLACE
Property Taxes 813 813 (813)
TOTAL 813 813 - (813) #DIV/0!
TOTAL REVENUE 86,986 546,077 2,761,915 2,303,439 19.77%
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 17 / 92
MONTH ENDED 2017-2018 2018 REMAINING % OF BUDGET
February-18 YEAR TO DATE BUDGET BALANCE USED
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2018
EXPENSES -
CRA
GENERAL OPERATIONS:
Auditing & Accounting - 5,000 5,000 0.00%
Legal Services 450 645 3,000 2,355 21.50%
Consulting Services - 5,000 5,000 0.00%
Contract Services 2,951 17,711 75,000 57,289 23.61%
Printing & Binding - 1,000 1,000 0.00%
Other Professional Services 5,146 16,000 10,854 32.16%
General Liability Insurance - 250 250 0.00%
Postage - 200 200 0.00%
Lifesafety Grant 175,000 200,000 25,000 87.50%
Legal Notices 70 500 430 13.94%
Licenses & Fees 750 750 - - #DIV/0!
Travel & Training - 1,000 1,000 0.00%
Office Supplies - 1,000 1,000 0.00%
Supplies - 300 300 0.00%
Land - 200,000 200,000 0.00%
Bond Principal - Lincoln Pool 175,000 175,000 - 100.00%
Bond Interest - Lincoln Pool 10,606 20,863 10,257 50.84%
PROJECTS
Façade Improvement - 350,000 350,000 0.00%
Building Improvement 80,000 300,216 554,732 254,516 0.00%
Other Projects - 150,000 150,000 0.00%
TOTAL CRA EXPENSES 84,151 685,144 1,758,845 1,074,451 38.95%
GENTLE DENTAL
Bond Principal 1,753 - - #DIV/0!
Bond Interest 41 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL GENTLE DENTAL - 1,793 - - #DIV/0!
PROCON TIF
Bond Principal 8,641 - - #DIV/0!
Bond Interest 939 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL PROCON TIF - 9,581 - - #DIV/0!
WALNUT HOUSING PROJECT
Bond Principal 31,547 - - #DIV/0!
Bond Interest 5,689 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - 37,236 - - #DIV/0!
BRUNS PET GROOMING
Bond Principal 6,820 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - 6,820 - - #DIV/0!
GIRARD VET CLINIC
Bond Principal 5,073 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - 5,073 - - #DIV/0!
GEDDES ST APTS - PROCON
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 18 / 92
MONTH ENDED 2017-2018 2018 REMAINING % OF BUDGET
February-18 YEAR TO DATE BUDGET BALANCE USED
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2018
SOUTHEAST CROSSINGS
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
POPLAR STREET WATER
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
CASEY'S @ FIVE POINTS
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
SOUTH POINTE HOTEL PROJECT
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
TODD ENCK PROJECT
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
JOHN SCHULTE CONSTRUCTION
Bond Principal 3,385 - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - 3,385 - - #DIV/0!
PHARMACY PROPERTIES INC
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
KEN-RAY LLC
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
TOKEN PROPERTIES RUBY
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
GORDMAN GRAND ISLAND
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
BAKER DEVELOPMENT INC
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
STRATFORD PLAZA LLC
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
COPPER CREEK 2013 HOUSES
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 19 / 92
MONTH ENDED 2017-2018 2018 REMAINING % OF BUDGET
February-18 YEAR TO DATE BUDGET BALANCE USED
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2018
CHIEF INDUSTRIES AURORA COOP
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
TOKEN PROPERTIES KIMBALL STREET
Bond Principal 1,250 - (1,250) #DIV/0!
TOTAL - 1,250 - (1,250) #DIV/0!
GI HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
AUTO ONE INC
Bond Principal 5,689 - (5,689) #DIV/0!
TOTAL - 5,689 - (5,689) #DIV/0!
EIG GRAND ISLAND
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
TOKEN PROPERTIES CARY STREET
Bond Principal 3,995 - (3,995) #DIV/0!
TOTAL - 3,995 - (3,995) #DIV/0!
WENN HOUSING PROJECT
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
COPPER CREEK 2014 HOUSES
Bond Principal 5,337 - (5,337) #DIV/0!
TOTAL - 5,337 - (5,337) #DIV/0!
TC ENCK BUILDERS
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
SUPER MARKET DEVELOPERS
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
MAINSTAY SUITES
Bond Principal 30,624 - (30,624) #DIV/0!
TOTAL - 30,624 - (30,624) #DIV/0!
TOWER 217
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - - #DIV/0!
COPPER CREEK 2015 HOUSES
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - #DIV/0!
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 20 / 92
MONTH ENDED 2017-2018 2018 REMAINING % OF BUDGET
February-18 YEAR TO DATE BUDGET BALANCE USED
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2018
NORTHWEST COMMONS
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - #DIV/0!
HABITAT - 8TH & SUPERIOR
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - #DIV/0!
KAUFMAN BUILDING
Bond Principal - - - #DIV/0!
TOTAL - - - #DIV/0!
FUTURE TIF'S
Bond Principal - - 1,882,874 1,882,874 0.00%
TOTAL - - 1,882,874 1,882,874 0.00%
TOTAL EXPENSES 84,151 795,926 3,641,719 2,910,431 21.86%
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 21 / 92
03/16/2018 10:21 |CITY OF GRAND ISLAND |P 1
briansc |BALANCE SHEET FOR 2018 5 |glbalsht
NET CHANGE ACCOUNT
FUND: 900 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHOR FOR PERIOD BALANCE__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ASSETS
900 11110 OPERATING CASH 2,834.35 669,907.41
900 11120 COUNTY TREASURER CASH .00 130,439.66
900 11305 PROPERTY TAXES RECEIVABLE .00 133,504.00
900 14100 NOTES RECEIVABLE .00 311,247.93
900 14700 LAND .00 575,369.33_______________________________________
TOTAL ASSETS 2,834.35 1,820,468.33_______________________________________
LIABILITIES
900 22100 LONG TERM DEBT .00 -279,075.00
900 22400 OTHER LONG TERM DEBT .00 -1,105,000.00
900 22900 ACCRUED INTEREST PAYABLE .00 -5,880.73
900 25100 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE .00 -35,142.81
900 25315 DEFERRED REVENUE-PROPERY TAX .00 -127,464.00_______________________________________
TOTAL LIABILITIES .00 -1,552,562.54_______________________________________
FUND BALANCE
900 39110 INVESTMENT IN FIXED ASSETS .00 -575,369.33
900 39112 FUND BALANCE-BONDS .00 1,070,995.66
900 39120 UNRESTRICTED FUND BALANCE .00 -955,627.58
900 39500 REVENUE CONTROL -86,985.51 -603,830.74
900 39600 EXPENDITURE CONTROL 84,151.16 795,926.20_______________________________________
TOTAL FUND BALANCE -2,834.35 -267,905.79_______________________________________
TOTAL LIABILITIES + FUND BALANCE -2,834.35 -1,820,468.33=======================================
** END OF REPORT - Generated by Brian Schultz **
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 22 / 92
Community Redevelopment
Authority (CRA)
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Regular Meeting
Item D1
Bills for March 21, 2018
Staff Contact:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 23 / 92
03.21.18
TO: Community Redevelopment Authority Board Members
FROM: Chad Nabity, Planning Department Director
RE: Bills Submitted for Payment
The following bills have been submitted to the Community
Redevelopment Authority Treasurer for preparation of payment.
City of Grand Island Administration fees for February $ 3,077.73
Fonner Court/Staab Mgt. 1512 S. Locust Façade Grant Payment $ 106,500.00
Gentle Dental 2018 Acc. Closure $ 500.00
Hall County Treasurer Gentle Dental TIF $ 7,582.44
The Grand Island Independent Legal Notices - February $ 16.99
Legal Notices - March $ 17.49
Knotwell Geo Analytics GIS Research and Analysis $ 4,580.00
Total:$ 122,274.65
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 24 / 92
Community Redevelopment
Authority (CRA)
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Regular Meeting
Item E1
Committed Projects
Staff Contact:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 25 / 92
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 26 / 92
Community Redevelopment
Authority (CRA)
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Regular Meeting
Item G1
Life/Safety Application 207 W Third Street Tom and Lois Nielsen
Staff Contact:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 27 / 92
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 28 / 92
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 29 / 92
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 30 / 92
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 31 / 92
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 32 / 92
Community Redevelopment
Authority (CRA)
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Regular Meeting
Item I1
Redevelopment Plan 408 E 2nd Weinrich Developments Inc.
Referral to City Council
Staff Contact:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 33 / 92
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 34 / 92
Weinrich Developments Inc.-408 E 2nd
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
OF THE CITY OF GRAND ISLAND, NEBRASKA
RESOLUTION NO. 267
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A REDEVELOPMENT
PLAN OF THE CITY OF GRAND ISLAND, NEBRASKA; RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT OF THE CITY OF GRAND
ISLAND, NEBRASKA; APPROVING A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR SUCH
PROJECT; AND APPROVAL OF RELATED ACTIONS
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council of the City of Grand Island, Nebraska (the “City”), upon
the recommendation of the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Island, Nebraska (the “Planning
Commission”), and in compliance with all public notice requirements imposed by the Community
Development Law, Chapter 18, Article 21, Reissue Revised Statutes of Nebraska, as amended (the
“Act”), duly declared the redevelopment area legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the
“Redevelopment Area”) to be blighted and substandard and in need of redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to and in furtherance of the Act, a Redevelopment Plan (the
“Redevelopment Plan”), has been prepared by Community Redevelopment Authority of Grand Island,
Nebraska, (the “Authority”) pursuant to an application by Weinrich Developments Inc, a Nebraska
Corporation (the “Redeveloper”), in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B, for the purpose of
redeveloping Redevelopment Area legally described on Exhibit A, referred to herein as the Project Area
(the “Project Area”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan, the Authority would agree to incur
indebtedness and make a grant for the purposes specified in the Redevelopment Plan (the “Project”), in
accordance with and as permitted by the Act; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has conducted a cost benefit analysis of the Project (the “Cost
Benefit Analysis”) pursuant to Section 18-2113 of the Act, a which is included in the Redevelopment
Plan attached hereto as Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has made certain findings and pursuant thereto has determined that it
is in the best interests of the Authority and the City to approve the Redevelopment Plan and approve the
Redevelopment Project and to approve the transactions contemplated thereby.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF GRAND ISLAND, NEBRASKA AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Authority has determined that the proposed land uses and building requirements
in the Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area are designed with the general purposes of accomplishing,
and in conformance with the general plan of the City, a coordinated, adjusted, and harmonious
development of the City and its environs which will, in accordance with present and future needs,
promote health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity and the general welfare, as well as
efficiency in economy in the process of development; including, among other things, adequate provision
for traffic, vehicular parking, the promotion of safety from fire, panic, and other dangers, adequate
provisions for light and air, the promotion of the healthful and convenient distribution of population, the
provision of adequate transportation, water, sewerage, and other public utilities, schools, parks,
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 35 / 92
Weinrich Developments Inc.-408 E 2nd
recreational and communitive facilities, and other public requirements, the promotion of sound design and
arrangement, the wise and efficient expenditure of public funds, and the prevention of the recurrence of
unsanitary or unsafe dwelling accommodations, or conditions of blight.
Section 2. The Authority has conducted a Cost Benefit Analysis for the Project, included in the
the Redevelopment Plan attached hereto as Exhibit B, in accordance with the Act, and has found and
hereby finds that the Project would not be economically feasible without the use of tax increment
financing, the Project would not occur in the Project Area without the use of tax increment financing and
the costs and benefits of the Project, including costs and benefits to other affected political subdivisions,
the economy of the community, and the demand for public and private services, have been analyzed and
have been found to be in the long term best interests of the community impacted by the Project.
Section 3. In compliance with section 18-2114 of the Act, the Authority finds and determines as
follows: (a) the Redevelopment Area constituting the Redevelopment Project will not be acquired by the
Authority and the Authority shall receive no proceeds from disposal to the Redeveloper; (b) the estimated
cost of project acquisition and the estimated cost of preparation for redevelopment including site work,
onsite utilities and related costs are described in detail in Exhibit B attached hereto; (c) the method of
acquisition of the real estate shall be by private contract by the Redeveloper and not by condemnation;
and (d) the method of financing the Redevelopment Project shall be by issuance of tax increment revenue
bond issued in the approximate amount of $40,946 which shall be granted to the Redeveloper and from
additional funds provided by the Redeveloper. No families will be displaced from the Redevelopment
Project Area as a result of the project.
Section 4. The Authority hereby recommends to the City approval of the Redevelopment Plan
and the Redevelopment Project described in the Redevelopment Plan.
Section 5. All prior resolutions of the Authority in conflict with the terms and provisions of this
resolution are hereby expressly repealed to the extent of such conflicts.
Section 6. This resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and
approval.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 21st day of March, 2018.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF GRAND
ISLAND NEBRASKA
ATTEST:By: ___________________________________
Chair
By: ___________________________________
Secretary
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 36 / 92
Weinrich Developments Inc.-408 E 2nd
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
Lot Six (6) in Block Seventy (70) Original Town in the City of Grand Island, Hall County,
Nebraska, known as 408 E. 2nd Street
* * * * *
EXHIBIT B
FORM OF REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 37 / 92
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 38 / 92
Redevelopment Plan Amendment
Grand Island CRA Area 1
February 2018
The Community Redevelopment Authority (CRA) of the City of Grand Island
intends to amend the Redevelopment Plan for Area 1 with in the city, pursuant to
the Nebraska Community Development Law (the “Act”) and provide for the
financing of a specific infrastructure related project in Area 1.
Executive Summary:
Project Description
THE REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 408 E 2nd STREET FOR
RESIDENTIAL USES, INCLUDING ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY, SITE WORK
AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW THREE-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING AND
ALL REQUIRED OFFSTREET PARKING.
The use of Tax Increment Financing to aid in expenses associated with
redevelopment of the property located at 408 E. 2nd Street from a vacant lot to a
three unit apartment building. The use of Tax Increment Financing is an integral
part of the development plan and necessary to make this project affordable. The
project will result in developing a piece of property that has been vacant since 2005
into three new apartment units. A structural fire damaged the house that was on the
property in 2004; the CRA acquired the property and removed the damaged
structure in 2005. The addition of the residential units is consistent with B-3 Heavy
Business District and the neighborhood. The additional units are needed to meet
the goals of the 2014 Housing Study. This also adds units near Railside consistent
with the plans to increase housing opportunities in the area. This project as
proposed would not be possible without the use of TIF.
Weinrich Developments Inc. has made an offer to purchase the property from the CRA
with the plan to build 3 apartments. Their offer is contingent on the approval of TIF. The
property is currently vacant. The developer is responsible for and has provided evidence
that they can secure adequate debt-financing to cover the costs associated with this
project. The Grand Island Community Redevelopment Authority (CRA) intends to
pledge the ad valorem taxes generated for up to 15 years for a period beginning January
1, 2020 towards the allowable costs and associated financing for the renovation of this
building.
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING TO PAY FOR THE REHABILITATION OF THE
PROPERTY WILL COME FROM THE FOLLOWING REAL PROPERTY:
Property Description (the “Redevelopment Project Area”)
408 E 2nd Street in Grand Island Nebraska
Legal Descriptions: Lot Six (6) in Block Seventy (70) Original Town in the City of
Grand Island, Hall County, Nebraska
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 39 / 92
Existing Land Use and Subject Property
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 40 / 92
The tax increment will be captured for the tax years for which the payments become
delinquent in years 2020 through 2033 inclusive.
The real property ad valorem taxes on the current valuation will continue to be paid
to the normal taxing entities. The increase will come from the construction of the
proposed apartment building as permitted in the B-3 Heavy Business Zoning
District.
Statutory Pledge of Taxes.
In accordance with Section 18-2147 of the Act and the terms of the Resolution
providing for the issuance of the TIF Note, the Authority hereby provides that any ad
valorem tax on the Redevelopment Project Area for the benefit of any public body be
divided for a period of up to 15 years after the effective date of this provision as set forth
in the Redevelopment Contract, consistent with this Redevelopment Plan. Said taxes
shall be divided as follows:
a. That portion of the ad valorem tax which is produced by levy at the rate
fixed each year by or for each public body upon the redevelopment project valuation shall
be paid into the funds, of each such public body in the same proportion as all other taxes
collected by or for the bodies; and
b. That portion of the ad valorem tax on real property in the
redevelopment project in excess of such amount, if any, shall be allocated to and, when
collected, paid into a special fund of the Authority to pay the principal of; the interest on,
and any premiums due in connection with the bonds, loans, notes, or advances on money
to, or indebtedness incurred by, whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise, such
Authority for financing or refinancing, in whole or in part, a redevelopment project.
When such bonds, loans, notes, advances of money, or indebtedness including interest
and premium due have been paid, the Authority shall so notify the County Assessor and
County Treasurer and all ad valorem taxes upon real property in such redevelopment
project shall be paid into the funds of the respective public bodies.
Pursuant to Section 18-2150 of the Act, the ad valorem tax so divided is hereby pledged
to the repayment of loans or advances of money, or the incurring of any indebtedness,
whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise, by the CRA to finance or refinance, in
whole or in part, the redevelopment project, including the payment of the principal of,
premium, if any, and interest on such bonds, loans, notes, advances, or indebtedness.
Redevelopment Plan Amendment Complies with the Act:
The Community Development Law requires that a Redevelopment Plan and Project
consider and comply with a number of requirements. This Plan Amendment meets the
statutory qualifications as set forth below.
1. The Redevelopment Project Area has been declared blighted and substandard by
action of the Grand Island City Council on December 19, 2000.[§18-2109] Such
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 41 / 92
declaration was made after a public hearing with full compliance with the public
notice requirements of §18-2115 of the Act.
2. Conformation to the General Plan for the Municipality as a whole. [§18-2103 (13)
(a) and §18-2110]
Grand Island adopted a Comprehensive Plan on July 13, 2004. This redevelopment plan
amendment and project are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, in that no changes in
the Comprehensive Plan elements are intended. This plan merely provides funding for
the developer to rehabilitate the building for permitted uses on this property as defined by
the current and effective zoning regulations. The Hall County Regional Planning
Commission held a public hearing at their meeting on March 14, 2018 and passed
Resolution 2018-06 confirming that this project is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan for the City of Grand Island.
3. The Redevelopment Plan must be sufficiently complete to address the following
items: [§18-2103(13) (b)]
a. Land Acquisition:
The Redevelopment Plan for Area 1 provides for real property acquisition and this plan
amendment does not prohibit such acquisition. The developer is proposing to acquire the
property from the authority. There is no proposed acquisition by the authority.
b. Demolition and Removal of Structures:
The project to be implemented does not involve the removal or demolition of any
structures.
c. Future Land Use Plan
See the attached map from the 2004 Grand Island Comprehensive Plan. All of the area
around the site in private ownership is planned for Downtown Commercial use which
includes higher density housing. This property is in private ownership. [§18-2103(b) and
§18-2111]
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 42 / 92
City of Grand Island Future Land Use Map
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 43 / 92
d. Changes to zoning, street layouts and grades or building codes or ordinances or
other Planning changes.
The area is zoned B-3 Heavy Business zone. No zoning changes are anticipated with this
project. No changes are anticipated in street layouts or grades. No changes are
anticipated in building codes or ordinances. Nor are any other planning changes
contemplated. [§18-2103(b) and §18-2111]
e. Site Coverage and Intensity of Use
The developer is proposing to increase the number of dwelling units on the property from
zero to three. The size of the building and lot coverage will increase, but remain in
conformance with the applicable regulations regarding site coverage and intensity of use.
[§18-2103(b) and §18-2111]
f. Additional Public Facilities or Utilities
Sewer and water are available to support this development. The developer will be
required meet the minimum sewer and water line sizing requirements to serve the number
of dwelling units and fixtures.
Electric utilities are sufficient for the proposed use of this building.
No other utilities would be impacted by the development.
The developer will be responsible for replacing any sidewalks damaged during
construction of the project.
No other utilities would be impacted by the development. [§18-2103(b) and §18-2111]
4. The Act requires a Redevelopment Plan provide for relocation of individuals and
families displaced as a result of plan implementation. This property has been
owned by the Authority since 2005 an no structures have been on the property since
that time. No relocation is contemplated or necessary. [§18-2103.02]
5. No member of the Authority, nor any employee thereof holds any interest in any
property in this Redevelopment Project Area. [§18-2106] No members of the
authority or staff of the CRA have any interest in this property. The property is owned by
the Authority. Tom Gdowski, Chair of the CRA is also President of Equitable Bank.
Equitable Bank is providing financing to Weinrich Developments Inc. Mr. Gdowski will
abstain from any votes on this project.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 44 / 92
6. Section 18-2114 of the Act requires that the Authority consider:
a. Method and cost of acquisition and preparation for redevelopment and estimated
proceeds from disposal to redevelopers.
The developer has offered the Authority $15,000 for this property. The estimated costs
for this project including acquisition are $216,178. Site improvements including: tree
removal, utility improvements, sidewalks and other flat concrete of $18,346.
Architectural and Engineering planning services of $2,000 and are included as a TIF
eligible expense. Legal, Developer and Audit Fees including a reimbursement to the City
and the CRA of $5,600 are included as TIF eligible expense. The total of eligible
expenses for this project is $40,946.
This property will be transferred to redevelopers by the Authority. The developer
will provide and secure all necessary financing.
b. Statement of proposed method of financing the redevelopment project.
The developer will provide all necessary financing for the project. The Authority will
assist the project by granting the sum of $40,946from the proceeds of the TIF. This
indebtedness will be repaid from the Tax Increment Revenues generated from the project.
TIF revenues shall be made available to repay the original debt and associated interest
after January 1, 2019 through December 2033.
c. Statement of feasible method of relocating displaced families.
No families will be displaced as a result of this plan.
7. Section 18-2113 of the Act requires:
Prior to recommending a redevelopment plan to the governing body for approval, an
authority shall consider whether the proposed land uses and building requirements in the
redevelopment project area are designed with the general purpose of accomplishing, in
conformance with the general plan, a coordinated, adjusted, and harmonious development
of the city and its environs which will, in accordance with present and future needs,
promote health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity, and the general welfare, as
well as efficiency and economy in the process of development, including, among other
things, adequate provision for traffic, vehicular parking, the promotion of safety from
fire, panic, and other dangers, adequate provision for light and air, the promotion of the
healthful and convenient distribution of population, the provision of adequate
transportation, water, sewerage, and other public utilities, schools, parks, recreational and
community facilities, and other public requirements, the promotion of sound design and
arrangement, the wise and efficient expenditure of public funds, and the prevention of the
recurrence of insanitary or unsafe dwelling accommodations or conditions of blight.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 45 / 92
The Authority has considered these elements in proposing this Plan Amendment. This
amendment, in and of itself will promote consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. This
will have the intended result of preventing recurring elements of unsafe buildings and
blighting conditions. This will develop a vacant property with three brand new dwelling
units in a manner consistent with the goals of the 2014 Housing Study for the City of
Grand Island.
8. Time Frame for Development
Development of this project is anticipated to be completed between May 2018 and May
of 2019. Excess valuation should be available for this project for up to 15 years
beginning with the 2019 tax year.
9. Justification of Project
This is a lot that has been vacant since 2005. The proposed construction with a three-unit
apartment building will provide new quality housing in an existing neighborhood and
remove a structure contributing to blight within the neighborhood.
10. Cost Benefit Analysis Section 18-2113 of the Act, further requires the Authority
conduct a cost benefit analysis of the plan amendment in the event that Tax Increment
Financing will be used. This analysis must address specific statutory issues.
As authorized in the Nebraska Community Development Law, §18-2147, Neb. Rev. Stat.
(2012), the City of Grand Island has analyzed the costs and benefits of the proposed
Redevelopment Project, including:
Project Sources and Uses. Public funds from tax increment financing in the amount of
$40,946provided by the Grand Island Community Redevelopment Authority will be
required to complete the project. This investment by the Authority will leverage
$175,232 in private sector financing and $42,876 equity investment; a private investment
of $5.32 for every TIF dollar invested.
Use of Funds.
Description TIF Funds Private Funds Total
Site Acquisition $15,000 $$15,000
Site Improvements/Utilities $18,346 $18,346
New Construction Costs $175,232 $175,232
Legal and Plan $3,500 $4,400
Engineering/Arch $2,000 $2,000
City Fees/Reimbursements $2,100 $2,100
Financing Fees $4,100 $4,100
TOTALS $40,946 $179,108 $220,278
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 46 / 92
Tax Revenue. The property to be redeveloped has January 1, 2018, valuation of
approximately $8,712. Based on the 2017 levy this would result in a real property tax of
approximately $196. It is anticipated that the assessed value will increase by $292,000
upon full completion, as a result of the site redevelopment. This development will result
in an estimated tax increase of over $6,560 annually. The tax increment gained from this
Redevelopment Project Area would not be available for use as city general tax revenues,
for a period of 15 years, or such shorter time as may be required to amortize the TIF
bond, but would be used for eligible private redevelopment costs to enable this project to
be realized.
Estimated 2018 assessed value:$ 8,712
Estimated taxable value after completion $ 300,000
Increment value $ 291,288
Annual TIF generated (estimated)$ 6,561
TIF bond issue $ $40,946
(a) Tax shifts resulting from the approval of the use of Tax Increment Financing;
The redevelopment project area currently has an estimated valuation of $8,712. The
proposed redevelopment will create additional valuation of $291,288. No tax shifts are
anticipated from the project. The project creates additional valuation that will support
taxing entities long after the project is paid off.
(b) Public infrastructure and community public service needs impacts and local tax
impacts arising from the approval of the redevelopment project;
No additional public service needs have been identified. Existing water and waste
water facilities will not be impacted by this development. The electric utility has
sufficient capacity to support the development. It is not anticipated that this will impact
schools. The Grand Island Public School system was notified of this application prior to
consideration of this plan by the Grand Island CRA, Regional Planning Commission or
City Council. Fire and police protection are available and should not be negatively
impacted by this development.
(c) Impacts on employers and employees of firms locating or expanding within the
boundaries of the area of the redevelopment project;
This will provide additional housing options consistent with the 2014 Housing Study
for the City Grand Island.
(d) Impacts on other employers and employees within the city or village and the
immediate area that are located outside of the boundaries of the area of the
redevelopment project; and
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 47 / 92
This project will not have a negative impact on other employers in any manner
different from any other expanding business within the Grand Island area.
(e) Any other impacts determined by the authority to be relevant to the
consideration of costs and benefits arising from the redevelopment project.
This project is consistent with the goals of Grow Grand Island and the 2014 Housing
Study.
Time Frame for Development
Development of this project is anticipated to be completed during between May of 2018
and May of 2019. The base tax year should be calculated on the value of the property as
of January 1, 2018. Excess valuation should be available for this project for 15 years
beginning in 2019 with taxes due in 2020. Excess valuation will be used to pay the TIF
Indebtedness issued by the CRA per the contract between the CRA and the developer for
a period not to exceed 15 years or an amount not to exceed $40,946 the projected amount
of increment based upon the anticipated value of the project and current tax rate. The
developer will spend at least $40,946 on eligible activities based on the estimates
presented. Based on the projected increment the bonds on this project will be paid off in
year 7 or 8 depending on final valuation.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 48 / 92
Community Redevelopment
Authority (CRA)
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Regular Meeting
Item T1
Property Negotiations
Staff Contact:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 49 / 92
Community Redevelopment
Authority (CRA)
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Regular Meeting
Item X1
Consideration of Approving New Design Guidelines for Facade
Projects within the boundaries of the Downtown Improvement
District
Staff Contact:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 50 / 92
DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
Thursday, October 19, 2017 at 7:45 a.m.
Harmony Building – 224 West 3rd Street, Grand Island, NE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING AGENDA
1) Welcome & Open Meetings Act – by T. Ziller 7:49 am
2) Call to Order/Roll Call
Members: Kurt Haecker - A Jeremiah Krantz – A
Jim Pirnie - P Ryan Hand - P
Craig Hand - P Brad Kissler - P
Tom Ziller - P Chris Rosacker - P
Jackie Bowen – P
Staff: Cara Lemburg
Guests: Amos Anson, Amber Alvidrez and Linna Dee Donaldson
3) Consent Agenda - Action Items
a. Approval of October 2017 Bills Payables
b. Approval of September 2017 Financials
c. Approval of Minutes – September 2017
Discussion: ----
Motion: R. Hand Second: Bowen Vote: Unanimous
4) Discussion/Approval Items
a. Railside Tour - Overview
Ziller gave an overview of the tour, which consisted of 8 locations with 300+ attendee’s recorded. Lemburg commented that
feedback was positive.
b. Lease (Railside Office) – Review and Approval
Discussion: R. Hand, Ziller and Lemburg met with Carl Meyhew to discuss the new lease. Changes include an increase in rent
to $575 and we have requested a designated area for storage. He has also requested a security deposit (refundable) and this
would give our group use of the Harmony Room. Ziller and R. Hand are recommending the approval of the lease. Rosacker
and Anson also contributed information on alternate locations for the Railside Office.
Motion: C. Hand Second: Pirnie Vote: Unanimous
c. Design Guidelines – Review, Approval to ask CRA for Adoption
Discussion: Ziller reviewed the process for updating the design guidelines and the next steps that the DBID needs to take
with the goals of getting the CRA to adopt and publish them. Ziller wanted to be clear that the Building Department will
most likely never approve these due to the monitoring concerns associated with another sets of guidelines and codes. Ziller
commented that the design guidelines can only be enforced if the building owner is using public funding and the CRA would
negotiate with the building owner.
Motion: R. Hand Second: Bowen Vote: Unanimous
d. Bike Rack Project - Update
Lemburg gave the update that the bike racks are ready to be installed and the application has been approved by the city.
e. Special Event Street Closures –
April 7, 2018 – Race for Grace – Liederkranz - Parking Lot & Locust Street – Time, Starting at 9 am
Discussion: Race for Grace is requesting the same set up and timeline for the 2018 Race.
Motion: C. Hand Second: R. Hand Vote: Unanimous
August 19, 2018 – Praise on the Plaza – Church Service with Trinity United Methodist, Starting at 8 am
Discussion: Trinity United Methodist Church is requesting the same set up and timeline for the 2018 event.
Motion: C. Hand Second: R. Hand Vote: Unanimous
5) Reports
a. Design Committee
b. Promotions Committee –
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 51 / 92
Bowen gave the update on Halloween and Railside Christmas. New things include a window decorating contest for
Christmas.
c. Economic Vitality Committee –
d. Executive Committee –
e. Director’s Report –
6) Other Business –
Craig Hand asked about striping the parking lots. Ziller asked that Lemburg reach out to Public Works on the matter.
Pirnie suggested that we take a couple pictures and send them to the city.
7) Adjourn – 8:37 am
Next Meeting and Board Retreat: Thursday, November 16th starting at 4:30 pm
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 52 / 92
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Developed by the Grand Island
Downtown Business Improvement District’s
Design Committee
Adopted 12/15/2016
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 53 / 92
Acknowledgements
Thanks are due to the following who helped make these Design Guidelines possible:
Mayor - Jeremy Jensen
City Administrator – Marlan Ferguson
City of Grand Island Regional Planning Department – Chad Nabity
Special thanks for contributions by:
City of Grand Island Building Department
Downtown Business Improvement District Board of Directors
President – Thomas Ziller
Vice-President/Treasurer – Jeremiah Krantz
Secretary – Chris Rosacker
Jackie Bowen
Kurt Haecker
Craig Hand
Ryan Hand
Brad Kissler
Downtown Business Improvement District Design Committee
Chair – Thomas Ziller
Member – Marvin Webb, AIA
Member – Brad Kissler, AIA
Member – Amos Anson
Member – Chad Nabity
Originally compiled in 2008 by the Downtown Design Committee.
Reviewed and approved by Downtown Business Improvement District
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 54 / 92
Table of Contents
Introduction “Why Have Design Guidelines” ………………………………………………………….. 4
Using the Design Guidelines and Definition of Terms …………………………………………...5
Design Committee Review …………………………………………………………………………………….. 6
Certificates of Appropriateness ……………………………………………………………………………..6
Downtown Business Improvement District Boundaries ………………………………….. 7
Elements of a Building Façade ……………………………………………………………………………….. 8
Definition of Terms ………………………………………………………………………………………………... 9
Architectural Recommendations ……………………………………………………………………………..9
New Infill Construction and Building Additions ……………………………………………………..10
Setbacks and Infills ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 11
Architectural Details and Building Materials …………………………………………………………. 12
Accessibility …………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 13
Windows ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 13
Doors and Entryways ……………………………………………………………………………………………….16
Rear Facades and Entrances …………………………………………………………………………………..17
Awnings and Canopies ……………………………………………………………………………………………..17
Paint ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..18
Cornices …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..19
Roofs ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..19
Stucco ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...20
Mechanical and Electrical Items ……………………………………………………………………………..20
Lighting …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...20
Signs …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…… 20
Public Right-of-Way ……………………………………………………………………………………………..…. 22
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….24
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 55 / 92
Introduction – “Why have design guidelines?”
The City of Grand Island recognizes the value of preserving the distinct architectural and
urban characteristics of our downtown. Downtown Grand Island should embody the
cultural, commercial, social and civic heart of our community. One of the most visible
attributes is the remarkably consistent pattern of urban-commercial buildings, wide streets,
and alleyways that were constructed over extended periods of time. On block after block we
still find dense rows of two and three story, brick or stone buildings with elaborate cornice
treatments, upper story offices or residences, and first-floor retail storefronts. Taller, more
massive buildings create visual emphasis at select block corners. Alleyways cut between or
pass behind buildings, allowing services or deliveries to occur ‘off-stage.’ The downtown
buildings represent resources, ideas, investment, and history, which many agree are well
worth preserving.
These design guidelines are intended to guide the character of downtown development in
order to help promote the preservation of historic resources, enhance the
pedestrian-friendly character of the area and establish a sense of visual continuity among
properties. By doing so, the Downtown Business Improvement District (BID) seeks to
protect our cultural heritage, promote community development and encourage downtown
Grand Island as a destination place in Central Nebraska.
The overarching goal of the design guidelines is to encourage excellence in the design of the
built environment in the downtown. One measure of design excellence is the degree to
which new developments and buildings fit comfortably within the existing fabric of the
district. Another measure is the ability of a project to stand the test of time by remaining
functional over a period of many years. The design guidelines encourage the preservation
of the historic fabric of downtown, as well as, to promote compatible infill buildings that
complement, but are not required to historic designs.
New buildings should enhance downtown’s existing character through the use of
complementary materials and design styles. Old and new buildings should “work together”
to promote the overall character of the downtown area and to continue to attract people and
businesses, so as to keep the downtown economically viable.
These design guidelines are intended to stimulate creativity in design, while preserving the
historic character of the district. Preserving the older buildings in downtown helps to
capture our history and create a connection with our past. Historic structures provide a
connection to times past and serve as a record of our history that flows from generation to
generation.
In addition, downtown Grand Island is positioning itself as a destination place for Central
Nebraska. To fulfill the branding promise of “Arrive Railside,” we need to present a
cohesive plan and create image of our downtown that compliments and accentuates our
history. These design guidelines make downtown a unique place to visit, and encourages
visitation by residents and visitors alike. For businesses, this will result in increased sales
and new clientele. For property owners, it protects and raises the value of the district
properties by recommending a higher standard for the development of their own property,
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 56 / 92
but by also ensuring that neighboring properties are held to the same standard.
In summary,the Downtown Design Guidelines are expected to satisfy three main
purposes:
1. To ensure that development in the downtown area, including new construction, as
well as exterior alterations to existing buildings, takes place in such a way as to
maintain and enhance Grand Island’s unique character and scale.
2. To provide City staff, the Community Redevelopment Authority and BID Design
Review Committee with criteria upon which to base decisions when reviewing and
approving façade applications within the downtown BID District.
3. To provide design guidance to property owners, business owners, architects,
and/or developers who plan to build, demolish or make exterior changes to buildings
within the downtown BID District.
Using the Design Guidelines and Definition of Terms
The Design Guidelines are part of a system of tools that help shape downtown development.
Design guidelines complement and build upon the zoning requirements. Where any conflict
may exist between City of Grand Island’s Building department requirements and the design
guidelines, the building department requirements will prevail.
When considering a project in the downtown, property owners, developers and architects
shall refer to the downtown design guidelines. Projects will be reviewed by the Downtown
BID Design Review Committee, whose members shall comment on the proposed design in
relation to the Design Guidelines. Such review is mandatory as part of the city's normal
building design code review process. Compliance with the BID’s Design Review Committee's
recommendations is voluntary, but encouraged.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 57 / 92
Design Review Committee
The purpose of the DRC is to assist the City of Grand Island and BID Board of Directors by
providing design criteria, guidance and recommendations for those applications specifically
referred to the Committee by either the City of Grand Island, the Board of Directors or as
requested by the Applicant. The goal of design review is to maintain and enhance the
character of the City, enhance the natural and aesth
etic qualities of the City, preserve the value of land and buildings, and protect and preserve
the cultural aspects and heritage of the City. The Design Guidelines can be amended in the
spirit of cooperation with property owners.
More specifically, design review is intended to:
●Maintain, protect and enhance existing buildings of historical and architectural
significance,
●Foster new development that is aesthetically compatible with existing buildings and
infrastructure.
●Encourage and assist building owners to restore and rehabilitate existing buildings in
a cost effective, sensitive manner and in such a way as to be compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood.
●Encourage originality and creativity in the design of new buildings and additions, or
the remodeling of existing buildings.
●Maintain and enhance the appearance of signage, new and existing.
Certificates of Appropriateness
A "Certificate of Appropriateness" is a design permit issued by the Downtown BID
Design Review Committee based on review and approval of any construction,
alteration, demolition, or removal of a structure or part of a structure within the BID
District. Property owners within the BID District, who secure a Certificate of
Appropriateness, will be recommended and supported for grant funding from the
Community Redevelopment Authority (CRA).
If a “Certificate of Appropriateness” is denied, an appeal may be taken to the Downtown
Business Improvement Board of Directors. A notice of intent to appeal must be filed to the
BID Board of Directors at least 10 days before the Board of Director meeting and within 90
days from the Design Committee’s decision.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 58 / 92
Downtown Business Improvement District Boundaries
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 59 / 92
Elements of a Building Facade
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 60 / 92
Definition of Terms:
Architectural Elements – The unique details and component parts that either form
the decorative style of a building façade.
Cornice – A horizontal decorative molding that crowns a building or storefront.
The projecting member at the top of the exterior wall.
Bulkhead – The areas that support the display windows.
Column – A vertical structural member.
Display Window – The main areas of clear glass on a storefront.
Façade – The face or main front of a building.
Infill – When a structure is built on an empty lot between two existing buildings.
Pediment – a triangular shaped gable or decorative piece on top of a building or
doorway.
Pedestrian Experience – The positive reaction to walking and engaging in downtown
including appropriate green space, adequate lighting and a feeling of security.
Sash – A frame for glass to close a window
Setback – The distance a building is built from the property line.
Sill – Horizontal member immediately below the window.
Storefront – The front exterior wall of commercial space.
Storefront Cornice – The projecting member at the top of the storefront.
Transom – Smaller windows above a door or window; can be operable or fixed.
Upper Floor – The floors above the ground floor; usually non-retail.
Window Hood – A projecting structural member above a window.
Architectural Recommendations
The historic business district in downtown Grand Island is comprised of buildings from the
1870’s through the 1950’s. The business district developed along the face of the railroad
tracks on both the north and south sides. The historic building district contributes to the
community’s history and authenticity.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 61 / 92
New Infill Construction and Building Additions
In general, all new and infill construction must comply with all codes and ordinances
adopted by the City of Grand Island. These codes can be found at www.grand-island.com.
Constructing new buildings to fill vacant lots in the downtown district is encouraged. The
design of new construction is challenging in a historic district. The new building’s
appearance must be sensitive to the character of and designed to be compatible with
surrounding buildings. Any proposed new infill building designs need to be assessed for
negative impact on the character of the district and the surrounding buildings.
The infill façade should not look like a building of another architectural era not found in the
district or community. It should not pretend to look historic, but should contain similar
qualities that blend in with the surrounding buildings. Too often, false Colonial or Victorian
details are added to a new building in an attempt to make it blend in with older
surroundings. This approach detracts from the district’s character by compromising what is
authentic and historic. Any new building constructed should strive for craftsmanship and
quality design that is compatible with the surrounding buildings.
Like with new infill building construction, the design for additions to historic buildings is
challenging. The appearance of the addition must be sensitive to the building’s historic
character. Any proposed design needs to be assessed for negative impact on the
character of the historic building. It should not pretend to look historic but should contain
similar qualities that blend in with the existing building. The building addition should
strive for craftsmanship and quality design that is compatible with the existing building.
New buildings and additions should be designed with the following qualities in mind:
PROPORTION – The size of window and door openings should be similar to neighboring
buildings. Addition of infill panels not made of glass is discouraged. The composition
(organization of its parts) of the building should be similar to neighboring buildings.
SETBACK – Planners of the downtown areas aligned the building walls. This alignment
allows pedestrian traffic to flow naturally along retail and service areas. Infills should
maintain the consistency of the building facades.
HEIGHT – The height of the infill should be in proportion to its width and should relate to
the height and width of surrounding building. New buildings constructed in the middle of
the block should fill the entire space (height and width). Avoid construction a single
building between two multi-story buildings.
WIDTH – The width of an infill building should correspond with the widths of the
surrounding buildings. If the open space in the middle of the block is large, the building
should be broken into a number of smaller bays to maintain consistency of the block.
●DO make attempts to locate new uses in interior spaces rather than constructing a
new addition.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 62 / 92
●DO encourage construction of new buildings on vacant lots.
●DO build new additions so that there is the least possible loss of historic materials
and character-defining features.
●DO make sure the setback is possible loss of historic consistent with that of its
materials and neighboring buildings. character-defining features.
●DO respect the proportion of existing facades.
●DO encourage infill buildings to reflect the characteristic rhythm of the facades along
the street. If the site is large, the building should be divided into a number of small
bays.
●DO make sure the size and proportion of window and door openings are similar to
those on surrounding facades.
Setbacks and Infill
New construction and infill buildings should maintain the alignment of facades with adjacent
structures. Building height should also be comparable to adjacent structures. Infill
construction should reflect some of the detailing of the surrounding building in size and
window shape. Cornices, brick work and other detailing should also reflect surrounding
buildings.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 63 / 92
Architectural Details and Building Materials
There are four types of traditional materials used to construct commercial buildings:
masonry,metal,wood,and glass.Identifying,retaining,and preserving these materials are
important in defining the overall historic character of the building.Things such as brackets,
cornices,pressed tin ceilings,door pediments,steps,columns,cast iron facades,enameled
metal panels,glass block,storefronts,doors,window sashes,hardware,capitals,window
hoods,and stairways as well as details such as tooling,patterns,coatings,finishes and
color are constructed of these materials.
Deteriorated building details and ornament should be repaired rather than replaced
whenever possible. If a replacement is necessary, the new material should match the
original material in composition, design, color, and texture. Replacement of missing details
and ornaments are encouraged.
The following building materials are not recommended to be used on the exterior of historic
commercial buildings—cedar planks or cedar shake shingles, standing seam metal or
asphalt shingled awnings, molded stone, rough cut logs, aluminum slipcovers, vinyl or
aluminum siding, enamel coated Masonite panels, applied false brick veneer, or decorative
concrete block. These materials are not of the same quality as traditional building materials
and have not been time tested for durability and longevity.
●DO document the work, repairs and changes to the building to guide future research
and work.
●DO retain historic materials and features as much as possible and use adequate
measures to protect those materials and features.
●DO stabilize deteriorated or damaged features and surfaces prior to undertaking
work so further damage cannot occur.
●DO evaluate the existing condition of the feature or surface to determine whether
more than protection and maintenance are required or if repairs are necessary.
●DO protect and maintain exterior building features and surfaces by providing proper
drainage so that water does not stand on flat, horizontal surfaces or accumulate in
curved decorative elements. DO uncover hidden details and ornaments whenever
possible.
●DO repair, fill, caulk, prime and repaint soft, dry or split areas in wood surfaces.
●DO replace broken or missing details and/or ornamentation with quality materials
that will last over time and that matches the original material in composition, design,
color, and texture.
●DO use the least invasive method to clean exterior materials.
●DON’T remove architectural features that can be stabilized and preserved.
●DON’T use replacement material that does not match the historic features.
●DON’T alter features or surfaces that are important in defining the overall historic
character of the building.
●DON’T sandblast, pellet blast, water blast or use any other abrasive or corrosive
removal process to clean brick or stone that damages the historic nature of the
building. These harsh cleaning methods will severely damage the stone or masonry
and will lead to accelerated deterioration.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 64 / 92
Accessibility
Modifications to historic buildings are often required so that they will be in compliance with
current accessibility code requirements. Any proposed design modifications need to be
assessed for negative impact on a building’s historic character and/or character-defining
features. The overall goal of any accessibility modifications to historic buildings is to provide
access with the least impact on the historic resource.
●DO consider the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) provisions for alternative ways
of accessing historic buildings in cases where the proposed work would damage or
destroy building’s character-defining spaces or elements.
●DO comply with barrier-free access requirements while protecting the
character-defining spaces, features, and finishing of the building.
●DO include architecturally sensitive accessibility modifications during a storefront
rehabilitation.
●DO identify the building’s character-defining spaces, features and finishes so that
accessibility code-required work will not result in their damage or loss.
●DON’T design modifications without consideration of the impact on the building.
●DON’T make changes without first seeking professional advice to determine
appropriate solutions.
Windows
Windows are important in defining the historic character of a building. It is important to
identify and retain windows and their functional and decorative features when undertaking
a project.
Moving the location, covering-up, or changing the dimensions of an original window opening
is seldom appropriate, because it alters the character of the existing window. In a block of
commercial buildings, window patterns contribute to the visual appearance of the entire
block. Therefore, retaining the location of windows contributes to maintaining important
character-defining features.
The restoration or renovation of a building’s storefront should attempt to return the façade
to its original character. Preservation of original materials or details is strongly encouraged.
The shape and size of original openings are also significant in preserving the historic fabric
of a building. It is not appropriate to replace windows or doors with stock items that do not
fill the original openings or duplicate the unit size, material and design. Replacing missing
original elements such as transom windows is also recommended.
Upper floor windows should be vertically oriented. Arched tops and decorative lintels are
encouraged. The enclosing or bricking in of windows is strongly discouraged. When upper
floor windows must be replaced, match the original in configuration and materials if at all
possible.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 65 / 92
●Do remove boards and other inappropriate materials covering windows and fix
broken windows immediately since broken or boarded up windows negatively impact
the business district.
●DO restore window openings to their original configuration and detail if they have
been altered. When replacement windows are necessary, use windows that match
the original in size, material, profile, sightlines, configuration, and overall population.
●DO retain upper story windows even when vacant. Use curtains or open blinds to
conceal vacant spaces that can be seen from the ground level.
●DO use a recessed setback if a new interior ceiling must be dropped below the height
of the existing window opening, so that the full window opening can be retained
without altering the exterior appearance.
●DO stabilize a deteriorated or damaged window until additional work is undertaken,
so no further damage can occur to the building.
●DO protect and maintain the materials that make up the window frame, sash,
muntins, and surrounds through appropriate surface treatments such as cleaning,
rust removal, limited paint removal, and re-application of protective coatings.
●DON’T change the size or shape of window openings.
●DON’T remove material that could be repaired or use improper repair techniques.
●DON’T remove or alter windows or window features that define the character of the
building.
●DON’T add shutters to windows.
●DON’T allow window heating/air conditioning units in windows on the main facades.
●DON’T remove a character-defining window that is un-repairable and replace it with a
new window that does not convey the same visual appearance.
●DON’T replace windows because the paint is peeling, if there is broken glass, a stuck
sash or high air infiltration, as these conditions are not in indications that windows
are beyond repair.
●DON’T change the appearance of the windows by replacing them with inappropriate
materials, finishes, or colors which noticeably change the sash, depth of reveal, and
muntin configuration, the reflectivity and color of the glazing (glass), or the
appearance of the frame.
●DON’T cut new openings or block windows.
●DON’T replace windows without sufficient historical, pictorial, and physical
documentation for review.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 66 / 92
Windows
should be large
enough to fill
the entire
opening.
Filling in with
paneling is not
recommended.
Windows provide a visual
connection to the inside of
the building, which enhances
the pedestrian experience.
This connection is lost when
windows are bricked or filled
in.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 67 / 92
Doors and Entryways
The location and appearance of doors are important character-defining features of historic
buildings. Main entry doors, usually located on front facades, often employ richer materials
and more elaborate designs than side, rear, or service doors. Retail storefronts often have
recessed entries to provide shelter from the weather, additional display window space and
sometimes include the name of the business or address in the floor using tile or terrazzo.
Recessed storefronts also emphasize the building entrance. In renovation, building owners
are encouraged to retain these entries. If the recessed area has been changed in an earlier
remodeling, owners are encouraged to restore the recessed area unless the change has
added historic significance to the building.
Primary entrance doors should resemble what was originally in place. Solid or residential
style doors with small areas of glass are not appropriate for commercial/ retail buildings.
The typical historic commercial building often had an additional or secondary door on the
front or the side to permit access to the upper floors. Compared to the storefront entrance,
this second door should be modest in design and usually not recessed as deeply.
Secondary doors should also fit into the overall façade without drawing unnecessary
attention.
●DO retain original doors and hardware.
●DO match the original door in materials and scale to the rest of the façade when
replacing.
●DO use doors that are compatible with the storefront.
●DON’T move or cover up existing doorways.
●DON’T add new doors to the building where there weren’t doors or openings before.
●DON’T use standard sized residential type or fake “historic” looking doors decorated
with designs, moldings, or window grilles.
●DON’T install secondary doors that are more prominent than the storefront door.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 68 / 92
Rear Façades and Entrances
The alleys and areas behind Main Street buildings are often overlooked as an important
design feature of the district. People avoid them because they are unkempt and
unattractive. These spaces are usually used for deliveries or garbage collection. The
Downtown Grand Island has parking areas in the district where the back sides of Main
Street buildings are exposed to public view. Often times, the rear façade has been poorly
maintained. Windows and doors have been boarded up. Old signage remains. The area is
generally dirty and unattractive.
Rear façades need care and attention, not only for preservation reasons, but to support the
overall appearance of the district. It is important to clean up these areas and perform
rehab work and maintenance like on other parts of the building. Work with the utility
companies to repair, secure and conceal lines and wires and refer to the window and
building maintenance sections of these guidelines for more detailed information. Rear
entrances can be a benefit, providing customers access to the businesses without walking
around to the front of the building. Business owners should consider whether or not a back
entrance changes their walk-through traffic, their displays and their security.
●DO keep the design of the rear façade and rear entrance simple.
●DO remove boards and other inappropriate materials covering window and door
openings and restore them to their original configuration if they have been altered.
●DO use signage and appropriate lighting to make the rear entrance inviting.
●DO keep the rear entrance area clean and safe.
●DON’T allow the rear entrance to compete with the storefront in importance.
●DON’T allow trash or weeds to accumulate in the rear entrance area.
Awnings and Canopies
Awnings and canopies can provide a secondary location for signage and add color and
interest to the façade of a building. They can also be used to emphasize storefront windows
and entrances. They also serve as protection for pedestrians and display windows from the
sun and rain. Awnings and canopies don’t have to be used on every building and are not
appropriate for every building. Seek professional design advice when considering awnings.
Features such as awnings and canopies are visual elements that can add or detract from the
character of a building. They can be dominating design features on the façade of the
building, so it is important to make sure there is a good relationship between the awning or
canopy and the façade. Certain buildings may lend themselves to a particular style of
canopy or awning or none at all. If a new canopy or awning is to be added to historic
building where one did not previously exist, it should be designed to be compatible in scale,
color, proportion and material with the building façade. Aluminum canopies can be original,
or are later additions, that have gained historical significance with the building.
Awnings and canopies serve design as design elements, both as decoration and as a
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 69 / 92
functional purpose. Canopies are fixed to the building whereas an awning can be opened
and closed or can remain permanently extended. Operable awnings visual elements let
sunlight into your building that can add or on cold days, helping to heat detract from the
interior. Although it is more expensive to install an operable awning than a fixed one, you
may recoup the expense through less energy consumption.
Canopies should always be securely fastened to the façade. Steel rods are often used to
anchor canopies. It is important to position the rods so that they blend into the design of
the façade.
Before determining the appropriate color and/or pattern for an awning,look at the entire
building.If it has minimal architectural detailing,it can be enhanced with a bright accent
color or pattern.A more decorated facade should be complemented with a subtle solid
color.Select a color that enhances the existing building features.If incorporating signage
on the awning itself,keep the message simple and direct.Signs are best located on the
returns (sides) and valances (flaps) and should be attached to the fascia of canopies.
●DO repair rather than remove metal canopies if possible.
●DO utilize existing awning hardware and fixtures. Repair before replacing.
●DO consider how the awning or canopy will affect existing architectural features and
how it will appear in relation to the scale of the building.
●DO use a canvas color or pattern that enhances the building’s façade.
●DO consider the impact on neighboring buildings when choosing an awning or
canopy.
●DO use professionally manufactured canvas.
●DON’T use metal stock or structured standing seam awnings.
●DON’T use plastic or vinyl formed awnings.
●DON’T use plastic grids or baffles and under lighting with canvas awnings.
●DON’T overpower the proportions of the windows or facades with awnings.
●DON’T use patterned or bold colors on buildings with a great deal of architectural
style and detail.
Paint
When painting any surface, colors should be compatible with the building, surrounding
buildings, and the district overall. Bright, flashy colors are strongly discouraged. Painting
can be one of the simplest, but dramatic improvements that can be made to a building but
it must be done with great care. Paint was originally used to highlight the architectural
details of a building including the details in the cornice, the storefront, and the upper story
window frames. Paint was also used on early buildings to protect the soft-fired brick
surface.
Brick wall surfaces that have never been painted should be left unpainted. Brick wall
surfaces that have been painted, can be maintained and repainted. Paint colors should be
chosen to be compatible with the architectural color and characteristics of the building, as
well as adjoining buildings on the block. Inappropriate color selection makes a building
stand out rather than blend in with the neighboring buildings.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 70 / 92
Location and size of buildings should also be taken into consideration when selecting colors.
Large, plain buildings should use more subtle colors than smaller, more ornate buildings.
Attention should be given to the preparation of surfaces (brick, wood, metal), choice of
paint type (oil or latex) and finish (gloss, semi-gloss, or matte). We recommend that you
consult with paint professionals to ensure the appropriateness of your color preferences,
surface to be painted and type of paint.
●DO leave unpainted brick wall surfaces unpainted.
●DO select paint colors that are compatible with the architectural color and
characteristics of the building, as well as, adjoining buildings and other others on
the block.
●DO catalog all of the building pieces that are to be painted. Since each piece may
be of different material, it may require a different type of paint and painting
techniques.
●DO make repairs to surfaces before starting any work. Replace rotted wood,
remove peeling and loose paint, repair masonry mortar joints, clean and repair
windows, remove rust from metal, etc.
●DON’T select paint colors that are inappropriate for the building making it stand out
rather than blend in with the neighboring buildings.
●DON’T paint previously unpainted brick.
Cornices
Building cornices are constructed of different materials including sheet metal applied over a
wood frame, decorative wood molding, brick or stone. The cornice should be repaired
rather than replaced whenever possible. If a replacement is necessary, the new material
should match the original material in composition, design, color and texture. We
recommend that the cornice be duplicated if the cornice has been damaged or removed.
The new or replacement cornice should be based upon historic photographs or existing
pieces of the cornice.
●DO paint sheet metal cornices regularly to prevent rust.
●DO repair any rotted or damaged wood support if found.
●DO use quality materials that will last over time and that match the original material
in composition, design, color, and texture.
●DON’T restore cornices without historical or physical documentation if at all possible.
●DON’T replace a cornice or broken details with cheap or inferior materials that will
not last over time.
Roofs
Roofs on downtown buildings are typically unseen from the front of the building, hidden
from view in most cases by the parapet. A weather-tight roof is essential to protecting
and preserving a building.
Downspouts and other drains should be kept clear and well maintained. Flat or sloped roofs
with parapet walls are recommended.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 71 / 92
●DO stabilize a deteriorated or damaged roof prior to undertaking any work so
further damage cannot occur to the building.
●DO protect and maintain building roofs by cleaning gutters and downspouts so
that water and debris do not collect and cause damage to roof fasteners,
sheathing, and the underlying structure. Replace deteriorated flashing and check
roof sheathing to make sure there is proper venting and not any moisture
condensation or water penetration, and to insure that materials are free from
insect infestation.
●DO protect a leaking roof with plywood and building paper until it can be repaired.
●DO hide mechanical service equipment on the roof so they cannot be seen from
street level or obscure character-defining features on the building.
●DON’T remove materials that can be repaired.
●DON’T build a new roof addition that is incompatible in size, scale, material and
color or that is visible from the street or damages or obscures character-defining
features on the building.
Stucco
Materials similar in texture and perception either synthetic or natural including stucco,
plaster and EIFS should not be used as the only other finish material besides glass on a
facade. The amount, proportion and location should be carefully considered.
Mechanical and Electrical Items
Utility areas and mechanical equipment should be designed so that they do not detract from
the aesthetic appeal of the BID District. If possible, locate all mechanical and electrical
items out of view as is possible.
Lighting
Lighting in downtown serves several purposes including security, facilitating vehicular and
pedestrian traffic, illumination of signage and façades, highlighting interior merchandise
displays and accentuating architectural details of buildings.
Compatibility of exterior lighting and lighting fixtures is assessed in terms of design,
material, use, size, scale, color, and brightness. When using lighting fixtures in downtown,
it is important to consider the level of lighting as well as the scale and overall design of the
fixture itself. Exterior lighting should highlight building elements, signs or other distinctive
features rather than attract attention to the light fixture itself. Lighting should provide an
even illumination level. Exterior lighting fixtures should be appropriate to the building’s
architectural style.
Signs
Signs contribute to the overall image of downtown Grand Island and give identity to
individual businesses and buildings in the district. All signs in the downtown district need to
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 72 / 92
fit the image of downtown Grand Island while creating a positive identity for individual
businesses.
In general,signs should not cover windows,cornices,transoms,or other decorative details.
They should complement the building’s façade as well as those of neighboring buildings in
shape, size, color and material.
Regarding outdoor electronic signage,electronic signage is strongly discouraged as it does
not mess with the historic fabric of the downtown district.A verification of installing
electronic sign codes would also have to be approved within the City of Grand Island signs
codes.
Quality of workmanship and construction is essential. A simple, well-made sign speaks
more highly of a business than an extravagant, but sloppy sign.
●DO use signage appropriate to the design of the building façade.
●DO use historic photographs to aid in the design of a new sign.
●DO ensure signs are designed and installed following City of Grand Island’s Sign
Code.
●DO use signs that respect the size and scale of the building and street and do not
obscure the building’s important architectural details or features.
●DO pay attention to how the sign appears in relation to the entire façade. Take cues
from the colors of the building for the colors used on the sign.
●DO use signs that are attractive in appearance and are pedestrian-oriented in shape
and size.
●DO use professional sign companies with experience working in historic districts to
design and install signage. Use signs that are constructed of quality long-lasting
materials. Workmanship and quality are essential.
●DO use lighting to light signs at night.
●Do use lighting that shines down on the sign rather than up to avoid light pollution.
●DO use pedestrian friendly signage that provides information simply and legibly.
●DO use professionally designed laser cut and applied window lettering on storefront
windows and doorways.
●DO remove temporary signs such as banners and paper signs in windows in a timely
manner. The use of temporary signs that outlast the advertised sale or promotion is
discouraged.
●DO work with corporate chain businesses or franchise companies to find a sign
design solution that fits within the guidelines.
●DO use signs that reflect the individuality of the business.
●DO remove signs when the business is no longer present. City of Grand Island’s Sign
Code requires removal within 90 days of vacating the premises. These codes can be
found at www.grand-island.com.
●DON’T allow signs that obscure significant architectural details or features.
●DON’T allow signs that dominate the façade of the building.
●DON’T use signs with poor craftsmanship or poor quality materials.
●DON’T used handwritten, homemade or cheaply constructed signs.
●DON’T use mechanical, neon or electronic signage that is inconsistent with the
historic character of downtown.
●DON’T clutter the front of the building or display windows with signs. Window
signage should not cover more than 15% of the available window space.
●DON’T use vacuum formed or internally lit plastic signage.
●DON’T use standard commercial neon lighted signs that can be purchased from a
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 73 / 92
retail store.
●DON’T use fluorescent colors.
Public Right-of-Way
The purpose of addressing streetscape elements in the Design Guidelines is to ensure
coherent street perspective and to assist building owners and occupants with the
understanding of the relationship between the public space and the building space. These
Design Guidelines present a set of parameters for the placement and characteristics of
sidewalks, street trees and other appurtenance (benches, signs, street lights, fixtures) on or
near building sites. Allowances should be made for curb cuts, fire hydrants, water poles, and
other infrastructure elements.
The Design Committee is creating a set of zones on the sidewalk. The frontage zone and
the furnishing zone are locations where property owners and business owners can add
items, including flower pots, sidewalk seating, product displays, sculptures and other public
art. All items added to the frontage and furnishing zones must be easily removable. There
will be no permanent additions in these zones. The City of Grand Island may require a
permit or licensing agreement for items placed in public right-of-way.
Sidewalks should be wide enough to facilitate pedestrian movement and pedestrian
amenities such as outdoor seating, landscaping, and street furnishings. There should be
pedestrian crosswalks at all intersections in downtown Grand Island. Public spaces should
provide attractive pedestrian scale lighting to complement the built and natural
environment. Lighting should also provide security while preserving views of the night sky.
If it is necessary to remove or repair the downtown sidewalks, the trees and surrounding
grates in the sidewalks shall match the existing trees and grates in the district. A list of
acceptable trees are as follows:
In areas where the sidewalks require repair or where sidewalks do not have a brick accent,
it is recommended to use matching brick pavers for replacements and repairs. The existing
pavers are made by Endicott Clay Products and the colors are a blend of Medium Ironspot
No. 11 and Medium Ironspot No. 46.
The Design Committee is aware that some of the trees do block business signage that is
affixed to the downtown buildings. The Design Committee does not want the trees to be
removed, but would pay for the trees to be trimmed to increase visibility of the building
faces and signage. Please contact the Business Improvement District for more details.
If property owners or business owners would like to make changes to the public
right-of-way, the Design Committee strongly encourages these owners to prepare a
proposal outlining the changes that are being considered. This proposal will be reviewed by
the Design Committee for a Certificate of Appropriateness as described earlier in this
document.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 74 / 92
Edge zone – A 24” area between the face of curb and the furnishing zone. An area of
required clearance between parked vehicles and appurtenances or landscaping.
Furnishing Zone – This zone is for infrastructure, bike racks, trees, historic lights, Post
Indicator Valves, and other amenities. This zone is typically 48”.
Throughway Zone – The pedestrian throughway zone must remain clear, both horizontally
and vertically for the movement of pedestrians. ADA accessibility is a critical component of
this zone and therefore a 60” clearance without obstacles must be maintained.
Frontage Zone – This zone is for café seating, flower pots, displays and other amenities.
This zone can vary in size as long as the Edge Zone and Throughway Zones are maintained.
Permanent structures may require a license agreement with the city of Grand Island.
Zone overlap: Please note that these zones are not “fixed positions”. It is possible
to have overlap with these zones. For example, the Edge Zone and Furnishing Zone
can count as part of the required 60” Throughway Zone as long as there are no
objects within these areas.
Street Trees – The trees that are currently in the downtown district were primarily planted
through a grant program through the City of Grand Island. These trees have reached
maturity, and are an asset to the downtown atmosphere.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 75 / 92
Conclusion
The Downtown Business Improvement District and the City of Grand Island encourages the
preservation of the distinct architectural and urban characteristics of our downtown.
Downtown Grand Island should embody the cultural, commercial, social and civic heart of
our community. These design guidelines promote the character of downtown development
in order to help preserve historic fabric, encourage the pedestrian experience and establish
standards for renovation and repair projects.
The goal of the design guidelines encourages a standard of excellence in the design of the
built environment in the downtown. New developments and buildings should fit comfortably
within the existing fabric of the district and remain functional over a period of many years.
The design guidelines encourage the preservation of the historic fabric of downtown, as well
as to promote compatible infill buildings that complement downtown Grand Island.
The Downtown Business Improvement District wishes to thank the volunteers on the Design
Committee and the staff members of the City of Grand Island who have devoted time and
effort towards the completion of these design guidelines.
Downtown Business Improvement District
Railside Design Guidelines
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 76 / 92
Community Redevelopment
Authority (CRA)
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Regular Meeting
Item X2
TIF Valuation Study Final Report
Staff Contact:
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 77 / 92
Hall County TIF Valuation Report
1994-2016
Submitted: January 22, 2018
Knotwell GeoAnalytics
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 78 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 1
Summary
The primary question is: does TIF designation increase property valuation, leading to increased tax revenue that
enhances development? Though the answer is not definitive, it remains a reasonable probability that, YES, TIF
designation does what it is intended to do; in the most fundamental sense--TIF matters.
•TIF parcels generally changed value differently year-to-year than non-TIF parcels. Parcels that ultimately
were designated TIF, were decreasing in value until designated for TIF, at which point, or within a year
or two, they began to increase in value—in nearly all cases. TIF designation correlates directly with
subsequent valuation increases.
•NON-TIF parcels, on the other hand, maintained a gradual, fairly steady increase, quite likely driven
more by commercial valuation increases rather than residential, which seemed to fluctuate more, or be
affected more by external housing valuation—forces operating at a state or national level.
•There does seem to be some sort of TIF-Adjacency Factor working on parcels within close proximity to
TIF parcels, although it seems to work differently on different types of parcels: residential or
commercial. This effect of this factor, though, is weak and dissipates quickly with distance, hardly more
than 1/20th mile (264’).
o Residential parcels within 264’ of TIF projects changed valuation in the same direction as
residential non-TIF parcels further away, but rate-of-change was “flatter”, perhaps the influence
of TIF improvements.
o Commercial parcels within 264’ were slow to keep pace with generally increasing commercial
valuations of commercial non-TIF parcels further away, perhaps the result of the generally
depressed valuation that motivated TIF designations in the first place; valuations did seem to be
increasing after a considerable lag time (10 years), suggesting further examination beyond this
lag period, or on a project-by-project basis.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 79 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 2
In the most fundamental sense Tax Increment Finance (TIF) projects are initiated to increase tax valuations for
the properties so designated. There are, theoretically, additional benefits associated with TIF designations, but
these seem unlikely to accrue unless these areas “perform” in the primary way they are intended, which is to
provoke an increase in value that generates an increase in tax revenue. This analysis examines TIF land parcel
valuations to see if that is occurring in Hall County, and if those parcels that have been TIF-designated respond
differently, in terms of assessed valuation, than those parcels that have not been TIF-designated.
The analysis concludes that there are noticeable differences in valuation changes over time between these
inside parcels (TIF) and outside parcels (NON-TIF), coinciding with initiation and accumulating instances of TIF
designations from year to year, beginning in 2003 and accumulating annually since.
TIF PARCELS – Total Assessed Value
Figure 1
The key element of this comparison is slope direction. Cumulative Total Assessed Values (TAV) in TIF parcels,
sloped negatively until 2004, two years after the first TIF projects were designated, then sloped positively at
much steeper rate since 2004, approximately six times steeper than before; increasing, but still not increasing as
fast as non-TIF parcels after changing direction1(Figure 1). Non-TIF parcels, contrastingly, vary gradually with
little variation, trending generally upward (positively) at about the same rate throughout the analysis period,
until the last couple years when they begin to trend upward a bit more steeply (Figure 2).
1 Negative slope (-122,710); Positive slope all years (+2,645,778); Positive slope minus last two years (+768,435). Non-TIF
parcels (+61,652,203). Cumulative valuations attributable to improvements only increased dramatically the last two years in
the database provided; land values, too, but less dramatically.
0.00
10,000,000.00
20,000,000.00
30,000,000.00
40,000,000.00
50,000,000.00
60,000,000.00
70,000,000.00
80,000,000.00
90,000,000.00
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016Current $
Constant $
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 80 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 3
There are two features of TIF parcels at this scale that are noteworthy for our narrow purposes, that distinguish
TIF parcels from non-TIF: 1) in terms of constant dollars, they were actually decreasing in value at the beginning
of the study period, which tends to justify their consideration for TIF designation in the first place; and 2) after
TIF projects are introduced from 2003 on, with possibly a lag period of a year or so, maybe more, TIF parcel land
valuations change direction from negative to positive, and stays positive in terms of valuation growth.
NON-TIF PARCELS – Total Assessed Value
Figure 2
Over the last couple years of the study period, cumulative valuations increase at a steeper rate for both groups,
though the rate is tempered among NON-TIF parcels somewhat, it is unknown at this point why, but some
suggestions appear as the NON-TIF parcels are further separated and examined for variation among types of
NON-TIF parcels: rural v. urban/town, adjacency to TIF, inside or outside Grand Island, Grand Island Residential
v. Grand Island Commercial.
TIF PARCELS FIRST
There are 43 TIF projects spread throughout Grand Island containing 316 land parcels, many of which had zero
assessed value until the last couple years of the study period, which partly explains the recent valuation spike;
improvement assessments also shot up in these parcels by several tens of thousands of dollars these last two
years as well. Of these TIF projects, 27 (56%) affect commercial (C) parcels, and 16 (37%) affect residential (R)
parcels. These TIF projects went into effect almost annually from 2002, through 2016, although a few were date
unknown, with more per year from 2009 onward peaking at 9 initialized in 2012.
0.00
1,000,000,000.00
2,000,000,000.00
3,000,000,000.00
4,000,000,000.00
5,000,000,000.00
6,000,000,000.00
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016Current $
Constant $
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 81 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 4
Year
Projected
Value Type Number
2002 355,000 C 1
2003 1,063,000 C 1
2004 3,500,000 R 1
2006 1,825,476 3C 3
2007 1,400,000 R 1
2008 7,030,000 2C 1R 3
2010 3,895,653 3C 1R 4
2011 150,316 R 1
2012 18,163,734 4C 5R 9
2013 35,369,145 1C 1R 2
2014 25,775,000 3C 1R 4
2015 34,333,829 4C 1R 5
2016 3,034,351 2C 2
Beginning in the early years of TIF project introduction, TIF-designated parcel values, in terms of constant
dollars, were either decreasing or flat, but most increased substantially in valuation in the year following TIF
project initiation, then generally stabilizing at the higher rates. The 2007 data was skewed in the database
provided by values attributed to parcel #400494116, that then zeroed out in year 2000, no explanation was
given, so that early part of the 2007 TIF parcel curve should be ignored in this pattern. None of these TIF
parcels, though, seems to have benefitted from the rapid infusion of improvement valuations at the end of the
period.
The middle years, too, show signs of post-TIF designation valuation improvement, but with 2011 and 2013
parcels showing considerable pre-TIF value fluctuation: 2011 spiking upward in 2006 as well as 2011, and 2013
increasing gradually from 2000 – 2004, then decreasing substantially 2004 – 2012, then spiking a bit post-2013,
then again spiking post 2015 (Figure 4). There were 4 projects started in 2010, plus one in 2011 to contribute to
the post-2011 valuation increase, the earlier increase is harder to explain, although one of these projects was
very close to a 2005 TIF project and could have benefitted some from that, although, in general, as will be shown
later, adjacent parcels did not necessarily share valuation spiking with TIF parcels. The pattern of post-TIF
valuation improvement continues in the later years as well, as shown in Figure 5. The magnitude of valuation
change, though, is much more drastic than earlier in the period, suggesting there may be some external factors
affecting valuation within the last few years of the study period. Still, the sequencing remains fairly consistent
with a post-TIF valuation increase immediately following project initialization.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 82 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 5
TIF PARCELS BY YEAR INITIATED – Total Assessed Value2
Figure 3
Figure 4
2 The downturn in 2016 TIF parcels comes from one parcel (2017 Broadwell Ave N), that lost all its improvements valuation
in those final years, from $3,000,000+ to $0, perhaps from being razed, as their appears to be nothing on that parcel now.
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
TAVInside2003 (constant)
TAVInside2004 (constant)
TAVInside2007 (constant)
TAVInside2008 (constant)
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016TAVInside2010 (constant)
TAVInside2011 (constant)
TAVInside2013 (constant)
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 83 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 6
Figure 5
NON-TIF PARCELS
Non-TIF land parcels during the first half of the study period, 1994 - ~2004/2005, are increasing gradually with
little fluctuation in rate of increase with non-TIF values inside Grand Island city limits increasing a bit faster,
driven primarily by Grand Island commercial parcels (GI residential trending upward as well, but flatter). Rural
land values are also increasing similarly during this period, but smaller town parcels hardly changing at all the
entire period. Land parcels within 1/8th of a mile of a soon-to-be TIF project, though, are increasing generally,
but also a slower rate, lending weight to the notion that a TIF was generally located within a neighborhood, or
small area of relatively depressing land values (Figure 6)3.
Post-2004, since institution of TIF projects in Grand Island, land valuation curves tell a different story. Non-TIF
land values seemed to have slowed in their increase. In Grand Island, commercial non-TIF parcels are more
actively increasing in valuation; residential non-TIF has been flat until just the last year or so. Parcels adjacent to
pending TIF zones during this time are also flat, with perhaps even a slight loss in value, more on this later.
Small town values have changed very little over this time period. These valuation curves differ substantially
from those attached to TIF project parcels.
3 Not all towns outside Grand Island were sampled.
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
14,000,000
16,000,000
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016TAVInside2014
(constant)
TAVInside2015
(constant)
TAVInside2016
(constant)
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 84 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 7
NON-TIF PARCELS BY LOCATIONAL GROUP
Figure 6
0
200,000,000
400,000,000
600,000,000
800,000,000
1,000,000,000
1,200,000,000
1,400,000,000
1,600,000,000
1,800,000,000
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016TAV NON-TIF GI (constant)TAV NON-TIF GI Res (constant)
TAV NON-TIF Rural (constant)TAV NON-TIF GI Comm (constant)
TAV NON-TIF Adjacent (constant)TAV NON-TIF Cairo (constant)
TAV NON-TIF WoodRiver (constant)TAV NON-TIF Doniphan (constant)
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 85 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 8
NON-TIF PARCELS ADJACENT TO TIF PARCELS
In order to examine the issue of the proximal impact of TIF projects we selected parcels that were within a short
distance of any TIF project, to see if they displayed a different valuation change pattern than other non-TIF
parcels—it was expected that they would be more similar with TIF parcels than non-TIF parcels. The first subset
of adjacent parcels consisted only of those parcels within 1/8 of a mile of a TIF project.
NON-TIF PARCELS WITHIN 1/8 MILE OF TIF PROJECT – TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE
Figure 7
Up until about 2007 these adjacent non-TIF parcels change very similarly to non-TIF in general, but then, instead
of continuing to rise, the begin to flatten out, even decline a bit before rebounding to flat. Since these parcels
are all parcels in Grand Island alone, we selected out Grand Island parcels from the rest of Hall county, and then
again by Grand Island commercial and Grand Island residential (Figure 8). In these two groups a noticeable
distinction shows up: residential parcels all over the city flattened out in 2005 continuing flat through the peak
2008 housing crisis, a massive external event that may have had an overriding influence on city housing,
depressing residential values across the entire U.S. including Grand Island (see below). Some valuation rebound
may be evident in the last year or so.
0
50,000,000
100,000,000
150,000,000
200,000,000
250,000,000
300,000,000
350,000,000
400,000,000
450,000,000
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016Current $
Constant $
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 86 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 9
Figure 8
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 87 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 10
GRAND ISLAND RESIDENTIAL NON-TIF PARCELS – TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE
Figure 9
GRAND ISLAND COMMERCIAL NON-TIF PARCELS – TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE
Figure 10
0
200,000,000
400,000,000
600,000,000
800,000,000
1,000,000,000
1,200,000,000
1,400,000,000
1,600,000,000
1,800,000,000
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016Current $
Constant $
0
100,000,000
200,000,000
300,000,000
400,000,000
500,000,000
600,000,000
700,000,000
800,000,000
900,000,000
1,000,000,000
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016Current $
Constant $
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 88 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 11
THE TIF-ADJACENCY FACTOR
Non-TIF commercial parcels varied differently over this span of time: valuation growth was much steadier
despite a two-year aberration (2014-2015), although the slope of positive change diminished beginning 2006.
This was similar to residential parcels prior to the period between 2005-2007, but to a much lesser degree after
that, suggesting that external depressional forces are influential and may even over-ride potential extended TIF
impacts nearby. So we dove deeper in selecting adjacent parcels to see how far from TIF designations might
parcels be affected if at all, by further parsing out parcels within the 1/8th mile range into groups of 264’ (0.05
mile), and 528’ (0.1 mile)—beyond this distance any potential adjacency influence was not noticeable. We also
examined valuation changes within these two adjacency groups relative to whether the TIF project was
Residential or Commercial, yielding eight groups: four groups within 264’ of a TIF and four groups between 264-
528’ of a TIF.
•Residential parcels adjacent to Residential TIF
•Residential parcels adjacent to Commercial TIF
•Commercial parcels adjacent to Residential TIF
•Commercial parcels to Commercial TIF
Any parcels that were adjacent to both a commercial and a residential TIF were excluded from the samples (See
Figure 11).
In short, the impact of adjacency to TIF projects on valuation is slight but noticeable, but that impact does not
extend very far from the TIF boundary, probably less than 1/10th of a mile, and more likely less than 1/20th
(264’).
Valuation change patterns of residential parcels immediately adjacent to TIF projects, regardless if those TIF
projects were residential or commercial, were still depressed post-2005, but those within 264’ of a TIF project
depressed at a noticeably slower rate (a much flatter post-2005 curve), than those further than 264’ (See Figures
12-15). Plus, if the TIF was commercial, it appears to have delayed the valuation depression by a couple years for
those residential parcels immediately adjacent. Valuation change patterns of commercial parcels, on the other
hand, did not increase as much if they were within 264’ of a TIF project, than they did if they were beyond 264’;
though there is evidence in the curves to suggest a lag effect on the commercial parcels nearest TIF projects,
perhaps as much as 10 years. The data suggest that a TIF-Adjacency-Factor may exist in many cases, but when it
is present, its affect is subtle, weak, and dissipates fairly quickly with distance.
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 89 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 12
Figure 11
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 90 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 13
NON-TIF PARCELS WITHIN 264’ COMPARED TO 264’-528’
Residential TIF / Residential Parcels
Figure 12
Residential TIF / Commercial Parcels
Figure 13
0
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
10000000
12000000
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016< 264' Res TIF/Res Parcels
(constant $)
264-528' Res TIF/Res Parcels
(constant $)
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016< 264' Res TIF/Comm
Parcels (constant $)
264-528' Res TIF/Comm
Parcels (constant $)
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 91 / 92
Hall County Annual Land Valuation for TIF Impact Evaluation
pg. 14
Commercial TIF / Residential Parcels
Figure 14
Commercial TIF / Commercial Parcels
Figure 15
0
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
10000000
12000000
14000000
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016< 264' Comm TIF/Res
Parcels (constant $)
264-528' Comm TIF/Res
Parcels (constant $)
0
5000000
10000000
15000000
20000000
25000000
30000000
35000000
40000000
19941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016< 264' Comm TIF/Comm
Parcels (constant $)
264-528' Comm TIF/Comm
Parcels (constant $)
Grand Island Regular Meeting - 3/21/2018 Page 92 / 92