HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-02-12 Planning Commission Meeting PacketsAGENDA
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
FEBRUARY 12, 2014
7:00 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
A. Minutes of the regular meeting of the Edina Planning Commission January 22, 2014.
V. COMMUNITY COMMENT
During "Community Comment," the Planning Commission will invite residents to share new issues or
concerns that haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Commission or which aren't slated for
future consideration. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the
number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are
elsewhere on this morning's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals
should not expect the Chair or Commission Members to respond to their comments today. Instead, the
Commission might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Variance. Sybesma. 4015 Wood End Drive, Edina, MN
B. Variance. Mollet. 5212 Duncraig Road, Edina, MN
C. Subdivision. Homestead Partners, 6304 and 6312 Warren Avenue, Edina, MN
VII. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. TIF Resolution — Pentagon Park Proposal Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
B. Sketch Plan Review — 5108 Edina Industrial Boulevard, Edina, MN
C. Sketch Plan Review — 5100 Edina Industrial Boulevard, Edina, MN
D. Tree Preservation Ordinance
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
• Council Update
• Attendance
IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS
X. STAFF COMMENTS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the
way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-927-886172
hours in advance of the meeting. Next Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission February 26, 2014
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Originator
Meeting Date
Agenda #
Kris Aaker
February 12, 2014
B-14-03
Assistant Planner
Recommended Action: Approve the front yard setback variance.
Project Description
A 6.7 foot front yard setback Variance to rebuild a home at nearly the same
nonconforming front yard setback as the existing home, (See property location,
aerial photos, photos of the subject and neighboring homes on pages A.1—A. 9).
The project is a teardown — rebuild on an existing single dwelling unit lot for
property located at 4015 Wood End Drive for Eric and Staci Sybesma.
INFORMATION/BACKGROUND
The subject property is located on the east side of Wood End Drive consisting of
a rambler with an attached two car garage built in 1951. The lot is 9,373 square
feet in area with existing lot coverage of 21 %. The owners are hoping to tear
down the existing home and replace it with a two and 1 Y2 story home while
maintaining the existing attached two car garage. The existing garage is forward
of the required front yard setback. The owners would like to locate the new home
consistent with the existing front yard setback of the current home and connect
the garage with a new breezeway. The existing attached garage is
nonconforming, extending into the required front yard setback. The plan
incorporates the existing garage and attaches it to the new house. The
attachment to the garage overlaps the front yard setback, (as does the existing
link attaching the garage).
The current home/attached garage is located 16.1 feet from the front lot line. The
zoning ordinance requires that the new home maintain the average front yard
setback of the homes on either side. The home to the south is located 58.3 feet
from Wood End right-of-way and the home to the north is located 18.8 feet from
Wood End resulting in an average front yard setback for the property of 38.5 feet.
The new home will be setback from the front lot line approximately 31.79 feet,
which is a greater distance from the front lot line than the existing home. The
front north corner of the new home will be the closest building point to the street
with the remainder of the front fagade farther from Wood End Drive and farther
from the front lot line than the existing home (see A. 10 — A. 14 surveys and
elevations).
The new home is proposed to be a walk -out with back yard views towards the
east.
Surrounding Land Uses
Northerly: Single dwelling units, zoned R-1, single dwelling unit district
and guided residential.
Easterly: Single dwelling units, zoned R-1, single dwelling unit district
and guided residential.
Southerly: Single dwelling units, zoned R-1, single dwelling unit district
and guided residential.
Existing Site Features
The subject property is a 9,373 square foot lot with a single story home that has
an attached two car garage built in 1951.
Planning
Guide Plan designation: Single Dwelling Unit
Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District
Building Design
The proposed home will be 2 and 11/2 stories with finish on the front fagade of
cement board shake siding and cement bead board/batten siding. (See
elevationson pages A. 12 A. 14).
Compliance Table
2
City Standard
Proposed
Front -
38.5 feet
*31.7 feet
Side-
9+ height, (living)
19 feet
Rear-
25 feet
38.5 feet
Building Height
2 1/2 stories
2 1/2 stories,
30 feet to the ridge,
29 -11" feet to the rid e
Lot coverage
25%
24.46%
2
* Variance Required
Primary Issue:
• Is the proposed development reasonable for this site?
Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for four reasons:
1. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1, Single Dwelling Unit Zoning
District and complies with all requirements with the exception of
setback from the average front yard setback of the homes on either
side. The new home will improve upon the existing nonconforming
front yard setback of the current home.
2. The home is appropriate in size and scale for the lot. The
improvements will enhance the property and not detract from the
neighborhood. Spacing between the new home and the home to the
north lot line will increase. The current home is located 6.5 feet from
the north lot line with the new home is approximately 19 feet from the
north lot line.
3. The improvements will provide a reasonable use of the lot given the
current front yard setback requirement. The variance will allow for a new
home to be built at nearly the same distance from Wood End as the
existing home. Front yard setback of the new home will actually increase
with the proposal.
4. The new home nearly matches an existing nonconforming front yard
setback that has been in place since 1951. The required average front
yard setback forces a new home farther back on the lot potentially
impacting drainage patterns.
Is the proposed variance justified?
Yes. Per the Zoning Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is
found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical difficulties
in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. As
demonstrated below, staff believes the proposal does meet the variance
standards, when applying the three conditions:
Section 850.0.Subd., requires the following findings for approval of a
variance:
Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions
must be satisfied affirmatively. The Proposed Variance will:
1) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from
complying with ordinance requirements.
Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land
cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the
applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with
the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties"
may include functional and aesthetic concerns.
Staff believes the proposed variance is reasonable. The new home will be
farther back from the street than the nonconforming setback of the existing
home which has been located on the property since 1951, pre -dating the
home to the south that was built in 1955 and was located much farther
back from Wood End Drive at 58.3 feet from the front lot line. The
practical difficulties in complying with the ordinances are created by the
required front yard setback that is dictated by adjacent properties. A
practical difficulty is the average front yard setback requirement that takes
into account the setback of the home to the south which is much deeper
from the street.
The purpose behind the ordinance is to maintain an established front yard
sight lines and street scape. The ordinance is meant to prevent a continual
erosion of the established front yard setback pattern in an existing
neighborhood by holding all new construction to the existing neighborhood
standard and to avoid new structure build -out beyond existing conditions.
Duplicating the front yard setback of the existing home will not
compromise the intent of the ordinance. The new home will maintain the
existing pattern of setback on the block and will be no closer to the street.
2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not
common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-
created?
Yes. The unique circumstances are that the existing lot is subjected to an
average front yard setback that is deeper than the location of the existing
home. The required setback reduces the buildable area of the lot which is
not a self-imposed condition.
3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood?
4
No. The proposed home will be consistent with the location of the existing
home and will not change the streetscape along Wood End. The character
of the neighborhood consists of a variety of housing styles. The applicant
is asking to preserve a setback pattern along the block that has included
the nonconforming setback of the subject property.
Staff Recommendation
Approve the requested variance based on the following findings:
1. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because:
a) The practical difficult is caused by the location of the home to the
south.
b) The encroachment into the setback improves upon an existing
nonconforming setback that was established when the original home
was built in 1951 and was conforming at that time.
Approval of the variance is subject to the following condition:
1. The home must be construction per the proposed plans date stamped,
January 28, 2014
Deadline for a City decision: March 28, 2014.
Y16
VARIANCE APPLICATION
•
CASE NUMBER-
.DATEU/ 2V
I -a
FEE PAID- L,-'
City of Edina Planning Department * www.citvofedina.com
4801 West Fiftieth Street * Edina, MN 55424 * (952) 826-0369 * fax (962) 826-
0389
.......................................................................................................
FEE: RES - $350.00 NON -RES - $600.00
APPLICANT:
NAME: Eric & Staid Sybesma _(Signature required on back page)
ADDRESS: 4015 Wood End Drive PHONE: 651-323-3396
EMAIL: e(ics@pobox.com
PROPERTY OWNER:
NAME. Eric & Staci Sybesma (Signature required on back page)
ADDRESS: 4015 Wood End Drive PHONE: 651-323-3396
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (written and electronic form):
SEE ATTACHMENT I
**You must provide a full legal description. If more space Is needed, please use a separate sheet.
Note: The County may not accept the resolution approving your project If the legal description does not match their
records. This may delay your project.
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 4015 Wood End Drive
PRESENT ZONING. P
'.I.D.#
Residential RI 19-028-24-14-0009
.
EXPLANATION OF REQUEST:
SEE ATTACHMENT 2
(Use reverse side or additional pages If necessary)
ARCHITECT: NAME: underground DESIGN GROUP, LLC PHONE: 952-270-2482
EMAIL. jgears@undergroundarch.com
SURVEYOR: NAME: Acre Land Surveying PHONE: 16 Z38 6Z79
EMAIL: is—dandft-a—
JI5,
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT
This application should be processed in my name, and I am the party whom the City should
contact about this application. By signing this application, I certify that all fees, charges, utility
bilis, taxes, special assessments and other debts or obligations due to the City by me or for this
property have been paid. I further certify that I am in compliance with all ordinance requirements
and conditions regarding other City approvals that have been granted to me for any matter.
I have completed all of the applicable filing requirements and, to the best of my knowledge, the
documents and information I have submitted are true and correct.
11/2— 712oo, 9 -
Applicant's Signa re Date
OWNER'S STATEMENT
I am the fee title owner of the above described property, and I agree to this application.
(If a corporation or partnership is the fee title holder, attach a resolution authorizing this
application on behalf of the board of directors or partnership.)
1 f 27 Z-alt'V
Owner's Signatu a Date
Note. Both signatures are required (if the owner is different than the applicant) before we
can process the application, otherwise It Is considered Incomplete.
5
Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions
must be satisfied affirmatively. Please fully explain your answers using
additional sheets of paper as necessary. Vie( Ck f txcAeie,,L � Z,
The Proposed Variance will:
Relieve practical difficulties In complying
with the zoning ordinance and that the use
Is reasonable
Correct extraordinary circumstances
applicable to this property but not
applicable to other property in the vicinity
or zoning district
Be in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of the zoning ordinance
Not alter the essential Character of a
neighborhood
YES NO
Sybesma Variance Request for 4015 Wood End Drive
Attachment 1: Property Information and Description
i
Legal description of property (from Title Commitment, EXHIBIT "A"):
That part of the North 70 feet of the East'/2 of the North'/2 of East 'h of South % of Southeast
of Northeast % of Section 19, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal
Meridian lying West of the East 178 feet thereof and lying Southeasterly of a circular curve
having a radius of 50 feet, the center of said curve being at a pant which is 6 feet North
measured at right angles, from a point on the North line of South % of the Southeast'/4 of the
Northeast'/ of said Section 19, distant 340 feet West of Northeast corner of said South % of
Southeast'/ of Northeast'/ of Section 19, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Property l D #: 19-028-24-14-0009
Property Address: 4015 Wood End Drive, Edina, MN 55424
Legal description of property from Hennepin County electronic form:
County Auditor's description of this tax parcel. It may not be the legal description on the most
recent conveyance document recording ownership. Please refer to the legal description of
this property on the public record when preparing legal documents for recording
PID: 19-028-24-14-0009
Municipality: EDINA
Addition Name: UNPLATTED 19 028 24
Lot:
Block:
COM AT NW COR OF SE 114 OF SE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF NE 1/4 TH S 75 FT TH E TO A PT
DIS 216 FT W FROM E LINE THEREOF TH N 5 FT TH E 38 FT TH N 70 FT TH W TO
BEG EX ROAD
Sybesma Variance Request for 4015 Wood End Drive
Attachment 2: Explanation of request
We are requesting a variance of 6'8.5" to the front setback for new construction in a cul de
sac from the prescribed 38'6" feet to 31' 9.5".
As seen in the survey overlay on sheet number a0.1, the adjacent properties have front
setbacks of 18.8' and 58.3', resulting in an average of approximately 38.5 feet, or 38'6". The
existing garage, which will be preserved in the project is built at a non -conforming front
setback of 16'1".
To maintain reasonable attachment to the existing garage location and to maintain current
absorption space in the rear of the home, we are requesting a 31' 9.5" front setback which is
the average setback of the current main house, which ranges from 29'6" to 34'1" as shown in
a0.1. Our proposed setback is therefore actually 2'3.5" deeper than the current home.
If we used the zoning requirements, we would need to move the home further back in the lot,
and the city engineers have expressed drainage concerns on moving back significantly.
(email from city engineer attached).
This is why we request a front setback for the closest point of the new construction at 31'
9.5", representing a variance of 68.5".
Sybesma Variance Request for 4015 Wood End Drive
Attachment 3: City Engineer Email
From: Jamie Cynor JCynor@edinamn.gov
12/19/13
to Eric Sybesma, Kris Aaker
Eric,
Based on your scope of work you will want to check with the local watershed requirements which is
Minnehaha Creek. A good contact over there is Brandon Wisner, 952-641-4505.
Regarding Engineering and existing and proposed drainage is our only concerned when you start cutting
and filling on a site. Your lot has the house about in the center from east to west which allows the water
to infiltrate into the ground before it gets to your neighbor to the east and that is currently
the drainage path. With the placement of the new house you will be much closer to the back property
line and depending on the amount of fill we don't want to increase the intensity or localize the
surface water. As long as you don't adversely impact your adjacent neighbors it shouidn' be a concern.
I hope this helps and contact me with any further questions. Thanks
Jamie Cynor, Senior Engineering Technician
ssa-Us-oW i Fax 952 -82s -o392
JCynorQEdkwMN.pov I www.EdinaMN.gov
...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business
Kris Aaker
From: esybesma@gmail.com on behalf of Eric Sybesma <erics@pobox.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2014 9:46 AM
To: Kris Aaker
Cc: Staci Sybesma; Jeffrey Gears
Subject: waiver addendums for 4015 Wood End Variance application for 2/12 Planning
Commission Mtg
Attachments: 4015Waiver.PDF; 4015PedersonWaiver.pdf
Hi Kris,
Staci and I have walked the area surrounding the 4015 Wood End property and discussed the variance
application with all available neighbors. No one has raised any objection to the variance request.
We also had an extended face to face meeting with the neighbors (Dean Preston and Dave Timm) at 4017 Wood
End Drive, and they as well as five additional line of sight neighbors have signed or given their support of the
variance. We have also corresponded with Domain Edina LLC, the land owner of the rental property at 4009
Wood End which is the northern neighbor to the property, and they raised no objection to the variance.
Attached is a list of six signatures stating no objection and also an email from the neighbor directly across the
street, Marilou Pederson, stating her support of the variance request.
If requested, we can make printed copies of these documents for the planning commission.
Let me know if we should do that.
Eric Sybesma
'V'ariaoce Approval
I have been informed of Eric and Staci Sybesma's application for a variance for
their new construction at 4015 Wood End Drive, Edina.
I understand that it is a variance of the front setback for new construction of 6 feet
and 8,5 inches from the prescribed 38'6" to 311 9.5".
I also understand that the home currently on the lot with a 29'6" front setback is
actually closer to the street than the new construction will be.
I do not oppose this variance being approved for their construction project.
Signed by:
Name Signature Address Date
avid , m�
� ,-� ' UM Wft� Ed a
G
4L1QS` lUa
2
Chri''�Pjvrsor)
�aZy G-10 Undid'
�
illy
2/5/2014
E�
b�i�:3fifNy(ti.
(no subject)
Marilou Pederson <mariloupederson@hotmail.com>
To: "erics@pobox.com" <erics@pobox.com>
Gmail - (no subject)
Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 7:00 PM
Hi Eric and Staci - I am Marilou Pederson, your new neighbor, 4020 Wood End Drive - directly across the street
from 4015. Welcome to the neighborhood. You will love it here.
have no problem with your variance request. I look forward to meeting you and seeing the new house go up.
Go Broncosl
iu . M' g
https:llmail.g oogle.com/mail/u/O/7ul=2&ik=40518edfa6&\tew=pt&q=marlioupederson%40hotmail.com&q s=true&search=q uery&msg=143f542a88801 ccl 1/1
Jackie Hoogenakker
From: Marilou Pederson <mariloupederson@hotmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2014 9:54 PM
To: Jackie Hoogenakker
Subject: re: 4015 Wood End Drive variance
I live at 4020 Wood End Drive, directly across the street from 4015 Wood End Drive. I have no problem with
the setback variance.
Thank You....
Marilou Pederson
4020 Wood End Drive
Edina, Mn. 55424
AT -B: Abstract
Market
Total:
Tax
Total: (Payable: 2013)
Sale
Price:
Sale 11/1996
Date:
Sale
Code:
Map Scale: I" -100 ft.
Print Date: M8l2014
This map is a compilation of data from various
sources and Is furnished "AS IS" with no
representation or warranty expressed or
Implied, including fitness of any particular
purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and
completeness of the information shown.
COPYRIGHT 0 HENNEPIN COUNTY 2014
A 'IlhinkGre"I
Parcel
19-028-24-14-0009
ID:
Owner
Mark H Hogue
Name:
Parcel
4015 Wood End Dr
Address:
Edina, MN 55424
Property
Residential
Type:
Home-
Homestead
stead:
Parcel
0.22 acres
Area:
9,486 sq ft
AT -B: Abstract
Market
Total:
Tax
Total: (Payable: 2013)
Sale
Price:
Sale 11/1996
Date:
Sale
Code:
Map Scale: I" -100 ft.
Print Date: M8l2014
This map is a compilation of data from various
sources and Is furnished "AS IS" with no
representation or warranty expressed or
Implied, including fitness of any particular
purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and
completeness of the information shown.
COPYRIGHT 0 HENNEPIN COUNTY 2014
A 'IlhinkGre"I
S.�Lo�.�o� � z
Hennepin County Property Interactive Map
— r
Interactive
Maps
Welcome
Results
Links
Tax information
View oblique imagery (Bing maps
Survey documents
About the data
Find a PID or an address on the map
PID: 1902824140009
4015 Wood End Dr
Edina, MN 55424
Owner/Taxpayer
Owner: Mark H Hogue
MARK H HOGUE
Taxpayer: 4015 WOOD END DR
EDINA MN 55424
Tax District
School Dist: 273
Sewer Dist:
Watershed Dist: 3
Parcel
Parcel Area: 0.22 acres
9,486 sq ft
Torrens/Abstract: Abstract
Addition: Unplatted 19 028 24
Lot:
Block:
Com At Nw Cor Of Se
1/4 Of Se 1/4 Of Se
1/4 Of Ne 1/4 Th S 75
Ft ThEToAPtDis
Metes & Bounds: 216 Ft W From E Line
Thereof Th N 5 Ft Th
E
Legend
_-._--.____._.__.._.__..___- _..--
Measure
http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/property/map/default.aspx?pid=1902824140009
Page 1 of 1
2/6/2014
:s-
Y.,
t
�
k 5
C
� a 11J
.0
9,
t
:s-
2
L
�
k 5
C
� a 11J
.0
"
y
m
py
a
r
Jx
«a,r
7
a
•
r+ •
A%
y2 ?
a� y x... x R!x
� x
7
a
e � k
I
�i Al
�i
F \ I
M
i<
y j llY�
,
�d Fyy
"
"
*,
IFE
-a; rsf.
''a
�r.. r f r i
511
i
t(. t:
Page 1 of 1
file://ed-ntl.ci.edina.mn.us/citywide/PDSImages/Photos/1902824140008001 jpg 2/6/2014
\
o"a
r- 1\11 1
! f •�rry
W24
Cabe s suvwE
a
...-__<• .ems ..
I hereby ca fly that this PW4 w.wy or rsoat was IxrePand oy SETBACK & ZONING DATA
me a under my dheat supervision and it I own a dWy Licenwd
Land Surveyor under the Tawe of the State of MAwnesoto Exdding Zoning - -R-1
UtllitNs------------AvoMMs
Front Yard--------Awrags it Adjacent Lots
Side-----
s d ----VINs withBuNoirng He10t (5 Ft ApnMnum)
12-24-13 MNo. RevMae Rea Yard ----25 Ft
fiat par! of the NartNn 70 fief of tin Eoet 1/2 of ft North i/2 of
tle Eat 1/2 d the South 1/4 of the Sou6neast 1/4 of oro North. t
1/4 of SeatRam i!, Towp North, Rags 24 Nket of M» 4t#r
Prinoipd McHritan IyRnq Nbt of Eaet 178 feet thereof and I�rtq
Soutlneatafy of a circular curve having a radia of 50 fur the anter
of sail oxw being at a point which b 6 feet North measured at right
angleA frorm a point an the North line of the South 1/4 of the
Soutluaet 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of sold Section 19, distant 340
feet West of the Northeast comer of said South 1/4 of the Southeast
1/4 of the Northeast i/4 of Section 19.
NOTES JOB#1383
- Ith wavey was completed 09a 19th, 2013, In
the middle of the Mkmssoto wrow/winter season.
Zero
tiers ahmay es knprovemnb/feahrros In addition
oan hereon tinct sero not located due
to snow/ke aver.
Bwlnq'e shown am Davi on assumed datum.
This ark. war prepared with the bwwffi of some
tMewal Additlanal easwnents, appurtenances and
encumbrances may exist In addition to those shown
hereon.
- The Plat of Wood End Addition dedicates only the
of Wood End Drew which is within sold plat
o documents were provt�ed IMkxotknq the reoordllrq
of an sasenent for the portion of Wood End Drive
lyhnq South of the Plat of Wood End Addition.
Based an recorded documents exlete between provkNd a 6.0 foot
Wood End 0 Dow Van M (Dom Na 6670931) and ethef N. Me of
4017 Wood End Dins (Doer No. 64ti4460)
NORTH
0 30
( IN FEET )
I Inch 30 it.
AREA CALCULATIONS
TOTAL LOT - 9.373 sq. fL
Existing House - 31.790 Sq. Ft.
Existing Shed - t132 Sq. Ft.
Exktkn
Cant. - *50 Sq. Ft.
• Skier Wdk - 11.370 Sq. Ft
EXISTING ELEVATIONS
GARAGE FLOOR - 886.2
TOP OF BLOCK - 865.8
7BS LOWEST FLOOR a 878.3
FiRST FLOOR - 886.9
LEGEND
•DEMOTES IRON MONUMENT ENT FOUND
0 DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET
0000• DENOTES OWING RETA96NG WAIL
1011.2 DENOTES t7ISTI1NG ELEVATpM.
-ohs DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE
x DENOTES EXISTING FENCE
®DENOTES U1M POLE
DENOTES PAVING STONES
DENOTES CONCRETE SURFACE
DEN07M WTUMINOUS
CRE LAND SURVEYIN
i31ak1•, AAM 56449 1
763-236-6278 q.eorglandsurvesq%paloam
,i N g Y h e• M M A N N N N- N N-
1 K. I.r♦ I♦ r\
ifV t 11 l l P
�,
Y R ♦r ♦I L/
Al"
'�
r
Ing-24.2-
e3.534.2-
All
All
BBSA
o"a
r- 1\11 1
! f •�rry
W24
Cabe s suvwE
a
...-__<• .ems ..
I hereby ca fly that this PW4 w.wy or rsoat was IxrePand oy SETBACK & ZONING DATA
me a under my dheat supervision and it I own a dWy Licenwd
Land Surveyor under the Tawe of the State of MAwnesoto Exdding Zoning - -R-1
UtllitNs------------AvoMMs
Front Yard--------Awrags it Adjacent Lots
Side-----
s d ----VINs withBuNoirng He10t (5 Ft ApnMnum)
12-24-13 MNo. RevMae Rea Yard ----25 Ft
fiat par! of the NartNn 70 fief of tin Eoet 1/2 of ft North i/2 of
tle Eat 1/2 d the South 1/4 of the Sou6neast 1/4 of oro North. t
1/4 of SeatRam i!, Towp North, Rags 24 Nket of M» 4t#r
Prinoipd McHritan IyRnq Nbt of Eaet 178 feet thereof and I�rtq
Soutlneatafy of a circular curve having a radia of 50 fur the anter
of sail oxw being at a point which b 6 feet North measured at right
angleA frorm a point an the North line of the South 1/4 of the
Soutluaet 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of sold Section 19, distant 340
feet West of the Northeast comer of said South 1/4 of the Southeast
1/4 of the Northeast i/4 of Section 19.
NOTES JOB#1383
- Ith wavey was completed 09a 19th, 2013, In
the middle of the Mkmssoto wrow/winter season.
Zero
tiers ahmay es knprovemnb/feahrros In addition
oan hereon tinct sero not located due
to snow/ke aver.
Bwlnq'e shown am Davi on assumed datum.
This ark. war prepared with the bwwffi of some
tMewal Additlanal easwnents, appurtenances and
encumbrances may exist In addition to those shown
hereon.
- The Plat of Wood End Addition dedicates only the
of Wood End Drew which is within sold plat
o documents were provt�ed IMkxotknq the reoordllrq
of an sasenent for the portion of Wood End Drive
lyhnq South of the Plat of Wood End Addition.
Based an recorded documents exlete between provkNd a 6.0 foot
Wood End 0 Dow Van M (Dom Na 6670931) and ethef N. Me of
4017 Wood End Dins (Doer No. 64ti4460)
NORTH
0 30
( IN FEET )
I Inch 30 it.
AREA CALCULATIONS
TOTAL LOT - 9.373 sq. fL
Existing House - 31.790 Sq. Ft.
Existing Shed - t132 Sq. Ft.
Exktkn
Cant. - *50 Sq. Ft.
• Skier Wdk - 11.370 Sq. Ft
EXISTING ELEVATIONS
GARAGE FLOOR - 886.2
TOP OF BLOCK - 865.8
7BS LOWEST FLOOR a 878.3
FiRST FLOOR - 886.9
LEGEND
•DEMOTES IRON MONUMENT ENT FOUND
0 DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET
0000• DENOTES OWING RETA96NG WAIL
1011.2 DENOTES t7ISTI1NG ELEVATpM.
-ohs DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE
x DENOTES EXISTING FENCE
®DENOTES U1M POLE
DENOTES PAVING STONES
DENOTES CONCRETE SURFACE
DEN07M WTUMINOUS
CRE LAND SURVEYIN
i31ak1•, AAM 56449 1
763-236-6278 q.eorglandsurvesq%paloam
,i N g Y h e• M M A N N N N- N N-
r
L
LILA-1-10
LAT UM
• S,373 SF
MAX LOT COVERAGE
-25%
- MW BF
NEW HOME,
FRONT PORCH,
BREEZEWAY&
EXISTING GARAGE
- $1S1 SF
EXISTING SHED - 132 OF
TOTAL LOT COVERAGE --ZMSF
NOW
r
L
WEST "M EXTERIOR ELEVATION
114"- V
_""
ttau ee�ue. tte
1
NEW
a
SYBESMA
RESIDENCE
4018 WOOD END DR
EDWk MN
VARIIWCE-
P
On EFOOR
ELEVATIONS
I
..
;
CL
a2.1
� j
r
W
L
QNORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION
i/F- i'-0" L-J-�
"'-"'"
DF81Dp DRDpf, ttD
n�
4
NEW
r"
SYBESMA
RESIDENCE
e
4015 WOOD END DR
EDINA, MN
"r
Dx�a—
.>
m
—A
VARIANCE -
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS
(�
a2.2
Lu
CO
CO LIJ
uj n cli
55 cc
LLI
k
I lvV I
I .. i 1,
'w91Njt'�j'�
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Originator
Meeting Date
Agenda #
Kris Aaker
February 12, 2014
B-14-04
Assistant Planner
Recommended Action: Deny the variance as requested.
Project Description
A 4.6 foot setback variance from the north property line
to extend the existing garage 4 feet closer to the north property line
for property located at 5212 Duncraig Road for Kevin and Kristi Mollet.
INFORMATION/BACKGROUND
The subject property is located west of Duncraig Road consisting of a rambler
with an attached two car garage owned by Kevin and Kristi Mollet. The home
was built in 1954 on the northern most portion of the site, (See attachments A.1
—A. 13, site location, ariel photos, site plans, survey, and building elevations).
The homeowners have indicated that they are in the final phase of a three phase
project to bring the 1950's rambler up to modern building standards. The first two
phases included updating the main level, an exterior face lift with new windows
throughout.
The owners were planning the next phase of their project that adds a second
floor to include new bedrooms, laundry and baths and a four foot extension of the
garage width to the north on the main level. The proposed improvements
conform to all of the setback and height requirements with the exception of the
north side yard setback proposed for the garage addition. The existing garage is
an under sized two car garage that provides an interior side yard setback of 9.4
feet. The minimum side yard setback for an attached garage is 10 feet. Prior to
the zoning ordinance change as of January 1, 2014, the side yard setback for an
attached garage was 5 feet. The owners had planned their addition based on the
previous setback standard and prior to ordinance amendment.
As indicated all portions of the expansion to the home will conform to the
setback, height and coverage requirements with the exception of the 4 foot
extension proposed for the garage. The 1 sc two phases of the project included the
plan to expand the width of the garage at a 5 foot setback, (conforming at the
time). Unfortunately the ordinances were amended before the final phase of the
project was submitted for permit. The 4 foot extension to the garage is to provide
enough garage width to park two cars and to allow for storage. Some storage is
currently accomplished outside of the garage.
The ordinance requires a minimum 10 foot side yard setback for a garage.
The existing garage is currently nonconforming at a little over 9
feet from the north lot Iine.The owners would like to decrease the setback from
the north lot line to be 5.4 feet to the north lot line. The adjacent property to the
north is a through lot addressing from and with the home fronting from Lochloy,
(5265 Lochloy), and with back yard area adjacent to the proposed improvements.
The new north wall of the garage will be next to open space on the lot next door.
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Surrounding Land Uses
Northerly:
Single -dwelling homes.
Easterly:
Single -dwelling homes.
Southerly:
Single -dwelling homes.
Westerly:
Single -dwelling homes
Existing Site Features
The subject property consists of 13,730 square feet in area. The existing
home was built in 1954.
Planning
Guide Plan designation:
Zoning:
Building Design
Single -dwelling detached
R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District
The proposal is to extend the garage by an additional 4 feet 2 inches. Finish
materials will match the materials on the home.
Compliance Table
2
City Standard
Proposed
Front -
30.Ofeet
32.323 feet
Side-
10+ height
*5.4 feet
Rear—
25 feet
28.5 feet
Building Height
2 112 stories
2 stories,
35 feet to ride
feet to the ridge
Lot coverage
25%
17.9%
2
* Variance Required
Primary Issues
Is the proposed development reasonable for this site?
Staff questions if the proposal is reasonable:
As of January 1, 2014, the zoning ordinance was amended to require that all
attached garages maintain the underlying side yard setback required based on
lot width. The minimum side yard setback required for a garage in this instance is
10 feet. The existing garage is already nonconforming regarding side yard
setback at 9.4 feet. The request is to bring the garage closer to the side yard,
decrease setback and increase a nonconforming condition.
Is the proposed variance justified?
Per the Zoning Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is
found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical difficulties
in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable.
Section 850.0.Subd., requires the following findings for approval of a
variance:
Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions
must be satisfied affirmatively.
1) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from
complying with ordinance requirements.
Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land
cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the
applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with
the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties"
may include functional and aesthetic concerns.
The garage cannot be expanded without the benefit of a variance given the
recent ordinance amendment. The ordinance was amended to protect adjacent
property by maintaining adequate distances between structures and properties. It
has been determined that a 10 foot setback is adequate protection. The existing
garage is already nonconforming and too close to the side yard.
2) Are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to
every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created?
Circumstances include the nonconforming status of the garage given its
existing location to the side yard which limits design opportunities and the
presence of large back yard open space next door, however, the existing
garage side wall is now already too close to the side yard given the rule
change.
3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood?
The zoning ordinance was amended in part to maintain the integrity and
essential character of a neighborhood. Deeper setback standards were
deemed appropriate to maintain character. The request will compound an
already nonconforming situation.
Staff Recommendation
The zoning ordinance was amended to address mounting concerns regarding the
size, mass, proximity and height of tear-down/rebuilds, (new homes), and
additions to existing homes. The existing garage is already closer to the side
yard than deemed appropriate by the new code and a variance would reduce the
garage side setback even more.
It is difficult for staff to support or recommend approval of a variance from the
recently amended code, (January 1, 2014), that was considered over many
months of public input, thoughtful discussion and that as a result was
intentionally crafted to provide deeper setbacks from side yards to preserve
adequate spacing.
Deadline for a City decision: March 29, 2014.
4
Hardship Letter —1/27/14
Monet Residence — 5212 Duncraig Road, Edina 55436
We purchased the house in the fall of 2006, at which time it needed updating both internally and
externally as it was built in the 1050's and hadn't been updated at all. We have spent the last five years
updating the property In phases. Phase 1 and 2 focused on updating the main level and exterior facelift,
including new window's throughout. During these 2 phases, trying to update and beautify our home we
spent considerable money, $200,000.00 plus. Phase 3 is to be our final remodel and our plans have
always been to stay in the house and continue to support and be engaged in our community. Phase 3,
which we are in the process of securing permits, is why we are writing this letter of hardship as it
pertains to the new property regulations as of 1/1/14.
Phase 3 we have been working on for the last 1.5 years with our contractor, Fred Nordahl, architect, Cad
Gramentz, and various city hall contacts as needed ensuring code and regulations are met. The primary
update to the house, the garage, is now impacted by the new assessment. Our garage at this time is an
undersized 2 stall. We are unable to park our cars adequately, meaning that the driver has to let out the
passengers (including in rain and snow) before parking in the garage. Also, the tight space does not
allow us to store our garbage, yard waste and recycling bins due to limited space when the cars are
parked in the garage.
The new design is to bring our garage up to current standard size by creating a standard sized 2 stall
garage, not a 3 stall. The 4 feet widening will not change the existing hard cover around the garage, as it
Is only being extended out as far as the current hard cover, which are steps going to the backyard. The
land next door is unbuiidable and is laden with trees and shrubs, which divides the lots.
The remainder of the remodel includes transforming the house from a 3 bedroom (2 bedrooms on main
level,1 in basement), with no en suite, to a fully functioning home with all bedrooms on one level
bringing the family together on the same floor.
The last 5 years our lives and love for our home, and community, have revolved around this final phase
in which we'll be updating the garage and creating a home we can take greater pride in. We've spent an
excruciating amount of time ensuring the architecture and design fits in with Edina. Being unable to
Increase the size of the garage will diminish, or eliminate, our ability to complete phase 3 of the
remodel.
Sincerely,
Kevin and Kristi Moliet
l
t.
I
r
�4
a
r'
z
i y
�
i
f
1
w d f i
r +
k
t
p
t
E
r
v: t
Parcel 29-117-21-44-0022
A -T -B:
Abstract
Map Scale:1 200 ft.
IDs
/NN
Print Date: 1/28/2014} -
Owner K M Mollet & K A G Mollet
Market
�gl
w
Name:
Total:
Parcel 5212 Duncraig Rd
Tax
Address: Edina, MN 55436
Total:
(Payable: 2013)
Property
Residential
~
Type:
Type:
Price
This Is a compilation of data from various
source and is furnished "AS IS' with no
Home-
Homestead
Sale
09/2006
representation or warranty expressed or
implied, Including fitness of any particular -
stead:
Date:
purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and
completeness of the information shown.
Parcel 0.32 acres
Sale
warranty Deed
COPYRIGHT® HENNEPIN COUNTY 2014
Area; 13,747 sq ft
Code:
_�
A. t.-
Hennepin County Property Interactive Map
—r
Interactive
Maps --
Find a PID or an address on the map
Welcome
Results
A
Links
Tax information
View oblique ima (I]ing mans)
Sun= documents
About the data
PID: 2911721440022
5212 Duncraig Rd
Edina, MN 55436
OwnedTaxpayer
Owner. K M Mollet & K A G
Mollet
KEVIN M & KRISTI A
Taxpayer. G MOLLET
5212 DUNCRAIG RD
EDINA MN 55436
Tax District
School Dist: 273
Sewer Dist:
Watershed Dist: 1
P
Parcel Area:
ircei
0.32 acres
13,747 sq ft
Torrens/Abstract:
Abstract
Addition:
Edina Highlands
Lot:
021
Block:
001
Metes & Bounds:
Tax Data (Payable 2013)
Market Value:
Tn4�1 Tavt -..
Legend
Measure
5X 016' 0p?w Ag�
http://gis.co.hennepin.mn.us/proper(y map defa2aspx?pid=2911721440022
Page 1 of 1
2/6/2014
Page 1 of 1
��ao6eoeoo
e��.o 4WY�Ao—
%.
file://ed-ntl .ci.edina.mn.us/citywide/PDSImages/Photos/2911721440022002.JPG 2/6/2014
T -a
�jl
1,
.
t
w r
a
p � . f '
Al ;.e t '
_ J "
_, . a. ��;r`a fi ��. .� .,,�.! a "•, � " — •`^iS
r.
a
. t
;r
,
T ! _
1 i... � - �-,„ ,„•, ya ter,.. `Wn. v-
s 8 � �twY
a}. r
• K .. wvw..ueF
Page i of I
file:l/ed-ntl.ci.edina.mn.us/citywide/PDSlmage Mhotos/2911721440021001 jpg 2/6/2014
Page 1 of 1
Sw molm
Osla. 1 1412:MWPJ&CentalSIWW ndToa
Rom: k Cdfn
Ta
sMdMommyfPlan. �j/�✓�����'��"�'��- JAN 2 8 2014
WY OF EU»
X. Tuesday, January 28, 2014 AOL: FrednordaM
Page 1 of 1
Subj: Mallet
Date: 1/28/201412:45:10 P.M. Central Standard Time
From: frednordahl@aol.com
To: frednordah Oaol.com
Sent from my Phone
�Fope� JAN 2 8 2014
CITY OF EDINA
Tuesday, Januaa y 28, 2014 AOL: Frednordahl
a
aQS 84-47128- E
� 92.15
,
----j_
718.3
i � zza
1 DkCK GFE-957.5
10.5
m
EXISTING a
l i HOUSE V
I 1
28.5�- 2.8f
I °1
� I
f
r r
ti
Co
r ' ,�.cr
2�KJX9� I
x
SO X°gip
S800
6
PLAN" G RTI 1151 rt
JAN Z 2014
CfiY OF EDINA
v N
M N
Q� +
r�i� pdditiw+�
DRIVE / 40
I 24.4 s5l a
s�
.� p
X
VIVO � � y6h 32,3
20 40 80
SCALE IN FEET
N
n
;,x9yg2
X(998.0) = PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION
I �ool1
I 1
- DIRECTION SURFACE DRAINAGE
` \ `•9se
I 066.0
- CANTILEVERED OVERHANG
OHL
= OVERHEAD UTILITY LIFE
k
— GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION
R s i \
— TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION
126"
= LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION
EXISTING _j
HOUSE
"069
BENCyUARK'�
TN�HYD°
ELEV = 959.31
STRUCTURE HARDCOVER
HOUSE = 1900 SF Proposed House 2052 SP
DECK 550 SF
150 ALSTHC
TOTAL = 2300 SF / 16.8%
Proposed Haidwver 2452 SF 17.9 %
LEGAL DESCRPTION:
LOT 21, BLOCK 1, EDINA HIGHLANDS,
HENNEPIN CO., MN.
ADDRESS — 5212 DUNCRAIG ROAD
PID# 29-117-21-44-0022
LOT AREA = 13730 SF/ 0.31 AC
X 25% = 3432 SF STRUCTURE
HC ALLOWED
SURVEY IS SUBJECT TO CHAFE PER
TITLE OR EASEMENT INFORMATION
0
20 40 80
SCALE IN FEET
+00
a EXISTM SPOT ELEVATION.
X(998.0) = PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION
"
- DIRECTION SURFACE DRAINAGE
COH
- CANTILEVERED OVERHANG
OHL
= OVERHEAD UTILITY LIFE
CFE
— GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION
TFE
— TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION
LFE
= LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION
STRUCTURE HARDCOVER
HOUSE = 1900 SF Proposed House 2052 SP
DECK 550 SF
150 ALSTHC
TOTAL = 2300 SF / 16.8%
Proposed Haidwver 2452 SF 17.9 %
LEGAL DESCRPTION:
LOT 21, BLOCK 1, EDINA HIGHLANDS,
HENNEPIN CO., MN.
ADDRESS — 5212 DUNCRAIG ROAD
PID# 29-117-21-44-0022
LOT AREA = 13730 SF/ 0.31 AC
X 25% = 3432 SF STRUCTURE
HC ALLOWED
SURVEY IS SUBJECT TO CHAFE PER
TITLE OR EASEMENT INFORMATION
jjIIIII, nn � -
IVB) � �� _ 77. sa• `•'-�
o
r p
O
g � ,
t.' r
f -
�,� � $� � c�acs®uamrreseii:' - oo�ir�enoaeuwa�,es+aarar.ewiwi -, :� fedl�le!'d2til
0 1 E q e� •�wm+WY{v RVWi1�1�11tlg2aTN�¢tC[- cent
i1 9< 'P O '1 CtlIRRKEFIGROID Z ,piy� 1•{S•2aM
�A .<-IP{�{I� roiu.0 •a.PuTww: Fs•�!i_4:awcao
;` -A �rw.�e�a.r.� n.ansixo-....r•®� �a,..nanrac�t�.
{
//,IV
Ili
j!gih�i,'�
fps
jig HIM
s C
� . i •. of �� � .. ' . � IY t� �i � �
. i6 : . c� • � I i � � � '! . � � . � l,�lCj.���CC- a .� i �. •. � ! . -
Jr
7:s e�per RoR • p i
` 1
rt
it vs>o�Y. w•�r...te
0
:
����,��t�y�
11WE1AEt�
Esvi Ne.•+a
i�is�w�a
CWLtCMSQ(fLdl1A ' CWsfiOLlW�ILamtWWtaIIINA�91t
�Kerm.�w IQWI�tolengGaat
• I
': ssoM�vrimwmW
Wf W9ft�IpA°
muAl�iiiOnl •..
.n'�i
iwwsd+.i
CY
j
Rp(
Mf
JI
r TIM
un
toTvr.
rw4
lit
ii t r
"A ii M11.11 1, 1, 1�
lip
CdWMWCFtWWAWW0M�WADMWW
i7M
We jo kw
9 Or
wx aa.xs .
,es•oi- ,c'1 •.�/: _,_. .._....=_ :. c+o dna+ 7X—s .a ;1 •r, , . bna-i3--SS�/h ... �'r!'O'� . .
e
•on io.rou. .
Q
' � } ;• . i.., - ,...e •r,.s v.... • �! i� » ..:w ti �' -r'i�` � '' � wxomyw� tw»a "'" °.e.r.is '
_ 66 s�roil'—^'i Y. .+ora. +..,w++r.9. -'•.re `; +orris ai.+A•
sr rrry • , uray — — r »• a
' ran�si M ' --__ '�'. �_'•wr° 'ML's _ ... "— .. , , '. arw+�l N M • — � 1 �a — — —
I.•f IN11 ' — � `•✓ L M4 i �rrlL sMWwi ll
u..(�rwA4r..M y •..RLN �' _N y
.I. mom•• na�svn� , r�i�o(y p;i•.
v.. ` �.v»i C»Ns:».» ,i--� • , •• w...y .'.', _ - ..� .'M".u' tt —p 4 — +'at�i�nws�'°ars
I
.. ®»ww 11ry�T.�11I�sY ,s •wn� 'i, • '
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Originator
Meeting Date
Agenda #
Cary Teague
February 12, 2014
VI.C.
Community Development
Director
INFORMATION & BACKGROUND
Project Description
Homestead Partners LLC is proposing to subdivide the properties at 6304 and
6312 Warren Avenue into three lots. (See property location on pages Al A3.)
The existing two homes would be torn down, and three new homes built on the
new lots. (See applicant plans on pages A4 Al2.) To accommodate the request
the following is required:
Preliminary & Final Plat.
The proposal meets all minimum lot size requirements. Within this neighborhood,
the median lot area is 10,116 square feet, median lot depth is 135 feet, and the
median lot width is 75. (See attached median calculations on pages A4—A5.) Lots
1 & 2 would gain access off of 63rd Street and Lot 3 would gain access off of
Warren Avenue.
Surrounding Land Uses
The lots on all sides of the subject properties are single-family homes, zoned
and guided low-density residential. Crosstown Highway 62 is located north of
the site. (See pages Al -A2.)
Existing Site Features
The site is 38,907 square feet in size, relatively flat, and contains two single
family homes that gain access off of Warren Avenue. The site contains two
accessory buildings including a detached garage. All structures would be
removed.
The site also contains a scattering of mature trees around the perimeter and
interior of the site. The applicant proposes to remove 20 interior trees that are
primarily Elm and Ash, with one Oak, Maple and Dogwood. The perimeter
trees would remain. The applicant is proposing to plant a row of 21 six-foot
tall Black Hills Spruce and 32 six-foot tall Techny Arborvitae along the south
and west lot lines to provide screening from the two adjacent homes. (See
pages A3 and Al2.)
Planning
Guide Plan designation:
Zoning:
Lot Dimensions
Single -dwelling residential
R-1, Single -dwelling district
The proposed subdivision meets all lot dimension requirements.
Grading/Drainage and Utilities
The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them generally
acceptable, with a few revisions. First, the sewer line should be extended in
the street, not in the front yard of the private property, as proposed. (See
page A10.) Second, water connections should be made directly from the
street, rather than as proposed, which would run new water lines into the site
across the front yards of the new lots. (See page All 0.) These changes would
minimize impacts to the front yards of the new lots, and allow future
maintenance of the utilities outside of the private property within the right-of-
way. Drainage and utility easements should be adjusted accordingly on the
Final Plat.
Adequate drainage and utility easements are proposed along all other lot
lines. The detailed grading plans and utility connections would be reviewed by
the city engineer at the time of building permit application for each lot.
N
Area_'
Lot Width
Depth
REQUIRED
10,116 s.f.
75 feet
135 feet
Lot 1
12,450 s.f.
91 feet
135 feet
Lot 2
11,970 s.f.
75 feet
160 feet
Lot 3
14,487 s.f.
81 feet
182 feet
The proposed subdivision meets all lot dimension requirements.
Grading/Drainage and Utilities
The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them generally
acceptable, with a few revisions. First, the sewer line should be extended in
the street, not in the front yard of the private property, as proposed. (See
page A10.) Second, water connections should be made directly from the
street, rather than as proposed, which would run new water lines into the site
across the front yards of the new lots. (See page All 0.) These changes would
minimize impacts to the front yards of the new lots, and allow future
maintenance of the utilities outside of the private property within the right-of-
way. Drainage and utility easements should be adjusted accordingly on the
Final Plat.
Adequate drainage and utility easements are proposed along all other lot
lines. The detailed grading plans and utility connections would be reviewed by
the city engineer at the time of building permit application for each lot.
N
Site Access
As shown onpage A6 and in the attached 11 x 17 sheets, there is a restricted
access to 63' Street in favor of MnDOT. This was established as part of the
Crosstown Highway 62. Therefore, MnDOT must approve any access
driveway to 63rd Street. The applicant has requested a release of the
restriction from MnDOT. MnDOT staff has indicated to Edina staff, that they
are agreeable to allowing access and releasing the restriction, if Edina is ok
with access to 63rd Street. (See pages A18 -A19.)
Therefore, as a condition of the Plat approval, a written letter from MnDOT
shall be required stating that they are agreeable to the access. As
demonstrated on page A2, there are several homes on 63rd Street that
already have direct access to 63rd
Park Dedication
As with all subdivision proposals, park dedication is required. Edina City Code
requires a park dedication fee of $5,000 for each additional lot created.
Therefore a park dedication fee of $5,000 would be required.
Primary Issue
• Is the proposed subdivision reasonable for the site?
Yes. Staff believes that the proposed subdivision is reasonable for the
following reasons: -
1. The proposed subdivision meets all minimum zoning ordinance
requirements. As such, the applicant is entitled to subdivide the property.
2. The applicant has submitted a landscape plan to provide year around
screening from the most impacted neighbors to the south and west. A row
of 21, six-foot tall Black Hills Spruce and 32, six-foot tall Techny Arborvitae
are proposed along the south and west lot lines. (See page Al2.)
3. Building pad locations would meet all minimum setback requirements. The
front yard setback requirement for Lot 3 is established by the home to the
south, therefore, a 35 -foot setback is required from the Warren Avenue
right-of-way. (See page A10.)
3
Staff Recommendation
Because the proposed subdivision meets all of Edina's Zoning Ordinance
requirements, recommend that the City Council approve the proposed three lot
subdivision of 6304 and 6312 Warren Avenue for Homestead Partners.
Approval is based on the following findings:
The proposal meets all the required standards and ordinances for a
subdivision.
2. The applicant is proposing to provide year round screening for the existing
homes to the west and south with a row of 21six-foot tall Black Hills
Spruce and 32 six-foot tall Techny Arborvitae along the south and west lot
lines.
3. MnDOT has expressed a willingness to allow access to 63rd Street.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary
approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the
preliminary approval will be void.
2. Park dedication fee of $5,000 must be paid prior to release of the final
plat.
3. Sewer line must be extended in the street, not in the front yard of the
private property. Water connections shall be made directly from the street.
4. Drainage and Utility Easements shall be revised on the Final Plat to reflect
removing the sewer and water lines from the front yards of the three Lots.
The easement along the front lot lines (63rd Street) shall be 10 feet.
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be
submitted:
a. Submit evidence of a Nine Mile Creek Watershed District approval.
The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the
district's requirements.
b. Curb -cut permits must be obtained from the Edina engineering
department.
C. A grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer is
required for each building permit.
4
d. A construction management plan will be required for the
construction of the new homes.
e. Utility hook-ups are subject to review and approval of the city
engineer.
Deadline for a City Decision: May 6, 2013
f
BERTS 1
i - r
pARCYLA
VAkLf Y VIECV R -
63RD ST W
V�JNITING AVE
fir, �.., i- •� _ ....�� � I "
t [ ,
j
y
4
i' 4TWSTW
o� 64TH 5T vw2 rn f
a
00
=tet i
ti
3
M
�
�A,�,.
, �R ` i �,/�.w i. 'iL \ �,� qac. \�$ ��` � 'S•+.\C� �i
�v
apt' j
�a
.dry
;�q, y> ' "'� � '• � , -`� � �� .. 3 W _ _ ,..E "� � ;� � �y�c -�.; .__�.___I
,
llj j s
Parcel 04-116-21-22-0108NMap Scale: 1" 400 fl. N
ID: -116-21-22-0iQ8 A T -B: Abstract
Print Date: 2!4/2014
Owner 3
Name: j
Parcel 6304 Warren Ave
Address: Edina, MN 55439
Property
Type: This map is a compilation of data from various
sources and is fumished "AS IS" with no
Home- representation or warranty expressed or
stead' implied, including fitness of any particular
purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and
completeness of the Intormat on shown.
Parcel 0.59 acres COPYRIGHT HENNEPIN COUNTY 2014
Area: 25,666 sq ft
A Vink Greent
rl
A-3
i' r a" a" �-
..-,veli:..
1ny 13 2M
�'
a':I
a■ P hga r
.s i
—
r =
500 FT. NEIGHBORHOOD EXHIBIT
for.OCarlson
i i
ii
i F
HOMESTEAD PARTNERS, LLC
�
o
r
"}-
i - =
500 FT. NEIGHBORHOOD EXHIBIT
for.OCarlson
HOMESTEAD PARTNERS, LLC
�
McCain
8
�;
�
WYMAN PLACE
owwoeocxra • aa+aoslc • suevcwc
sal ApOW Or, Suri 100, Lino takes, M $5014
Edina, Mhutew a
Phone: 763-484-7900 Fsx: 763.489-7959
F
St
E z )o
;l
•
un iif01
m W3. jgl�,
ow, [-;=! utuj.= 1,
WoMm -W1"XM
WON "M
On mt MY
nic aft "fty—acw
ON an P.R.RkAlmom! pq .. w
,hp.7m ng ON my mw --ANN xo_vft_==r almaxwnx1r,
"Cl oll ant w"txnam;
Lum rw fur
p 7C "%I M
Om Aww.
itn ro : SlAt -n.,Mm suatoommovimmutt wm ful Wo �V-Azvl
m ON m Im-nmAzi 4IrNW no m un --Y—&KW
0 viq on, am -PPRm Rl
I - - "a on tdn
rb ON! fan wn am "a 3LYM ___ ___ __ . 1
OR un
otN an ILWU&nyw
M z ON "Avv*.K 3�Lvzu no OR -In-P&MMMMOMOMI
ON ON m=w%w, 4TU jKLMY aW%lFmQcrr4mcwuw""xq
wat --am,
m "a OR. wit 0" MOO _=A '= NOMMISCOYMM'XVI:
m om WK " -W-A&MV! 1903MAMUMSMIGAINEW vm Go —Y�Awff; "%I;
la. wm "a fulf --w-tA "nAl%W MUMyANOgXMW4W"'!W - MmMuffmovanx
WM ON W0 --W-Wftd*, WW -Q op OT. -W, XMIUMMY
as.: ON on --W-ABO; -4M-VMTh-A%
"no 'M am "N "Wvommmr" VIR to a" ow4op-ppm
9 R = " -==- NO AMMIR
Z T R 0 War m mgwvmwA:wwx-w� Via ON MOO -W-Quo: *PRWVCMEVMCWNX SIXTM
VKI ON "M P-m-mcm. ffll� OR, arm --W-Awe;: AMVI-we lowm"War;
m ON aml "o-i-ving va-mvpmw xmwvnmvl:=, m - a: 'arm --w-Alm! --vowal"gooloO
OUT m POW -*a-wfmmw, *WI"rwlW KVWWM&Vs Val , now MWVCM..KK
NMI Nown. On orn _wp"
om ON P -m -n wa=v=vl an co am Nx,==_
2 8 Out OR SM =2 "n xxuwxmvs:=, an w mmwaa
m ria ro "M i-mimms "W"W"Oft, Off ON, ftGY A.Wp-mflO
an 0*1 W"umu� m ON MY --'~as,
Ow ON am "=Nel OUT ON -AW *19;
ON "M W3."4 , "D "M .0"m
"m MAIM to "tv
MWV-jwmp, mumou"ong VIVT
FOR ON am' .441.1""Nomi NM ON wev pig-% mXXVIfeavvywo"W"W
n"
04 VIA ON am ow ON "a xmuw4mvNocwumwln;
m 0" —YrRmaxi ""-Wc9wwjwmmx P*Mwwl,' Im gar' !
ow MU --wrommosi Out OR -._vF-mRw9i
Ow an m z .-Nim
mufft fm ow wo "My"MRS
fm m 1xv —Vft"Avff! walwaNxIvevornmem ow ru wo wracTIVORWINK""Tal
_W xv: wt,
ON ON an WvRmom: MMZA.* NollmonTIVOMMM I P"W""t I No 1 )*Uavxmmukllxlm":
dom ON an -wh"Assi -mlwww ou *r* Mwp-ww� qwv,
go IN, MCI; -wimalm MOMMOV
-k"R rrfqmwmx m t" mm -n
oia ON ml pmq""ff; POR. -V jo On g; F-XFMVWA AXIOCYAMMAV19*414
to m LN't vmi4ii mommawsrAuvroaRon: far re 0" _WF.Mm --mvqrR ""MaymoluvKINVI;
nn ME pmq"=: Sanmlgv& fro cm an ---yvqmaol -RONAM, -
tYa 091 VIA m an W-w"Wer! 4= M-oxc—loyls
=z weld
Homo
mom
01�
rn artni^i ,�Cl Ift
►� f � / s y� i Z
I m
I I I 1 Irl— • I i
I 1
mix r!, o
cp
IS t3
-Ju-----
1TI1�
IYVi11VItV�YL41"YL.L I c'.IaVV PYVDI AVIV
I1 I 1 A ! a� aatA�m�� p A e • • is �� i �[a fi!�'+�� II
4sp tittllllllllllll#ill i�i��ri� �= iE�
.. �1 1 [fill 1111,11,1111,61.1
lid ����a ��[i't � �a ;• i �l-. Ef!"
a a
E tt i f• It fEij [ •
RL
EE{
•' v.. � = S � aa� I • le I{ � l i�� i ��� a[c i
.. f itE;i • • PRELIM3:MMY PLAT & OMcCcdn Carlson
EXI ma CONDITIONS
HOMESTEAD PARTNERS, LLC
$ S, 525 SSM Av 35 5.
E1iF M•D.INi 55749 o•nsoroYo.n.
Y WY6/AM PLACE 245 ftdo Or. &Jft SOB. Uw U&M MM SM4
W (�Y"'mWesufm Mane: 767-489-7900 Fax: 763.409.7959
4wirrwy � �
mrfwsro
Y�yl1 •YYYMYI
YAA••4Mw�Yt�YYf
!MM•�SWT r � YM�MY�-M Y
4
•4W � rM i M+IY.•r Y111
Y
f
II
r 1
1*00 Dual
r �--
a� Yaw " LVS-TV 1 1 — • �. 1 • ^?
9 Yid
d 1Y�01/d4ALy)Np�,VD61 1 t 1 I
•+9�G�nrri.rrux . mvA v Him MMi4tlCt �' I 1 I ' f f .'.+.,,��, ,•
i7 M � 1 ' � 1 � � Y•
` e
•u a _+io1i
uwol�s ewa�wzl�r
g iOnmw s l ♦ Y
livi UR
(AM3N 60{1) ffC It! kill A�
O'KY 'AM
Mv� raw Trig MOLL YiIYM
Met z TWIY9 0 n 01 AM
V EMOM= � eKsl'��'
yl i8 m".
mm
� ..� � irtlewlOdd awlw — aMranew
. .
.s
PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN Cad=
i HOMESTEAD PARTNERS, LLC 0 McCcd ■
j (i 52515N Anenw 5.
Nopkim, MN SS343 wrwwoov.�.vwmw.awxs�w
►+ �:tt WYNAN PLACE
248 Aa060 D , s� IM, Lke LM&M MN SM4
Phare: 763-169-7900 �7634W7M
11 \
00
p
—
I It
I L
- c
--------
� J
_
1�tjJ
♦ ;
i
WARREN AVE
qy
� v
.s
PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN Cad=
i HOMESTEAD PARTNERS, LLC 0 McCcd ■
j (i 52515N Anenw 5.
Nopkim, MN SS343 wrwwoov.�.vwmw.awxs�w
►+ �:tt WYNAN PLACE
248 Aa060 D , s� IM, Lke LM&M MN SM4
Phare: 763-169-7900 �7634W7M
""-GWM mbj ooso-ser•tgc :watai eia
*TOSS MNsom mm 1.10 MWOO MVJO r 3OVld MVWAM is1 °A
,P/ ON 's snwnr vac sss #ia g
�AlairV+I,hI+0MV7d1ON MOD �ll'SV3MlaVd OV31SHMOH a '
fll
11111 R h + M
1 1 111• (} �� � `•• ! 8 �4'j��
>' bat
a
�r
all
N1
�•
`I is ill, 3AV N32 W/AXJ
, \
/ •'_ _° I 5
-- • , oil
SY g
1
a i 1" dx
y
--------------
� 0 a
S 00
1It
0
It . _ • o0 p
a •'° • i\1 000 i $
O
Li
All1 Y R II
a"IDNLL1ga
�i
1
i
I
7i
i I
YN
•S1�f18-Stl
i Y
,
I t• j I
A113 aid N#MW StMV301
NU) 301Aa3S
a31tlM 8 MNM 0Nl1 M
1
�$
I I
iti
I I
PM
IN
I I
I I
am NI
NOL03SS 13MdS ::3
30tlldda $ 3AOVM
I �
l
•
T t
dtll 13NI
.x" .9
1
'X3
iJ W3A aM) L•£•L£6 AM
0'9£6 'AM
1tl3S 1N9LL VXVIA
i
j
��, �-�•
TNISNI 8 TMW 3a00
M 'X3 01 103NNOO
rm aw
a"IDNLL1ga
�i
gym''
r
00
1 c
I l ,�/ I
GRADING PLAN LOT KEY
4- -- 1
5 U
e
:Zill ! .— —
D
R3 5"•_
_ 6 Inc
INFILTRATION BASIN
X NUMBER ----- O MM mix Touaw OF
wimm ----C—N---
t } RWiI
MKCRB PR-RAANT WW -3
Ro—�LommT
AWT �5� T►i ',
Wsm Bim. C"Tm ON _
7O7i ORCMIIC IEAf CO�AMOST. summ — To E &MWT BOTM m MTBTO WA &M
> aro BIICIMUO MM OR71TC ORJNUtAIt TMTiRIALf
Q STREET iME W. E qAW E:4, MOT BE COMrAC7EO.
---""-- -"--- M0QIFIED LOOKOUT
e Mo $CMd _ 4 BnAeT' BACJfSJ.
v
"79v&
TURF ESTABLISHMENT "MT SETOAOO ICOMPACM BACOU
TREE REMOVED
(TYP.)
GRAVEL CONSTRUCrON
ENTRANCE
$am wavit
09 I
P1 a I X1
All I Ji
Boa 1g goP
NX .
Ic
i
r
4c
A01
i
,a
d9d,
a
tf
S 6 e $
♦i V k; a-v� _vr,'�' w 1 fi5 � s � � ♦� K � �
,� � � 7•t r � a r� .+ - a `� v n ,�: s a Lfi
�.__q��c1,,�gpA���,y •a•�•. "1� .fid.. `� fa�>.A ° �` i4. _ 6�,• ysC$ � �
'W
6
a
e
r.
rr §
rp✓' �!� `CCI �..a:.a,.a, �+� ^a' e. s� •'�. ♦,q�� �. G ¢, ' f i
i
4 � �
t'� ,.+bid �►'"{� � r�`y:� ya'`'1.- �� taa.., ,✓� ��
wee rr
�:�
tiVia,,: �- /r �! , � lYQ '�,Y w , s ► �t rr�.� li S,. �...
�t8lc.�zj
fi ``
�t
�A
`
� s
y, air d rr ,
$T 4 d
IN
f
r{4;
& r a
Al
Liu
Al
{
W Y �
QN
r, 4 rt S y
i. f
k. gg p
iJ' sa ►al�y'FFF�Y�� i� �. r^%' fs �y ��"�r�x AFF �� + r,
tO
V#
7 ,
,�+ ♦ter { v _ � '��4';i^�w°�.`... � �}f � # .' 4
U-��
til
5,R b z }
f >•�P.A4ri /0�'��' \\M r X rfi.it
JA
t"z �J' # o ��� +P'�k;' '✓ ` %" # q x { ,' `'
s:
t+. 4 +
A
¢y ff
Jackie Hoogenakker
From: Sherman, Tod (DOT) <Tod.Sherman@state.mn.us>
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 4:59 PM
To: Stephen Bona
Cc: Chad Millner; Kautz, Tiffany (DOT); Craig, E.Buck (DOT); Jackie Hoogenakker
Subject: RE: Turnback request on 63rd St at TH 62 and Wyman Ave
Stephen:
I'm just saying that since we're well into the process of turning back the right-of-way to the City, that it would be the
City's call whether you're allowed access onto the road or not. You will not need a MnDOT access permit.
Thanks, Tod
Tod Shermany.Planning Supervisor
Mn/DOT Metro District
1500 W. County Road B-2
Roseville, MN 55113
(651) 234-7794
tod.sherma n0state.mm us
From: Stephen Bona [mailto•stephen bona@gmall com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 3:47 PM
To: Sherman, Tod (DOT)
Cc: cmillner(abEdinaMN.gov; Kautz, Tiffany (DOT)
Subject: RE: Turnback request on 63rd St at TH 62 and Wyman Ave
Todd,
Thanks for the clarification. I'm just trying to get a better understanding of when I can build driveways onto 63rd street.
Tiffany's letter states that since the turnback process has been initiated, MNDOT is potentially willing to allow access to
63rd street at this location. Does this mean that following your review of the plans, we will be able to access the road?
Any further explanation would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Steve
Stephen A. Bona
Homestead Partners
651-271-4951
From: Sherman, Tod (DOT)[mailto•Tod.Sherman@state.mn.usl
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 2:50 PM
To: Stephen Bona
Cc: Craig, E.Buck (DOT); Kautz, Tiffany (DOT)
Subject: RE: Turnback request on 63rd St at TH 62 and Wyman Ave
Stephen:
A I Zl
I was talking with our permits people and you will not be going through MnDOT for the access permit. We are in the
process of transferring the right-of-way to the City, so the permit will come from the City. Sorry for the confusion.
Tod
Tod Sherman, Planning Supervisor
Mn/DOT Metro District
1500 W. County Road B-2
Roseville, MN 55113
(651) 234-7794
tod.shermanostate.mn.us
From: Stephen Bona [mailto:stephen.bonaCagmaif com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 8:30 AM
To: Sherman, Tod (DOT)
Subject: RE: Turnback request on 63rd St at TH 62 and Wyman Ave
Todd — I'll watch for your letter on 2/12 and plan to apply for an access permit shortly thereafter. As I mentioned, our
current platting schedule with the city of Edina allows for home construction to begin in March/April. I would like to
complete the MNDOT process, so I can stay on this schedule. Per our conversation, you mentioned that this was
reasonable.
Please let me know if you need any further information from me.
Thank you,
Steve
Stephen A. Bona
Homestead Partners
651-271-4951
From: Kautz, Tiffany (DOT) [mailto:tiffany.kautz(alstate mn us]
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 4:59 PM
To: cmillner(&EdinaMN.gov
Cc: Anderson, Debra (DOT); Crocker, Keith (DOT); Sherman, Tod (DOT); Stephen Bona (stephen.bona(a gmail.com)
Subject: Turnback request on 63rd St at TH 62 and Wyman Ave
Hi Chad.
Attached is an electronic copy of the letter regarding the City of Edina's turnback request on 63`d St at TH 62 and Wyman
Ave. The hard copy is being sent via US mail.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Thanks,
Tiffa ny
Tiffany Kautz, PE
Metro District Right -of -Way
Anoka, Chisago and Washington Counties
NIS
CITY OF EDINA MEMO
1NA.
City Hall - Phone 952-927-8861—��
Fax 952-826-0389 - www.CiWAdina.com
Date: February 12, 2014
To: Planning Commission
From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director
Re: Sketch Plan Review - 5100 Edina Industrial Boulevard
The Planning Commission is asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to tear down the
existing 20,388 square foot office building at 5100 Edina Industrial Boulevard and build a
new 16,000 square foot retail building with a drive-through on the north end of the
building. (See location on pages Al A3 and the applicant narrative and plans on pages.
A4 -A7.)
To accommodate the request, the following would be required:
1. A Rezoning from POD, Planned Office District -1, to PCD -2, Planned Commercial
District -2 or PUD, Planned Unit Development.
2. A Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Neighborhood
Commercial.
The property is located just west of Highway 100 and is located across the street from
retail uses that are zoned PCD -2, Planned Commercial District. Uses include the Shell
gas station, Burger King, and a small retail strip center. North and west of the site are
office/light industrial uses. (See the Zoning for the area on page A8, and the
Comprehensive Plan designations for the area on pages Ag -A11.) The proposed use of
the property would be consistent with the existing land uses to the south.
This property is located within an area of the City that is designated as a "Potential Area
of Change" within the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. (See page A11.) The Comprehensive
Plan states that within the Potential Areas of Change, "A development proposal that
involves a Comprehensive Plan Amendment or a rezoning will require a Small Area Plan
study prior to planning application. However, the authority to initiate a Small Area Plan
rests with the City Council." The City Council did not recommend a Small Area Plan as
part of a recent Sketch Plan of the site to the west.
City of Edina - 4801 W. 50th St. - Edina, MN 55424
MEMO
The following is a compliance table demonstrating how the proposed building complies
with the PCD -2 Zoning Ordinance Standards.
Compliance Table
varrarrmw rtiyurreu
Comprehensive Pian Inconsistency
The site is guided for Office Uses in the Comprehensive Plan. The above mentioned
Commercial sites located south of the subject property, are guided for Industrial use,
therefore, they are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (Page A9.) If the
applicant pursues a Comprehensive Pian amendment, staff would also recommend that
these Commercial sites also be included for consideration of a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to Neighborhood Commercial to bring the existing uses into compliance.
Additional Identified Issues
Staff would highlight the following issues for discussion:
➢ Develop a site plan with the property to the west, which is also in for
consideration of a sketch plan for redevelopment. A unified site plan with cross -
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St - Edina, MN 55424
City, Standard (PCD -2}
PropQ'ses! ,
(E�istng)
Building Setbacks
Front — Edina Ind. Blvd
35 feet
12 feet*
Front — Highway 100
35 feet
15 feet*
Rear — North
25 feet
25+ feet
Side — North
25 feet
50 & 40 feet
Building Height
4 stories
1 story
Maximum Floor Area
1.5%
.30%
Ratio (FAR)
Parking Stalls (Site)
97
75*
Parking Stall Setbacks
20'& 10'
20'& 51*
Drive Aisle Width
24 feet
24 feet
varrarrmw rtiyurreu
Comprehensive Pian Inconsistency
The site is guided for Office Uses in the Comprehensive Plan. The above mentioned
Commercial sites located south of the subject property, are guided for Industrial use,
therefore, they are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (Page A9.) If the
applicant pursues a Comprehensive Pian amendment, staff would also recommend that
these Commercial sites also be included for consideration of a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to Neighborhood Commercial to bring the existing uses into compliance.
Additional Identified Issues
Staff would highlight the following issues for discussion:
➢ Develop a site plan with the property to the west, which is also in for
consideration of a sketch plan for redevelopment. A unified site plan with cross -
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St - Edina, MN 55424
MEMO
access easements could provide for better site circulation and access to Edina
Industrial Boulevard and Metro Boulevard. Consideration of one entrance onto
Edina Industrial Boulevard between the two sites to align with the westernmost
Shell Gas Station entrance. (See page A3.)
Traffic/Parking
A traffic/circulation and parking study would need to be completed to determine impacts
on adjacent roadways.
City of Edina » 4801 W. 50th St. » Edina, MN 55424
m
E
333 washinpton Avenue North. Suhe 210, Union Plaza, Minneapolis. MN 85401
T. 812.8762700 F: 612.876.2796 www.dir-inc.com
January 24, 2014
Cary Teague, Planning Director
Planning Department
Edina City Hall
4801 W. 50th St.
Edina, MN 55424
Project: Retail Redevelopment
Location: 5100 Edina Industrial Boulevard
Subject: Sketch Pian Narrative
Proposed Redevelopment:
This presentation for Sketch Plan Review is a conceptual design for the redevelopment of the site at 5100
Edina Industrial Boulevard. The proposal is to demolish the existing office building and associated parking
and construct an approximately 16,000 SF retail development with site improvements.
City and Neighborhood Betterment:
The proposed redevelopment of this parcel from office to retail uses will benefit the city and area
surrounding the project in the following ways:
■ Provide convenient retail establishments to the industrial and office uses in the area.
■ Locates parking behind and to the side of the building creating better visual environment for
vehicular and pedestrian traffic
■ Improve the site with more vibrant uses and an attractive building
■ Create a greener and more environmentally friendly development improving storm water rates and
quality through storm water retention and rain gardens or vegetated swales.
■ Provides small scale neighborhood serving retail.
• Add new businesses to the Edina tax base.
PUD:
The project proposes to change the zoning of the site from POD -1 to a PUD using the PCD -2 as a basis for
the zoning entitlements. The application for a PUD for this site a based largely around siting the building
appropriately to locate the parking to the side and rear of the building and bring the building toward the
front of the site. With typical PCD -2 parking setbacks, the building setbacks of 35 feet for front yard set
backs and 25 feet for side and rear yard setbacks make it impossible to site the building effectively on the
site due to its relatively narrow parcel dimensions. The lot width is only 148 feet and in order to meet the
setback requirements, a typical 60 feet deep retail building would have to be located in the middle with the
parking circling around it in order to fulfill the setback requirements.
In order to maintain some of the trees along the eastern edge of the property, we propose a 15 feet
setback along that side and a 12 foot setback at the south side and maintaining a 5 feet landscape buffer
on the north and west property lines.
hT
5100 Edina Industrial Boulevard — Sketch Plan Review Narrative
The properties to the south, across Edina Industrial Boulevard are currently zoned PCD -2 and these uses
at this site are advantageous as they provide retail conveniences for the adjacent industrial and office
developments with visibility along the Highway 100 corridor. According to the current comprehensive plan
land use section, this site is identified as an "I" industrial designation which does allow limited retail use.
In concert with the uses relative to a PCD -2 designation, the project proposal includes a single drive
through at the rear of the site. Locating it in this position screens it from Edina Industrial Boulevard limiting
its visual impact and providing the appropriate number of stacking spaces.
We believe the redevelopment of this site would be an improvement for the city and one that will enhance
the character of the area, but also the city itself.
Sincerely,
Sheldon Berg, AIA
Principal
Cc: Adam Seraphine, NHH Properties
PAdjr-arch120131113-0102.0 - NHH - Edina Industrial Blvd RetailMordOesignVoning & Planning\5100 Edina Industrial Blvd - Sketch Plan
Narrative.doc
l T
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
DRIVETHRU
ESCAPELANE
5'-0" LANDSCAPE
BUFFER
15'-0' SETBACK
12'-0"SETBACK
MONUMENT
SIGN
VV1
Arjowgcmnm.
of Edina
FFIitu >rar. rxv
anMi sY,il ,SM M,I FN 7lar' list TIMM
>H �:. j
Or SrM fM0 ,MY 7M, ,Ml7i%LMLI
fw, Jlet rrer ,ML Ten urf
i,Yy,NI iii/
,Jig ML rat fpr pJ,
LwJ
,fl
out
(ID am
an
am„!J m am
Woss"ad J/!f Mit Jfq
,flaWi s
Or*
flat
�• Nl�ir
Y.n..rdbq N.rss N�awMr
tab.►.
No.s. Number L.bsls
wMeEpms &awls
,JbrLb b
n/ cw&As
❑La,sNamn
0 t*.
El PMNs
PON”
ApIJNq.1alhLq JMGII
MLYdMvtC�s7l/.gtC�iQ
YJOdpY.,iwh►�n1YaRnl
YLO•L(NpYNYgaelOtlYq
/CJd (rbYMCssri.ffd1iy
fCJdIIuMNCM.rddtaWl
LCJOLtaaLCeeaiisi4W
�CP�IIeetNCo�ndY�iW I
Mlwu.iLwesrYa�bl
JJadlrawiareer'ar
• ,00•zIY.wLOYaoNvW
,Ysd t{waJYi:orrJ:rkl
p0.tp.wL�pW..wwWy
M9dpwdMlyASJsNI+I
, W ��tqq IInYaRilO/del
IY,dNNY{J4als,liiflsi.l
gsaplwrLJnMJWq
IWJLgr4�,Ms.0
adN..sYs..avww
IYaMawwrJe:rW
n Parcels
w!#1
1
�Ibs.liueuujRylMftll
Oq.ort Ruippt
-w•A.ryulwta
IPAi-RANOM 1rtiA0NRNIATd 0.OMN
IM-4e0.w0uNMRU1pN/
Ott- O.A, '
ROArRplogFrWSR
-ate.m., 4.0r1u
Ath hYYCu.IM1Ah
tK.CNa2iftAyttppy
IbA.(py�IN�y1Nl>Iwj
-W-pNMWURRuwILt
-uNMWi
+9 11� � JSI 3
it 314;
City of Edina
2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
nate Sawce: URS
Eoina Comp Plan Update 2008
Chapter 4: Land Use and Community Design
12
'.t
t.:
Moue Ata
Future Land Use plan
L'f o� os,�es
4-25
Nonresideptial and
1) s-kdption, latid Uses.
Develgpment ,
Density
Mixed Use
Guidelinesdelirtes
Cate oMes
MXC
Established or emerging mixed
Maintain existing, or
Mixed -Use. Center
use districts serving areas larger
create new,
Floor to Area
Current examples:
than one notghborhood (and
pgiestrian and
'streetseape
Rano-Per
• S& and France
beyond city boundaries).
Primary uses: Retail, office,
amenities; encourage
current
Zoning Code,
• Grandview
service, multifatntty residential,
or require structured
maximum of
trlstitiitipiial uses, paries and
parking. Buildings
1.5
open space.
"step down" in Height
from intersections.
1.2
Vertical mixed use should be
4 stories at 50 A
units/acre
encouraged, and may be
required on larger sites.
France; 3-6 stories At
Grandview
CAC
The most intense district in
Form -based dosign-
Coinmunity Activity
terms of "uses, height and
standards for building
Floor to Area
Center
coverage.
Placement, massing
Ratio -Per
Example: Greater
Primary uses: Retail, office,
l Vnif, entertainment and
and street -level.
treatment.
current
Zonin Code:
g
Southdate area (not
including large multi-
residential uses, combined or in
Buildings should be
tnaicimum of
family residential
separate buildings.
placed in appropriate
b.5 to. I&
neighborhoods such
Secondary uses: Institutional,
proximity to streets to
create pedestrian
2-3
units/acre
as Centennial lakes)
recreational uses.
scale. Buildings "step
Mixed use should be encouraged,
down" at .boundaries
and may be required on larger
with tower -density
sites,
districts and upper
stories "step back"
from street.
More stringent design
standards for
buildings > 5 stories,
EImphaslze pedestrian
circulation; re-
introduce finer-
graltied circulation
Patterns where
t
feasible.
i
dppiies to existing predominantly ominantly
Performance
Industrial
industrial areas within the City.
Primary use$: industrial,
standards to ensure
compatibility with
Floor to Area
-
manufacturing.. Secondary uses:
adjacent uses;
Ratio: Pei
Zoning Code;
limited retail and service uses.
screening of outdoor
0.S*
activities,
Edina Comp Plan Update RQOO
Uhapter 4-- Land Use and Community peslyit
4-29
I
JANA
n,
ment
* Fax 952-826-0390 - www.EdinaMN.gov o e 6 « �
0
Date: February I Z 2014
To: Planting Commission
ca Cary Teague, Planning Director
From: Bill Neuendorf
Economic Development Manager
Re: Creation of Pentagon Park Tax increment Financing (TIF) District and
Modifications to SouthEast Edina Redevelopment Project Area
BACKGROUND
The Edina City Council directed staff to prepare documentation and schedule a Public Hearing regarding the possible
establishment of new Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District to support redevelopment of the Pentagon Park properties.
The owner of the Pentagon Park properties anticipates significant redevelopment activities on the 40 -acre site to create
properties that are desirable and relevant in the 2Vt century marketplace. While not fully defined at this time, the
anticipated project is likely to include complete reconstruction of the commercial buildings as well as a variety of public
improvements to ensure that the final project is desirable to the broader community. The future project is anticipated to
not only contribute to the City's tax base but also to provide opportunities that enhance the quality of life in Edina.
Creation of a new TIF District will also require that the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area be modified to
identify the new TIF District. This Redevelopment Project Area is modified from time -to -time to ensure that the City's
broad redevelopment goals are actively addressed. This Project Area was last updated in 2012 when the City created the
Southdale 2 TIF District.
There are several steps in the process of creating a new TIF District. In addition to consulting with other governmental
agencies with taxing authority, input is solicited from the Plan Commission to ensure that the redevelopment plans are
consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
SUMMARY
The City retained LHB, Inc, to inspect the existing buildings to determine whether they meet the legal standards for
inclusion In a TIF District. Their findings indicate that the proposed District satisfies the requirements for creation of a 26 -
year TIF Redevelopment District. A copy of the Inspection Report (dated January 13, 2014) is attached and will be
included as part of the final TIF Plan.
The City also retained Ehlers & Associates to prepare the TIF Plan and necessary modifications to the Redevelopment
Project Area. The attached memo describes the broad goals of the proposed TIF Plan.
City of Edina - 4801 W. 50th St. - Edina, MN 55424
The proposed TIF Plan does not contemplate any modifications to the City's Land Use Plan within the Comprehensive
Plan. Therefore, the TIF Plan and Redevelopment Plan modifications would be compliant with Edina's Comprehensive
Plan.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning Commission is asked to adopt the attach Resolution finding that the proposed TIF Plan and modifications to
the Redevelopment Plan conforms to the general plans for development and redevelopment of the City.
C. Plan Commission Resolution B-14-2
City Council Resolution 2013-126 (Scheduling Public Hearing)
Ehlers memo dated 2-5-2014
Ehlers draft report dated 2-4-2014
LHB report dated 1-13-2014
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. B-14-2
FINDING THAT A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND A TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE PENTAGON PARK TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT CONFORM TO THE GENERAL PLANS
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY.
WHEREAS, the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA") and the City of Edina
(the "City") have proposed to adopt a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina
Redevelopment Project Area (the "Redevelopment Plan Modification") and a Tax Increment Financing
Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District (the "TIF Plan") and;
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan (collectively herein referred to
as the "Plans") have been submitted to the Edina Planning Commission (the "Commission") pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subd. 3, and
WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the Plans to determine their conformity with the general
plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as described in the comprehensive plan for the
City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina Planning Commission that the Plans conform
to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City of Edina as a whole.
Dated: February 12, 2014
Chair
ATTEST:
Secretary
RESOLUTION 2013-126
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON
MODIFICATIONS TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTHEAST
EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND ON TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING PLAN ESTABLISHING A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
BE 1T RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows;
1. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Edina, Minnesota
(the "HRA") has proposed that the HRA and the City consider approving modifications to the
Redevelopment Plan for the -Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area, raid a tax increment
fmanoing plan establishing the Pentagon Park Tax Increment District (the "TIFF Plan").
2. A public hearing on the proposed modifications to the Redevelopment Plan for the
Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and on the TIF Plan is hereby called and shall be
held on February 18, 2014 at 7:00 o'clock p,m. in the City Council Chambers at the Edina City
Hall. The City Clerk shall cause notice of the public hearing to be published in the official
newspaper of the City at least once- not less than ten (10) days or more fan thirty (3 0) days prior
to the date fixed for the public hearing.
Adopted by the Edina City Council this 3rd day of December, 2013.
tt • 0jd)V,4
A est.
Debra A. Mangen, City Cle(--)
James 1B, Rovland, Mayor
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424
wwwEdinaMN.gov 952-927-8861 . Fax 952-826-0390
LL
4/1
mop
O
H N
3
i ;!l�111��11•
oot"I ON HI
V
r
N p
V '^
OC!
tnw
tAm°
w
W
m
m z
o
As of February 4, 2014
Draft for Planning Commission
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan
for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area
and the
Tax Increment Financing Plan
for the establishment of
the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District
(a redevelopment district)
within the
Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
City of Edina
Hennepin County
State of Minnesota
Public Hearing: February 18, 2014
Adopted:
EHLERS
Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105
651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehlers-inc.com
Table of Contents
(for reference purposes only)
Section 1 - Modification to the Redevelopment Plan
for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area ........................... 1-1
Foreword............................................................. 1-1
Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan
for the Pentagon
Park Tax Increment Financing District .........................
2-1
Subsection 2-1.
Foreword ...............................................
2-1
Subsection 2-2.
Statutory Authority ........................................
2-1
Subsection 2-3.
Statement of Objectives ...................................
2-1
Subsection 2-4.
Redevelopment Plan Overview ..............................
2-1
Subsection 2-5.
Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired .
2-2
Subsection 2-6.
Classification of the District .................................
2-2
Subsection 2-7.
Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District ...........
2-4
Subsection 2-8.
Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured
Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification
of Prior Planned Improvements ..............................
2-4
Subsection 2-9.
Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued ......................
2-6
Subsection 2-10.
Uses of Funds ...........................................
2-7
Subsection 2-11.
Fiscal Disparities Election ..................................
2-7
Subsection 2-12.
Business Subsidies .......................................
2-8
Subsection 2-13.
County Road Costs .......................................
2-9
Subsection 2-14.
Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions .................
2-9
Subsection 2-15.
Supporting Documentation ................................
2-12
Subsection 2-16.
Definition of Tax Increment Revenues .......................
2-12
Subsection 2-17.
Modifications to the District ................................
2-13
Subsection 2-18.
Administrative Expenses ..................................
2-13
Subsection 2-19.
Limitation of Increment ...................................
2-14
Subsection 2-20.
Use of Tax Increment ....................................
2-15
Subsection 2-21.
Excess Increments ......................................
2-15
Subsection 2-22.
Requirements for Agreements with the Developer ..............
2-16
Subsection 2-23.
Assessment Agreements .................................
2-16
Subsection 2-24.
Administration of the District ...............................
2-16
Subsection 2-25.
Annual Disclosure Requirements ...........................
2-16
Subsection 2-26.
Reasonable Expectations .................................
2-18
Subsection 2-27.
Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment .................
2-18
Subsection 2-28.
Summary ..............................................
2-19
Appendix A
Project Description
......................................................
A-1
Appendix B
Maps of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and the District .......... B-1
Appendix C
Description of Property to be Included in the District ............................ C-1
Appendix D
Estimated Cash Flow for the District ........................................ D-1
Appendix E
Minnesota Business Assistance Form ....................................... E-1
Appendix F
Redevelopment Qualifications for the District .................................. F-1
Appendix G
Findings Including But/For Qualifications ..................................... G-1
Appendix H
Building Permits........................................................ H-1
Section 9 - Modification to the Redevelopment Plan
for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area
Foreword
The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina
Redevelopment Project Area. This modification represents a continuation ofthe goals and objectives set forth
in the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. Generally, the substantive
changes include the establishment of Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District.
For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project
Area is recommended. It is available from the City Manager at the City of Edina. Other relevant information
is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within
the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area.
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area 1-1
Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan
for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District
Subsection 2-1. Foreword
The Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), the City of Edina (the "City"), staff and
consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of the Pentagon Park Tax
Increment Financing District (the "District"), a redevelopment tax increment financing district, located in the
Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area.
Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority
Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or
redevelopment to occur. To this end, the HRA and City have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes ("MV9, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, inclusive, as amended, and MS., Sections 469.174 to
469.1794, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act"), to assist in financing
public costs related to this project.
This section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the District. Other relevant
information is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Edina
Redevelopment Project Area.
Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives
The District currently consists of sixteen parcels of land and adjacent and internal rights-of-way. The District
is being created to facilitate the multi -phase construction of several hundred thousand square feet of new
office space, adjacent public improvements, and other conunercial development including, potentially, a
hotel in the City. Please see Appendix A for further District information. The HRA is in the process of
negotiating an agreement with Hillcrest Development, and development is likely to occur in 2016. This TIF
Plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast
Edina Redevelopment Project Area.
The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan do not preclude
the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated
to occur over the life of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and the District.
Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview
1. Property to be Acquired - Selected property located within the District may be acquired by
the HRA or City and is further described in this TIF Plan.
2. Relocation - Relocation services, to the extent required by law, are available pursuant to
M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws.
3. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary
legal requirements, the HRA or City may sell to a developer selected properties that it may
acquire within the District or may lease land or facilities to a developer.
4. The HRA or City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction,
relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District.
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-1
Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired
The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the
parcels listed in Appendix C ofthis TIF Plan. Please also see the map in Appendix B for further information
on the location of the District.
The HRA or City may acquire any parcel within the District including interior and adjacent street rights of
way. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the HRA or City only in order to
accomplish one or more of the following: storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets,
utilities and facilities; carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to
accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The HRA or City may acquire property by gift,
dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in orderto achieve the objectives of this TIF
Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance offunding to finance the acquisition
and related costs.
Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District
The HRA and City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with
M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, as amended, inclusive, find that the District, to be established, is a
redevelopment district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Suubd. 10(x)(1) as defined below:
(a)"Redeveloprnentdistr•ict"meansatypeoftaxincrementfrnarlcingdistrictconsistingofaproject,
or portions of a project within which the authority finds by resolution that one or more of the
following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists:
(1) parcels consisting of70percent of the area in the district are occupied by buildings, streets,
utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and more than S0 percent
of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree
requiring substantial renovation or clearance,-
(2)
learance,
(2) The property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently
used rail yards, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way;
(3) tankfacilities,orpropertyii,hoseinrmediatelyprevioususe wasfortankfacilities,asdefined
in Section 115C, Subd 15, if the tank facility:
(i) have or had a capacity of more than one million gallons;
(ii) are located adjacent to rail facilities; or
(iii) have been removed, or are unused, underused, inappropriately used or infrequently
used; or
(4) a quali,ing disaster area, as defined in Subd 10b.
(b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in
structun-al elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and
ventilation, frreprotection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions,
or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify
substantial renovation or clearance.
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-2
(c) A building is not st-ucturallysubstandard ifit is in compliance with the building code applicable
to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15
percent of the cost of constructing a netiv structure of the sarne square footage and type on the
site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurallysubstandard
under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size,
type, and age of the building, the average cost of plt nibing, electrical, or structural repairs or
other similar reliable evidence. The municipality rrra), not make such a determination without
an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal
prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the
property is not required, if the nnrnicipalityfrnds that (1) the rrrunicipality or authority is unable
to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that
owns or controls theproperty; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion
that the building is structurally substandard.
(d) A parcel is deemed to be occupied by a structurally substandard building for purposes of the
finding tinder paragraph (a) or by the improvement described in paragraph (e) if all of the
following conditions are net:
(1) the parcel was occupied by a substandard building or met the requirements of paragraph
(e), as the case may be, within three years of the filing of the request for certification of the
parcel as part of the district with the county auditor;
(2) the substandard building or the improvements described in paragraph (e) were demolished
or removed by the authori4, or the demolition or removal was financed by the authority or
was done by a developer under a development agreement with the authority;
(3) the authority found by resolution before the demolition or removal that the parcel was
occupied by astructurally substandard building or met the requirement ofparagraph (e) and
that after demolition and clearance the authority intended to include the parcel within a
district; and
(4) upon filing the request for certification of the tax capacity of theparcel as part of a district,
the authority notifies the county auditor that the original tax capacity of theparcel must be
adjusted as provided by § 469.177, subdivision 1, paragraph (fl.
(e) Forpurposes poses of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved
or gravel parking lots or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel
contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures.
(1) For, districts consisting of tivo or more noncontiguous areas, each area roust qutalify as a
redevelopment district under paragraph (a) to be included in the district, and the entire area of
the district nnrst satisfy paragraph (a).
In meeting the statutory criteria the HRA and City rely on the following facts and findings:
• The District is a redevelopment district consisting of sixteen parcels.
• An inventory shows that parcels consisting of more than 70 percent of the area in the District are
occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures.
• An inspection of the buildings located within the District finds that more than 50 percent of the buildings
are structurally substandard as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix F).
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2_3
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 7, the District does not contain any parcel or part of a parcel that
qualified under the provisions of M.S., Sections 273.111 or 273.112 or Chapter 473H for taxes payable in
any of the five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification of the District.
Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Szzbd. ],and Section 469.176, Szrbd. 1, the duration and first year of tax
increment ofthe District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.176, Szrbd. 1b.,
the duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the HRA or City (a total of
26 years of tax increment). The HRA or City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2018, which is no
later than four years following the year of approval of the District. Thus, it is estimated that the District,
including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after
2043, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The HRA or City reserves the right to decertify the District prior to
the legally required date.
Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity
Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements
Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.174, Szrbd 7 and M S., Section 469.177, Szrbd.1, the Original Net Tax Capacity
(ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor
in 2013 for taxes payable 2014.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning
in the payment year 2018) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of:
1. Change in tax exempt status of property;
2. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district;
3. Change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements;
4. Change in the use of the property and classification;
5. Change in state law governing class rates; or
6. Change in previously issued building permits.
In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTO, no
value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the HRA or City.
The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2014, assuming the
request for certification is made before June 30, 2014. The ONTC and the Original Local Tax Rate for the
District appear in the table below.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Szrbd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Szrbd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated
Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area,
upon completion of the projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as
shown in the table below. The HRA and City request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity
for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2018. The
Project Tax Capacity (PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the projects within the District are completed.
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-4
Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC)
$8,812,299
Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC)
$371,498
Fiscal Disparities Reduction
$2,855,308
Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC)
$5,585,493
Original Local Tax Rate
1.17171 Estimated
Pay 2014
Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate)
$6,544,578
Percent Retained by the HRA
100%
Tax capacity includes a 0% inflation factor for the duration of the District. The tax capacity included in this
chart is the estimated tax capacity of the District in year 25. The tax capacity
of the District in year one is
estimated to be $1,354,280.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the HRA. shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its
request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S.,
Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which
building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the
TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to MS., Section 469.175, Subd 3. The County Auditor shall increase
the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building
permit was issued.
The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District and has found building permits that were
issued in the past 18 months prior to the public hearing. Please see Appendix H for the building
permits that were issued.
Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued
The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax
increments. The HRA or City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF
Plan. As presently proposed, the projects within the District will be financed by a pay-as-you-go note. Any
refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification. This provision
does not obligate the HRA or City to incur debt. The HRA or City will issue bonds or incur other debt only
upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City.
The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are shown in the table below:
SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL
Tax Increment $155,071,222
Interest $15,507,122
TOTAL $170,578,344
The HRA or City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments
from the District in a maximum principal amount of $90,545,791. Such bonds may be in the form of pay -as -
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-5
you -go notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total
bonded indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan as of the date of approval.
Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds
Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate the multi -phase construction of
several hundred thousand square feet of new office space, adjacent public improvements, and other
commercial development including, potentially, a hotel in the City. The HRA and City have determined that
it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District costs, as described. The HRA
has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To
facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the
use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs
and uses of funds associated with the District is outlined in the following table.
USES OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS
TOTAL
Land/Building Acquisition
$1,000,000
Site Improvements/Preparation
$30,241,000
Utilities
$1,847,000
Other Qualifying Improvements
$41,950,669
Administrative Costs (up to 10%1
$15,507,122
PROJECT COST TOTAL
$90,545,791
Interest
$80.032,553
PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL
$170,578,344
The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total
projected tax increments for the District as shown in Subsection 2-9.
Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification
to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed,
without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant
to MS., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent ofthe tax increment paid by property within the
District will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside ofthe District but within
the boundaries of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area, (including administrative costs, which
are considered to be spent outside of the District) subject to the limitations as described in this TIF Plan.
Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election
Pursuant to ALS, Section 469.177, Subd. 3, the HRA or City may elect one of two methods to calculate fiscal
disparities. If the calculations pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Surbd. 3, clause b, (within the District) are
followed, the following method of computation shall apply:
(1) The original net tax capacity shall be determined before the application of the fiscal disparity
provisions of Chapter 276,4or 473F. The current net tax capacity shall exclude any fiscal
disparity commercial -industrial net tax capacity increase behveen the original year and the
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-6
current year multiplied by the fiscal disparity ratio determined pursuant to M.S., Section
276A.06, subdivision 7 or M.S., Section 473F.08, subdivision 6. Where the original net tax
capacity is equal to orgreater than the current net tax capaclo, there is no captured tax capacity
and no tax increment determination. Where the original tax capacity is less than the tangent tax
capacity, the difference behveen the original net tax capacity and the current net tax capacity
is the captured net tax capacity. This amount less any portion thereofwhich the authority has
designated, in its tax increment financing plan, to share tinith the local taxing districts is the
retained captured net tax capacity of the authority.
(2) The county auditor shall exchide the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority from the
net tax capacity of the local taxing districts in determining local taxing district tax rates. The
local tax rates so determined are to be extended against the retained captured net tax capacity
of the authority as well as the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts. The tax generated by
the extension of the less of( 4) the local taxing district tax rates or (B) the original local tax rate
to the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority is the tax increment of the authority.
The HRA will choose to calculate fiscal disparities by clause b.
According to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3:
(c) The method of computation of tax increment applied to a district pursuant to paragraph (a) or
(b) shall remain the same for the duration of the district, except that the governing body may
elect to change its election from the method of computation in paragraph (a) to the method in
paragraph (b).
Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies
Pursuant to M.S., Section 116J.993, Subd. 3, the following forms of financial assistance are not considered
a business subsidy:
(1) A business subsidy of less than $150,000;
(2) Assistance that is generally available to all businesses or to a general class of similar businesses,
such as a line of business, size, location, or similar general criteria;
(3) Public improvements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve a
public purpose and do not principally benefit a single business or defined group of businesses at
the time the improvements are made;
(4) Redevelopment property polluted by contaminants as defined in M. S., Section 116J.552, Subd. 3;
(5) Assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or bringing
it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts, provided that
the assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the total cost;
(6) Assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance is to
provide those services;
(7) Assistance for housing;
(8) Assistance for pollution control or abatement, including assistance for a tax increment financing
hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under MS., Section 469.174, Subd. 23;
(9) Assistance for energy conservation;
(10) Tax reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law;
(11) Workers' compensation and unemployment compensation;
(12) Benefits derived fi•om regulation;
(13) Indirect benefits derived fi•om assistance to educational institutions;
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-7
(14) Funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds, and
bonds issued for the benefit of an organization described in section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999;
(15) Assistance for a collaboration between a Minnesota higher education institution and a business;
(16) Assistance for a tax increment financing soils condition district as defined under M.S., Section
469.174, Subd. 19;
(17) Redevelopment when the recipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site preparation
is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value;
(18) General changes in tax increment financing law and other general tax law changes of a principally
technical nature;
(19) Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local
government agency;
(20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority;
(21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $150,000 or less;
(22) Federal loan funds provided through the United States Department of Commerce, Economic
Development Administration; and
(23) Property tax abatements granted under MS., Section 469.1813 to property that is subject to
valuation under Minnesota Rules, chapter 8100.
The HRA will comply with M.S., Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995 to the extent the tax increment assistance
under this TIF Plan does not fall under any of the above exemptions.
Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. la, the county board may require the HRA or City to pay for all or
part of the cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by tax increment
will, in the judgment of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of
road improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five
years under a capital improvement plan or within five years under another county plan.
If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the HRA or City within forty-
five days of receipt of this TIF Plan. In the opinion of the HRA and City and consultants, the proposed
development outlined in this TIF Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads, therefore the TIF Plan
was not forwarded to the county 45 days prior to the public hearing. The HRA and City are aware that the
county could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing.
Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions
The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF
Plan would occur without the creation of the District. However, the HRA or City has determined that such
development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the
fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as
follows if the "but for" test was not met:
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-8
IMPACT ON TAX BASE
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Captured
Potential
Pay 2014
Tax Capacity (CTC)
Percent of CTC
Total Net
Upon Completion
to Entity Total
Tax Capacity
Hennepin County 1,236,174,443
5,585,493
0.4518%
City of Edina 94,077,024
5,585,493
5.9371%
ISD No. 273 80,662,848
5,585,493
6.9245%
IMPACT ON TAX RATES
1,552,823
The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate
used for calculations is the estimated Pay 2014 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are
based on estimated Pay 2014 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2014 rates, which
were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared.
Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b):
(1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be
generated over the life of the District is $155,071,222;
(2) Probable impact of the District on city provided services and ability to issue debt. An impact of the
District on police protection is expected. With any addition of new residents or businesses, police
calls for service will be increased. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional
overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and of
itself, will necessitate new capital investment.
The probable impact of the District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new
buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The existing buildings, which
will be eliminated by the new development, have public safety concerns that include several
unprotected old buildings with issues such as access, hydrant locations, and converted structures.
The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The current
infrastructure for traffic movements, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be modified to
handle the additional volume generated from the proposed development. B ased on the development
plans, there are no additional costs associated with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-9
Estimated
Percent
Potential
Pay 2014
of Total
CTC
Taxes
Extension Rates
Hennepin County
0.498590
42.55%
5,585,493
2,784,871
City of Edina
0.278010
23.73%
5,585,493
1,552,823
ISD No. 273
0.274140
23.40%
5,585,493
1,531,207
Other
0.120970
10.32%
5.585,493
675.677
Total
1.171710
100.00%
6,544,578
The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate
used for calculations is the estimated Pay 2014 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are
based on estimated Pay 2014 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2014 rates, which
were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared.
Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b):
(1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be
generated over the life of the District is $155,071,222;
(2) Probable impact of the District on city provided services and ability to issue debt. An impact of the
District on police protection is expected. With any addition of new residents or businesses, police
calls for service will be increased. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional
overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and of
itself, will necessitate new capital investment.
The probable impact of the District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new
buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The existing buildings, which
will be eliminated by the new development, have public safety concerns that include several
unprotected old buildings with issues such as access, hydrant locations, and converted structures.
The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The current
infrastructure for traffic movements, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be modified to
handle the additional volume generated from the proposed development. B ased on the development
plans, there are no additional costs associated with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-9
and sidewalks. The development in the District is expected to contribute to sanitary sewer (SAC)
and water (WAC) connection fees.
The probable impact of any District general obligation tax increment bonds on the ability to issue
debt for general fund purposes is expected to be minimal. It is not anticipated that there will be any
general obligation debt issued in relation to this project, therefore there will be no impact on the
City's ability to issue future debt or on the City's debt limit.
(3) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to school district levies. It is estimated that the
amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to school district
levies, assuming the school district's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions
remained the sarne, is $36,286,666;
(4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. It is estimated that the amount of
tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the
county's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $65,982,805;
(5) Additional information requested by the county or school district. The City is not aware of any
standard questions in a county or school district written policy regarding tax increment districts and
impact on county or school district services. The county or school district must request additional
information pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) within 15 days after receipt of the tax
increment financing plan.
No requests for additional information from the county or school district regarding the proposed
development for the District have been received.
Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation
Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 1 (a), clause 7 the TIF Plan must contain identification and
description of studies and analyses used to make the determination set forth in M.S. Section 469.175, Subd.
3, clause (b)(2) and the findings are required in the resolution approving the District. Following is a list of
reports and studies on file at the City that support the HRA and City's findings:
• TIF District Redevelopment Qualifications Report, LHB: January 13, 2014
Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing
district include all of the following potential revenue sources:
1. Taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed underMS.,
Section 469.177;
2. The proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, to the extent the property was
purchased by the Authority with tax increments;
3. Principal and interest received on loans or other advances made by the Authority with tax increments;
4. Interest or other investment earnings on or ftom tax increments;
5. Repayments or return of tax increments made to the Authority under agreements for districts for
which the request for certification was made after August 1, 1993; and
6. The market value homestead credit paid to the Authority under M.S., Section 273.1384.
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-10
Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District
In accordance with MS., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any:
1. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the District, if the reduction does not meet the
requirements of M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e);
2. Increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred;
3. A determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a pant of the original TIF
Plan;
4. Increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the HRA or City;
5. Increase in the estimate of the cost of the District, including administrative expenses, that will be paid
or financed with tax increment from the District; or
6. Designation of additional property to be acquired by the HRA or City,
shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval
of the original TIF Plan.
Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 4( )9, the geographic area of the District may be reduced, but shall not
be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county
auditor. If a redevelopment district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that
the addition to the district meets the criteria of M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10, must be documented in
writing and retained. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is
elimination of parcel(s) fl-om the District and (2)(A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated
from the District equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in the District's original net tax
capacity or (B) the HRA agrees that, notwithstanding M.S., Section 469.177, Subd 1, the original net tax
capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the
District.
The HRA or City must notify the County Auditor of any modification to the District. Modifications to the
District in the form of a budget modification or an expansion of the boundaries will be recorded in the TIF
Plan.
Subsection 2-18, Administrative Expenses
In accordance with M.S., Section 469.174, Subd 14, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the
HRA or City, other than:
1. Amounts paid for the purchase of land;
2. Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and
engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the
District;
3. Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the
District; or
4. Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued
pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178; or
5. Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance
costs described in clauses (1) to (3).
For districts for which the request for certification were made before August 1, 1979, or after June 30, 1982,
and before August 1, 2001, administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-11
counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. Pursuant to M.S., Section
469.176, Subd. 3, tax increment may be used to pay any authorized and documented administrative
expenses for the District up to but not to exceed 10 percent of the total estimated tax increment expenditures
authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined by M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause
(1), from the District, whichever is less.
For districts for which certification was requested after July 31, 2001, no tax increment may be used to pay
any administrative expenses for District costs which exceed ten percent of total estimated tax increment
expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan orthe total tax increments, as defined inM.S, Section 469.174, Subd.
25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less.
Pursuant to MS., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the County's actual
administrative expenses incurred in connection with the District and are not subject to the percentage limits
of M. S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3. The county may require payment ofthose expenses by February 15 of the
year following the year the expenses were incurred.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the County Treasurer shall deduct an amount (currently .36
percent) of any increment distributed to the HRA or City and the County Treasurer shall pay the amount
deducted to the State Commissioner of Management and Budget for deposit in the state general fund to be
appropriated to the State Auditor for the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information
and the cost of examining and auditing authorities' use of tax increment financing. This amount may be
adjusted annually by the Commissioner of Revenue.
Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment
The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and the District
may be terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the debt service fund or other escrow
account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment of the bonds at maturity or
redemption date.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6:
if, afterfour years fr•onr the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the tax
irrcrerrtentf»rancingdistrictpur•suanttoMS., Section469.177, nodenrolition, rehabilitation
or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified iniprovernent of a
street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service including sewer or water
systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district
by the authority or by the owner ofthe parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing
plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel and the original net tax
capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax
increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently
conrnrences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on thatparcel
including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the
tax increment financingplan, the authorityshall certify to the comity auditor that the activity
has commenced and the county auditor shall certify the net tax capacity thereof as most
recently certified by the connnissioner of revenrte and add it to the original net tax capacity
of the tax increment financing district. The county auditor nrrtst enforce the provisions of th is
subdivision. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required
activity has taken place for each parcel in the district. The evidence for a parcel must be
subm itted by February 1 of the fifth year following the year in which the parcel was certified
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-12
as included in the district. For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements of a
street are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street,
and (3) substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street.
The HRA or City or a property owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately February
2018 and report such actions to the County Auditor.
Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment
The HRA or City hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity of taxable
property located in the District for the following purposes:
1. To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued to finance a project;
2. to finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment
Project Area pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047;
3. To pay for project costs as identified in the budget set forth in the TIF Plan;
4. To finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in AI.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4;
5. To pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to or on behalf of the
HRA or City or for the benefit of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area by a developer;
6. To finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance or other security guaranteeing
the payment when due of principal of and interest on bonds pursuant to the TIF Plan or pursuant to
MS., Chapter 462C. M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178; and
7. To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and interest on
the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 4620, MS., Sections 469.152
through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178.
These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other
purposes prohibited by M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4.
Tax increments generated in the District will be paid by Hennepin County to the HRA for the Tax Increment
Fund of said District. The HRA or City will pay to the developer(s) annually an amount not to exceed an
amount as specified in a developer's agreement to reimburse the costs of land acquisition, public
improvements, demolition and relocation, site preparation, and administration. Remaining increment funds
will be used for HRA or City administration (up to 10 percent) and for the costs of public improvement
activities outside the District.
Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments
Excess increments, as defined in MS., Section 469.176, Subd 2, shall be used only to do one or more of the
following:
1. Prepay any outstanding bonds;
2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment for any outstanding bonds;
3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of any outstanding bonds; or
4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in
proportion to their local tax rates.
The HRA or City must spend or return the excess increments under paragraph (c) within nine months after
the end of the year. In addition, the HRA or City may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to
modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-13
Area or the District.
Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer
The HRA or City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the
Redevelopment Plan and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the
following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and
electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any
other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the HRA or City to demonstrate the conformance of the
development with City plans and ordinances. The HRA or City may also use the Agreements to address other
issues related to the development.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 5, no more than 25 percent, by acreage, of the property to be
acquired in the District as set forth in the TIF Plan shall at any time be owned by the HRA or City as a result
of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178 to which tax increments
from property acquired is pledged, unless prior to acquisition in excess of 25 percent of the acreage, the HRA
or City concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which
provides recourse for the HRA or City should the development or redevelopment not be completed.
Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the HRA or City may enter into a written assessment agreement
in recordable form with the developer of property within the District which establishes a minimum market
value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the District. The assessment agreement
shall be presented to the County Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements
to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are
to be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears,
in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the County Assessor shall also certify the
minimum market value agreement.
Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District
Administration of the District will be handled by the HRA Executive Director.
Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subds. 5, 6, and 6b the HRA or City must undertake financial reporting
for all tax increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board and County Auditor
on or before August I of each year. M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement
shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15.
If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M.S., Section
469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the OSA will direct the County Auditor to withhold the distribution of tax
increment from the District.
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-14
Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations
As required by the TIF Act, in establishing the District, the determination has been made that the anticipated
development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the
reasonably foreseeable future and thatthe increased market value ofthe site that could reasonably be expected
to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value
estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax
increments for the maximum duration ofthe District permitted by the TIF Plan. In making said determination,
reliance has been placed upon written representation made by the developer to such effects and upon HRA
and City staff awareness ofthe feasibility of developing the project site(s) within the District. A comparative
analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of the District and the use of tax
increments has been performed as described above. Such analysis is included with the cashflow in Appendix
D, and indicates that the increase in estimated market value of the proposed development (less the indicated
subtractions) exceeds the estimated market value of the site absent the establishment of the District and the
use of tax increments.
Subsection 2-27. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment
1. General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the TIF
Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the the
Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047. Tax
increments may not be used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No tax increment may be used for the
acquisition, construction, renovation, operation, or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and
regularly for conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of
government or the state or federal government. This provision does not prohibit the use of revenues
derived from tax increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure.
2. Pooling Limitations. At least 75 percent of tax increments from the District must be expended on
activities in the District or to pay bonds, to the extent that the proceeds of the bonds were used to finance
activities within said district or to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. Not
more than 25 percent ofsaid tax increments may be expended, through a development fund or otherwise,
on activities outside of the District except to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced
bonds. For purposes of applying this restriction, all administrative expenses must be treated as if they
were solely for activities outside of the District.
3. Five Year Limitation on Commitment of Tax Increments. Tax increments derived from the District shall
be deemed to have satisfied the 75 percent test set forth in paragraph (2) above only if the five year rule
set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 3, has been satisfied; and beginning with the sixth year
following certification of the District, 75 percent of said tax increments that remain after expenditures
permitted under said five year rule must be used only to pay previously committed expenditures or credit
enhanced bonds as more fully set forth in MS, Section 469.1763, Subd. 5.
Redevelopment District. At Ieast 90 percent of the revenues derived from tax increment fi•om a
redevelopment district must be used to finance the cost of correcting conditions that allow designation
ofredevelopment and renewal and renovation districts under M.S., Section 469.176Subd. 4j. These costs
include, but are not limited to, acquiring properties containing structurally substandard buildings or
improvements or hazardous substances, pollution, or contaminants, acquiring adjacent parcels necessary
to provide a site of sufficient size to permit development, demolition and rehabilitation of structures,
clearing of the land, the removal of hazardous substances or remediation necessary for development of
the land, and installation of utilities, roads, sidewalks, and parking facilities for the site. The allocated
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-15
administrative expenses ofthe HRA or City, including the cost of preparation ofthe development action
response plan, may be included in the qualifying costs.
Subsection 2-28. Summary
The Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority is establishing the District to preserve and enhance the tax
base, redevelop substandard areas, and provide employment opportunities in the City. The TIF Plan for the
District was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113,
telephone (651) 697-8500.
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District 2-16
Appendix A
Project Description
The Pentagon Park Tax Increment District is a significant redevelopment effort ofthe City of Edina. The total
development cost is estimated to be in excess of $500 million. The Project is focused on revitalizing an
outdated 659,000 square foot office park first constructed in the 1960's.
The redevelopment is expected to occur in stages over the next two to ten years. The City is cufently in
negotiations with Hillcrest Development over a redevelopment agreement. The proposed redevelopment may
potentially include over 900,000 square feet of office, 60,000 square feet of retail, and 425 hotel units.
Potential public improvements include pavement, sidewalk, intersection and streetscape improvements along
West 77`h Street between Noimandale and Parklawn, along Parklawn Avenue between West 76" and 77"
Streets, and potential new public streets providing access throughout the parcel north of West 77" St.
Modifications to storm water control, landscaping and other related improvements are also contemplated as
part of project costs.
The project will be financed by a pay-as-you-go note. More detailed information about the Southeast Edina
Redevelopment Project Area can be found in the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan on file at the Edina
City Hall.
Appendix A-1
Appendix B
Maps of the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and the District
Appendix B-1
Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area
and Proposed Pentagon Park TIF District
o e ��
gyp, F Project Area
Proposed Pentagon Park TIF District
N
W+E
S
Engineering Dept.
December. 2013
Proposed Pentagon Park TIF District "
015
WIkIt s Proposed Pentagon Park TIF District Parcelss E 9h.,ft D.yt
�_b.. 200
Appendix C
Description of Property to be Included in the District
The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the
parcels listed below.
Parcel Numbers
Address
Owner
31-028-24-33-0010
490177"' St. W
Pentagon South LLC
31-028-24-33-0012
Address Unassigned
Crown Bank
31-028-24-33-0014
48157 -ph St. W
Pentagon South LLC
31-028-24-33-0013
Address Unassigned
Pentagon South LLC
31-028-24-33-0018
482077 1h St. W
FYT LLC
31-028-24-33-0015
7710 Computer Ave
Crown Bank
31-028-24-33-0025
470077 1h St. W
Realty Associates Iowa Corp
31-028-24-34-0007
466077 1h St. W
Pentagon North LLC
31-028-24-34-0008
4600 77" St. W
Pentagon North LLC
31-028-24-34-0009
457077 1h St. W
Pentagon North LLC
31-028-24-43-0002
4540 77"' St. W
Pentagon North LLC
31-028-24-43-0001
4550 7Th St. W
Pentagon North LLC
31-028-24-43-0003
4510 77" St. W
Pentagon South LLC
31-028-24-43-0004
453077 1h St. W
Pentagon South LLC
31-028-24-43-0005
7600 Parklawn Ave
Pentagon South LLC
31-028-24-43-0006
7600 Parklawn Ave
Pentagon South LLC
Appendix C-1
Appendix D
Estimated Cash Flows for the District
Appendix D-1
1/172014
EHLERS
trrorss�isrueuo nnanc
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 1
City of Edina
496,000 sq. it office, 426 room hotel, and 30,000 sq. it retail - Shanahan values
Base Value Assumptions - Page 1
Note:
1. Base values are based upon review of Countywebsite on 12-18.2013.
Pmparodby ENvn a Aewdate Nc.-E,> I,a ONy n:V4'vxsalalE-mAlHouslrq Ewrontic RederebpnnallTlFlTiF-hbklslPentapan Pvk1TIPRM1Wpdakd Rum IJ4.14(Fawfke d,)W-Vl Palk TIFPasse1nn--0,dvalues 1.14.14
ASSUMPTIONS
AND RATES
VALUE
1):hIciTyp0:
Redevelopment
Tax Rates
Distdcl NamdNumber..
.
County District#:
Building
Exempt Class Rate (Exempt)0.00%
First Year Construction or Inflation on Value
2016
Commercial Industrial Preferred Class Raw (CA Pref.)
Current
Existing District - Specify No. Years Remaining
After
`.'First - $150,000
- 1.50%
Inflation Rale - Every Year:
0.00%
.Over -$150,000 -
- 2.00%
Interest Rate:6.00%
Tax
Commercial Industrial Class Rate (C4)
After
Present Value Date:
1 -Aug -16
Rental Housing Class Rate (Rental) .' -
.. 1.25%
First Period End
1 -Feb -16
Affordable Rendal Housing Gess Rate (Aft. Rental)
Market Value
Tax Year District was Certified:
Pay 2014
Find -( $100,000
0.76%
CashflowAssumes First Tax Increment For Development
2016
Over . $100,000
0.25%
Years fTax Increment
26
Non -Homestead Residential (Non -H Res.1 licit)
-
Assumes Last Year of Tex Increment
2043
- First ' 5500,000 -
f 1.00%
Fiscal Disparities Election 10utside(A), InAde(8). or NA)
Inside(S)
Over.-. M.000
.- 125%
Incremental or Total Fiscal Disparities
Incremental
Homestead Residenal Gass Rate (Hmstd. Res)
710
Fiscal Disparities Contribution Ratio
32.4014% Pay 2014
First -: M,000
1.00'h
Fiscal Disparities Meuo-Wide Tax Rale
163.1210% Pay 2014
Over '.. $$00,000
- -.;.1.25%
Maximuffvfm-n Local Tax Rale:
117.171% Pay 2014
Agricultural Non-Hameslead
-'1.00%
Current Local Tex Rate: (Use lesser -1 Current or Max.)
117.171% Pay 2014
174,000
'- -
State-wide Tax Rate (CommAnd. only used for total taxes)
63.0000% Pay 2014
174,000
Pay 2014
Market Value Tax Rate (Used for total taxes)
022925% Pay 2014
CA
3,480
Note:
1. Base values are based upon review of Countywebsite on 12-18.2013.
Pmparodby ENvn a Aewdate Nc.-E,> I,a ONy n:V4'vxsalalE-mAlHouslrq Ewrontic RederebpnnallTlFlTiF-hbklslPentapan Pvk1TIPRM1Wpdakd Rum IJ4.14(Fawfke d,)W-Vl Palk TIFPasse1nn--0,dvalues 1.14.14
VALUE
INFORMATIONBASE
Building
TotalPercentage
Tax Year
Property
Current
Class
After
Land
Market
Markel
Of Value Used
Original
Original
Tax
Odgfnal
After
Conversion Areal
Map# PID Owner Address
MarketValuc
Value
Value
for District
Market Value
Market Value
Class
Tax capacity
Conversion
OrIg Tax Cap, Phase
3102824330010 Pentagon S LLC
2,984,60D
1,000
2,985,600
100%
2,985,800
Pay2014
CA Ret
58,962
CA Pref.
58,962
3102824330013 Pentagon S LLC
35,500
0
35,500
100%
35,500
Pay 2014
C#
710
CA
710
3102824330014 Pentagon S LLC
663,300
180,600
843,900
100.
843,900
Pay 2014
CA
16,878
Cn
16,878
3�02 243300 12 Cr mwl Bank
174,000
0
174,000
100%
174,000
Pay 2014
CA
3,480
CA
3,480
3102824330015 Crown Bank
770,900
550,300
1,321,200
100%
1,321,200
Pay 2014
CJI Ref.
25,674
CA Rel.
25,674
?,623.30"
iii'iva
G,agn,2 p
8,360,200
106,704
"-106704
Note:
1. Base values are based upon review of Countywebsite on 12-18.2013.
Pmparodby ENvn a Aewdate Nc.-E,> I,a ONy n:V4'vxsalalE-mAlHouslrq Ewrontic RederebpnnallTlFlTiF-hbklslPentapan Pvk1TIPRM1Wpdakd Rum IJ4.14(Fawfke d,)W-Vl Palk TIFPasse1nn--0,dvalues 1.14.14
1117/2014
EHLERS
stx0iesix rvevcilNA;7A
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 7
City of Edina
495,000 sq. N office, 425 room hotel, and 30,000 sq. ft retail - Shanahan values
Base Value Assumptions -Page 2
Note:
1. Market values are based upon estimates provided by Shanahan on 1.9-2014.
PROJECT•'
ata
rsca
oca
Estimated
Taxable
te- e
Total Taxable
Property
Percentage
percentage
Percentage
Percentage
First Year
Property
Market Value
Market Value
Total
.Market
Tax
ProJeit
-: Project Tax
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Full Taxes
Areallshase New Use
Per rift
Pers .FtJUnt
3 .FtJUnits
Value '.
Class
Tax Ca ac-
Ca i Nn@
2016
2017
2018
2019
Pa ble
Group 182 oMm
,X
274
274
95,000
135,428,040
CA
2,708,581
-`1,870,000
5
50%
75%
100°4
100°.6
100°,0
1001A
2020
2020
ttatel
220,000
220,000
425
93,500,000
Cll
4,400
5
0%
50%
1WA
100%
100%
2019
RNdI
269
289
30000
8,074,000 --
Cll
--161480
1P,6
Note:
1. Market values are based upon estimates provided by Shanahan on 1.9-2014.
Note:
1. Texas and tax increment will vary silinficantly from year to year depending upon values, rates, stale law, fiscal disparities and other tactors
which cannot be predicted.
WHAT IS ■ ■ FROM
RKET VALUE BUT / FOR ANALYSIS
o Property Taxes 9,3 5, Current ar ret lus ,Est. 5,3 ,200
Iesa State vride Taxes (2,612,222) New Market Value - Est. 237.002 040
less Fiscal Disp. Ad). (2,506,277) Difference
less IMM
Market Value Taxes (543,327) Present Value of Tax Increment
less Base Value Taxes 83,7N) Ditemneo
Annual Gross TIF Value liketv to occur without Tex Increment is less than:
ft_- a, Exmn a N,alatas, W.. - Zane- only N!AI ,,o1,A,,wjm Ewmmc R<d]YaW—,111 lFl anN2,V4c—ft—F Run,wpd,trd Run,1.1e14ff-1Mpa.,)-.a--IIF ft— 1----vdua,1.14.14
TAX CALCULATIONS
ata
rsca
oca
oca
sca
te- e
ar e
Taz
Disparities
Tax
Property
Disparities
Property
Value
Total
Taxes Per
New Use
Capacity
Tax Ca c
Ca act
Tates
Tacos
Tues
Taxes
Taxes
So. FtJUnit
Office
2,708,661
877,612
1,830,949
2,146,341
1,431,669
1,436,537
310,469
6,322,916
10.76
Hotel
1,870,000
605,906
1,ffi4,094
9 481,151
988,360
991,100
214,349
3,674,980
8,64697
Retail
161480
62322
109.163
127.902
85348
65664317344
10.b8
3 0
3,7 ,38
,277
6
Note:
1. Texas and tax increment will vary silinficantly from year to year depending upon values, rates, stale law, fiscal disparities and other tactors
which cannot be predicted.
WHAT IS ■ ■ FROM
RKET VALUE BUT / FOR ANALYSIS
o Property Taxes 9,3 5, Current ar ret lus ,Est. 5,3 ,200
Iesa State vride Taxes (2,612,222) New Market Value - Est. 237.002 040
less Fiscal Disp. Ad). (2,506,277) Difference
less IMM
Market Value Taxes (543,327) Present Value of Tax Increment
less Base Value Taxes 83,7N) Ditemneo
Annual Gross TIF Value liketv to occur without Tex Increment is less than:
ft_- a, Exmn a N,alatas, W.. - Zane- only N!AI ,,o1,A,,wjm Ewmmc R<d]YaW—,111 lFl anN2,V4c—ft—F Run,wpd,trd Run,1.1e14ff-1Mpa.,)-.a--IIF ft— 1----vdua,1.14.14
1/172014
Tax IncrementCabftp - Page 3
EHLERS
Pentagon Park TIFDistrict- Phase 1
City of Edina
495,000 sq. ft office, 425 room hotel, and 30,000 sq. ft retail - Shanahan values
TAX INCREMENT CASH
•
Protect '. odgim" FWai Captured L44a1 Annual 8eml-Annual $rata Admin. 6emi-Annual $em1-Annual PERIOD
•/. of Tax Tax - Dlsp itl s Tax -Tax G T x Gross Tax Auditor at Net Tax Present ENDING tax Payment
1-1.aY—a AssM-. 1.--alas.4 II.W—.130AWaui.,a EwnemkFNa,a'o{mMlTal*eMtrcn`➢enapn'.M' 6unstllp--II-110-111-pa:pY>'eNa0011 Pah TP Pilar l tun- I.-vnAka 1.14, 11
-
-
-
0891/17
100%
1,354280
(105,704)
(404;536)l
844.020
117.174%
888,947
494,473
(1,780)
(49.269)
443,424
371.361
0901/16
0.5 2018 0&01/18
491.473
(1,780)
(49269)
443424
731.905
1 2018 02101/19
100%
3.127,901
(105,7041
(979,234)
$042,963
117.171%
2,393,760
1,196,1180
(4,309)
(119257)
1,073,314
1,579.189
1.5 2019 09171/19
1,196,8&1
(4,309)
(119,257)
1,073.314
2,407,795
2 2019 02/0120
100%
4.740,041
(105,704)
(1,501,590)
3.132,747
117171%
3670,671
1,835,335
(6,607)
(182,873)
1,645,855
3,625,466
2.5 2020 08)0120
1.835,335
(6807)
(182873)
1.645,855
4,815,467
3 2020 02/0127
1011%
4.740.041
(105,704)
(1,501,590)
3,132,747
117.171%
3,670,671
1835,335
(6,607)(182,973)
1,645,855
5,969.836
3.5 2021 08)0121
1,635,335
(0,607)
(182673)
1,645,855
7.090.564
4 2021 0210122
10D%
4,740,041
(105,7041
(1.501,590)
3,132,747
117.171%
3,670,671
1,835,335
(6,607)
(182,873)
1,645855
8,178.688
4.5 2022 0810122
1,835.335
(6,807)
(182.873)
1,645,855
9.235,100
5 2022 0210123
100%
4,740.041
(105,704)
(1,501,690)
3.132747
117.171%
3,670,671
1,835,335
(6,607)
(182,873)
1,645,855
10260,743
5.5 2023 059123
1,835,335
(6,607)
(182.873)
1,645,855
11.258,572
8 2013 0704124
108%
4.740041
(105,704)
(1,501,590)
3.132747
117.171%
3,6]0,671
1,835,335
(6,607)
(182.873)
1,645,855
12,223,279
65 214 0810124
1.835,335
(6,607)(192.873)
1.645855
13,161.887
7 X24 090125
IOD%
4,740,041
(105,704)
(1,601,590)
3,132,747
117.171%
3.670,671
1,835,335
(6,607)
(182,973)
1,645,855
14.073157
7.5 2025 089125
"1
1,11
(112,873)
18/5,855
10.957,686
8 2025 099126
10D%
4,740,041
(105,704)
(1.501,590)
3,132747
117.171%
3.670671
1,835,335
(61607)
(182,873)
1,60.4,655
15.816845
8.5 2026 0810126
1.635.335
(0607)
(182,873)
1,840855
16,650,786
9 X126 0210127
100%
4,740,041
(105,764)
(1,501,590)
3,132,747
117.171%
3,670,671
1.M335
(6,607)
(182,873)
1,645,855
17,460.438
9.5 2027 0510127
1,835,335
(6,607)
(182,873)
1.66. 655
18,246,508
10 2027 0X0128
100%
4.740.041
(105,049
(1,601,690)
3,132747
117.171%
3,670,671
1,835335
(8,607)
(182,873)
1.815,855
19,009682
10.5 2028 0130128
1.835,335
(6,607)
(182,873)
1.645,856
19,760,628
11 2028 0X0129
100%
4,740,041
(105,704)
(1,501,590)
3,132,747
117.171%
3,670,6]1
1,835,335
(6667)
(182,8]3)
1,845,855
90,469,894
115 2029 686)129
1,835,335
(6,607)
(182.873)
1.645,555
21,168,406
12 2029 07/01/30
100%
4.740.041
(105,7041
%
(1.501,0)
3,132,747
117.171%
3,670,671
1835.335
(6607)
(182,873)
1,545,855
21,846.477
125 2030 066)1/30
1,835,335
(6607)
(182,873)
1,645,855
22.604798
13 20M 02f0121
100%
4,740.041
(105,704)
(1,501,590)
3,132747
117.171%
3,670,671
1,835,335
(1607)
(182,873)
1,645,855
23,143,944
13.5 2031 06101/31
1,835,335
(6607)
(182,873)
1,645,855
23,764,475
14 2031 0210122
100%
4,7-0 0,041
(105,704)
(1,501,690)
3,132,747
117.171%
3.670,671
93
1,5, 335
(6607)
(182.873)
1,645,855
24,366,932
14.5 2032 0801/32
1,835,335
(6,607)
(182,873)
1,845,155
24,951,842
15 2032 0X01/33
100%
4,740,041
(105704)
(1,501,590)
3.132,747
117.171%
3,670,671
1,835.335
(66D7)
(182.873)
1.845,855
25.519,715
16S 2033 060123
1835,335
(6607)
(182,873)
1,645,855
26,071,049
16 2033 0710124
100%
4.740.041
(105,704)
(1,501,5DO)
3,132,747
117.171%
3,670,671
1,835,335
(6,607)
(182.873)
1,645,855
26,608,324
185 2034 050124
1,835,335
(8807)
(382,873)
1,645.855
27,126,009
17 2034 02fGlW
100%
4.740041
(105,704)
(1,501,590)
3,132,747
117.171%
3,670,971
1,635335
(6607)
(182.873)
1,645855
27,530.557
17.5 2035 0610125
1,835335
(6,607)
(182 673)
1,645,855
28,120,409
18 2035 OX1/36
Volt
4,740,041
(105.704)
(1,501;590)
3,132.747
117.171%
3,670671
1M335
(6.607)
(182,873)
1,645,855
28,595,994
18.5 2036 0891/38
1,835,335
(8,607)
(182873)
1,645,655
29,057,728
19 2036 0X0127
100%
4,740041
(105,704)
(1,501,590)
3,132,747
117.171%
UM171
1,635,335W7)
(182,873)
1,645,855
29,506.012
19.5 2037 0607137
1.835,335
(1607)
(102173)
1,645,855
29,841,240
20 2037 0X0128
100%
4.740.041
(105,704)
(1.501.590)
3,132,747
117.171%
3,670,671
1,M.335
(6607)
(182.873)
1,645,855
30,363,791
20.5 2038 0607/38
1835.335
(6607)
(782,873)
1.145,815
30,774,815
21 2038 02(01/39
100%
4.740,041
(105,704)
(1,501.580)
3,132747
117.171%
3,670671
1835,335
(6,607)
(112,873)
1,645,855
31,104,330
21.5 2039 0891(39
1,835,335
(6667)
(182,873)
1.645655
31,559,024
22 2039 0X01!40
100%
4,740,041
(105704)
(1,501,%!7)
3,132,747
117.171%
3.670.671
1835335
(6,607)
(182873)
1,845,855
31,934,455
225 2010 OBIOI/40
1,835.335
(8607)
(182,873)
1,645,656
32,298,952
23 2040 07/01/41
1W%
4,740,041
(105,704)
(1,507,590)
3,132,747
117.171%
3,670,671
1,835,335
(6,607)
(182,873)
1,645,855
32,652,832
235 2041 0891/41
1.835,335
(6607)
(1828 ]3)
1,645.655
32,9%,404
24 2041 02M1N2
100%
4,740,041
(105,704)
(1.501,5&0
3,132.747
117.171%
3,670,67/
1,635,335
(6,607)
(182873)
1,645,855
33329,970
24.5 212 0691/42
1835,335
(6.607)
(182,873)
1,15,855
33,653821
25 2042 0291/43
1og%
4,740.041
(105704)
(1.501,590)
3,132,747
117.171%
3,070,671
1835.335
(6607)
(182,873)
1.6454855
33,968,238
255 2043 010193
18353355
16607)
(1828731
1.645.855
3427368
26 11 02041/44
Total
81,478,1,141
(329,324)
(9,114,941)'
Present
Valve From 081012015
Present Value Rafe
6.00%-
.39.219,254'
(137.919)-''
2.109,1661-
34873498,,
1-1.aY—a AssM-. 1.--alas.4 II.W—.130AWaui.,a EwnemkFNa,a'o{mMlTal*eMtrcn`➢enapn'.M' 6unstllp--II-110-111-pa:pY>'eNa0011 Pah TP Pilar l tun- I.-vnAka 1.14, 11
1/172014 Base Value Assumptions - Page 1
EHLERS
{rAelr[IN I'Uetl[IIXANCI
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2a
City of Edina
197,600 sq. ft office and 22,600 sq. ft retail - Shenehon value.
DlstriefType:
Redevelopment
Tax Rates
VALUE
District NamelNumber.
County District S:
(OriginalBASE
Exempt Class Rate (Exempt)
0.00-A
First Year Construction or Inflation on Value
2017
Commercial Industrial Referred Class Rate (CII Pot') -.
-First
Existing District- Specify No, Years Remaining25
Building
$150,000
1.50°.6
R.00%
Inflation Rafe - Every Year.
0.00%
6.00%
over $150,000
Commercial Imluslrial Class Rate (CA)
-
2100%
Interest Rale:
Present Value Date:
1 -Aug -16
Rental Housing Class Rate (Rental) -
12511,
First Period F11r9ng
1 -Feb -16
Affordable Rental Housing Cie. Rate (Aff. Rental)
'0.75.6
Tax Year DisMe was Certified:
Pay 2014
First `.$100,000
0.25%
CashfiowAssumas Find Tax 4wement Far Deveiopmont
2019
Wer $100,000
Value
Years ofTax Irmas d
25
Non -Homestead Residential (Non H Res. 1 11Nl)
1.00%
Assumes Last Yearof TaximemeM
Fiscal Disparities Bedion (Outside (A), Inside (8). on NA)
2043
Inslde(B)
First $500,000 -
ore, $500,000 -
-
'125°6
Inaem inial or Total Fiscal Disparities
Incremental
Homestead Residental Class Rete (Horstd. Rest
1.00°6
Fiscal Disparities Contribution Rate
32.4014% Pey2014
.First $500,000
-
Fiscal Disparities Metro -Wide Tax Rate
MaximundFmmn Local Tax Rate:
163.1210% Pay 2014
117.171% Pay 2014
Over $500,000
ApicutWral Non -Homestead
..125%
1.00%
Current Local Tax Rate: (Use leaser of Current or Max.)
117.171% Pay 2014
2,014,900
_ 100%
State-wide Tax Rate (Cornn.W. only used for total taxes)
63.0000% Pay 2014
Cil P.I.
39,549
Market Value Tax Rate (Used for total taxes)
0.22925% Pay 2014
_
l7 S^1'
Note:
1. Base values are based upon mvlew of County webske on 12.19-2013.
Re W wd XY Ilesn a AsaatlXles. n1,.-Eaarelai O,Jy N WLnvvla\ee1NAW aal,e Fwwnrc RSMvebprenl\TlFlt� OhXkewenapen PuIaTIF Ru,sWpaaba Rw l.ta.ta(ibul [npacapPenbeen Pahta PXaa ]a lvn -plbltl valves 1.1419
VALUE
INFORMATION
(OriginalBASE
Building
Total
Percentage
-
Tax Year
Property
Current
Class
After
Land
Market
Market
Of Value Used
Original -
Original
Tax
Original
After
Conversion Areal
Ne / PID Owner Address
Markel Value
Value
Value
for District
Market Value
Market Value
Class
Tax Caft
Conversion
Ori.Tax Ca . Phase
3102924330016 YT LLC
762,300
167,400
929,700
100%
- 929,700
Pay 2014
CA PreL
17,944
Cil Pref.
CO Pref
17,&14
39,549
3102924340007 PentagonN LLC
2,013,900
1,000
2,014,900
_ 100%
'. 2,014,900
Pay2014
Cil P.I.
39,549
97,392
_
l7 S^1'
1 "M1
1 2 it 6'!
2,914b00
67,392
Note:
1. Base values are based upon mvlew of County webske on 12.19-2013.
Re W wd XY Ilesn a AsaatlXles. n1,.-Eaarelai O,Jy N WLnvvla\ee1NAW aal,e Fwwnrc RSMvebprenl\TlFlt� OhXkewenapen PuIaTIF Ru,sWpaaba Rw l.ta.ta(ibul [npacapPenbeen Pahta PXaa ]a lvn -plbltl valves 1.1419
1/17/214
_E_HLE_ R_S_
Rc6ti' _ r 01IINAN41
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2a
City of Edina
197,600 sq. it office and 22,600 sq. ft retail-Shenehon values
Base Value Assumptions - Page 2
ivure:
1. Market values are based upon estimates provided by Shanahan on 1.8.2014.
from year to year depending upon values,rates, state law, fiscal disparities and other factors
vAtkh cannot be predicted.
TAX CALCULATIONS
PROJECTa'
To lel Property Taxes
1,9 3, 06
Current! 1171" sue - Est ,944,600
ata
sca
oca
ocai=Pm
as
Estimated
Taxable
-
TotalTuable
properly
lex
Disparities
Percentage
percentage
Percentage
Percentage
First Year
Total
Texas Per
Madlel Value
Market Value
Total
Market
Tax
Project
Project Tax
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Full Texas
Arealphase
New Use
Per., FIM
peri .FIJ 1
S . 11.ift
-::Value
Class
Tax Ca cl
s. .P.'."
aci Nnit
2017
2018
2019
2020
Pa bhe
Group
Office
220
220
197,500
>_43,392,067
GI
-:-.667,841
4
60%
100°,6
100%
100°.5
20
Group
Retall
289
289
2,500
672,833
CA
'13,457
5
50%
f001A
100°4
100%
2020
Walsh
Retail
269
269
20.000
-;.5,382667
C/l
-.107653
5
t00%
100%
1WA
1001A
2019
IWAI
67
9
ivure:
1. Market values are based upon estimates provided by Shanahan on 1.8.2014.
i Taxes and tax Increment will vary signticantiy
from year to year depending upon values,rates, state law, fiscal disparities and other factors
vAtkh cannot be predicted.
TAX CALCULATIONS
WHAT IS ♦ a FROMFOR
To lel Property Taxes
1,9 3, 06
Current! 1171" sue - Est ,944,600
ata
sca
oca
ocai=Pm
as
as 1UTa,e•w1 a
4,37.-
-
Present Value ofTu Increment
Difference
Annual Dross TIF
lex
Disparities
Tax
Property
Disparities
Property
Value
Total
Texas Per
New U♦e
Ca ac
Tax Ca ac
Ca aci
Taxes
xe
Tam,
Taxes
Taxes
Taxes
Sq. FtJUnit
office
867,6 1
281,1931
666,640
687,382
466,684
469,966
99,476
1,705,499
6.64
Retail
13,467
4,360
9,097
10,668
7,112
7,132
1,542
26,446
10.58
Retail
107,663
34,681
72 772
86 68
56 899
67 056
12340
211 662
10.58
5,951
320,434
9
1,943,606
i Taxes and tax Increment will vary signticantiy
from year to year depending upon values,rates, state law, fiscal disparities and other factors
vAtkh cannot be predicted.
WHAT IS ♦ a FROMFOR
To lel Property Taxes
1,9 3, 06
Current! 1171" sue - Est ,944,600
less State-wide Tues
(624,144)
New Market Value - Est. 49447667
less Fiscal Disp. Adj.
(622,695)
Difference zvul
less Market ValueTaxes
less Base Value Taxes
(113,359)
(46,466)
Present Value ofTu Increment
Difference
Annual Dross TIF
737,550
Value likely to occurvRhout Tax increment is less than:
R Wlad by EN.. 6 Assist,,, Inc.-ESIhesla, ONy N:NIw15oa1Eolt1AWousbg Emmni6e ReNawbpmntlTlFITIF D'sNttsLLEnlapen-17I alnswP— ... 1A4.1a(Elua1 knpacn)1Pe,axaee N*711 1—as--means varves 1.1119
1/1720t4
Tax Imemnt Cadit W -Page 3
�HL�RS
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2.
City of Edina
197,600 sq, ft office and 22,500 sq. ft retail - Shenehon values
%237
OTC
Project
IT..
C P ite
0'10111.1
Ta -
C IN
- Ftseal
�Isparitles
1 tai
C.Plur.d
Taz
C W !t9
Leeel
Taz
Rte
"Annual I
Gross Taz
I t
S..W. uai
Gross Tax
I h t
filet.
Aud1wr
036%
A....
at
10%
aem, anneal
Net Tax
I t
aennw.oa,e,
Present
Value
ENDING Taz Payment
Date
Yrs. Yaar 07101115
_
-
98101118
_
-
_
02101117
-
-
-
23.101117
.
-
-
-
-
0210In8
•
_
_
-
01/18
69
02101/19
IOD%
548,302
(57,392)
(159.062)
331,849
717.171%
368.830
194,416
(700)
(19.372)
174,344
137,629
271.248
0.6
1
2019 08101119
2019 0210120
100%
908,951
(57,392)
(301.838)
629.721
IW.171%
737,850
194.415
368.925
(760)
(1.328)
(19,372)
t36,760)
174944
330,837
330,837
617,423
758,427
1.5
2
2020 MMM
2021 071121
430/,838)
629.721
117.171%
737.850
3, 25
368,925
(1,328)
(1.328)
(36.760)
(38,780)
330,837
988,469
Z5
2D21 0910121
700%
088.951
(57.392)
36698
(1,328)
(36.760)
330.831
1.213,753
3
2021 0210122
10018
888.951
(57,392)
(301,838)
828,721
717.171%
737,850
(36.760)
3M.i37
330.617
1,644,828 476
34
ZD2222 071231725
IOD%
888.951
(57,392)
(301.838)
629,721
117.171%
737.850
x,98
368,98
(1925
928)
(1,328)
(38.760)
(36,760)
330,837
330.837
1,650.995
2.051.167
4.5
5
3123 08101/23
2123 0211124
100%
988.951
(57.392)
(307,838)
629,721
117.171%
737,850
36898
3025
(1.328)
(1,328)
(35,760)
(36,760)
330.837
330.617
2,245,489
2.434.161
5.5
6
2024 0810124
2024 021125
IOD%
988.951
(57,392)
(301.8")
829.721
117.171%
737,850
368,925
368, 925
(1,328)
(L328)
(38,760)
(36.760)
330im
330837
2.617,337
2.785,179
6.5
7
8871
2125 026
2025 0210126
100%
988,951
(57,392)
(601,83)
629.721
117.171%
737,850
368,925
368,925
(1928)
(1.328)
(36,]80)
(36,760)
360,617
33DA37
2,967.840
3,135.473
7.5
B
22326 0887126
2028 0210127
629.721
117.171%
737,850
368,925
366025
(1,328)
(1,328)
(36,700)
(36.]60)
330337
3,296713
8.5
2027 0810127
100%
988,957
(57,392)
(301.838)
368,98
(1,328)
(38.760)
330.837
3.456.233
8
2027 0210728
IOD%
9811,951
(67,392)
(301.838)
626721
117.171%
737,860
368,925
(1.W81
(38.760)
330,837
330.07
3,809,640
3,758.580
9.5
10
1029 0810128
2028 020128
100%
988,957
(51,392)
(3231,83)
628,721
117.171%
797,850
368,925
(1.325)
(36.760)
330.637
4,043,571
s
101
am
2029 07/0120
100%
988.951
(57,392)
(301338)
629,721
117.171%
737,850
8898
368.98
(1,32)
(1.32)
(36,760)
(38,760)
330,837
4,179,871
11.5
2030 0810120
386925
(1,32)
(35,760)
330,837
4,312,202
12
2030 0201/31
988.951
(57.392)
(301.83)
629,721
117.171%
737,850
368.08
(1,328)
(36.76D)
33D,837
4,"0,879
125
2031 0810121
100%
38698
(1,32)
(36,76)
330.837
4,665,413
13
2031 027222
100%
988.951
(57.392)
(301,83)
629,721
117.171%
737.850
366,98
(1,32)
(38.76)
330.837
4.688514
4,604,088
13.5
14
2032 0610722
2032 0210123
100%
988,951
(57,392)
(301,83)
623,721
117.171%
737,8`50
36603
368.925
(1,32)
(1,328)
(38.760)
(36.76)
330.837
330.837
4.918,236
5.029.061
145
15
20" 0810123
2033 0211734
100%
898.951
(57.392)
(301,838)
629,721
117.171%
737.850
366,925
M.
(1.328)
(1,32)
(36,76)
(38.760)
330.837
330.837
5,136860
5,241,123
15.5
18
2034 08101114
2034 020125
100%
906,951
(57992)
(3237.83)
629.721
117.171%
737,860
388.925
368 9Z
(1,32)
(38.760)
330,837
SjS
117
2D35 08)01M
01721/38
700%
988,951
(57,392)
(30/,83)
629,721
117.171%
737,850
368N
(1,32)
(1,32)
(36,760)
(36760)
330.837
330.837
5,441,091
5,5MAM
17.5
18
2038 0&01116
2036 02)1127
IOD%
SWASI
(57992)
(301,838)
629.721
117.171%
737,850
368,93
368.925
(1.32)
(1,328)
(38,76)
(36,760)
330.837
330,837
5,629,422
5,719,633
185
19
2037 08/01/37
2037 07/OI/M
100%
988,951
(57,392)
(301.83)
829.721
117.171%
737,850
36698
368325
(1,32)
(1,32)
(36,760)
(36.760)
330,837
330,837
330.837
5,807.019
5,891,967
5,974,422
195
20
2038 089128
2038 07101n9
100%
986951
(57,392)
(301338)
629.721
117.171%
737,850
368,929
(1.32)
(36,760)
330.76D) 330 '837 837
6,131,2814
2aS
21
2039 �
339 02)01/
160%
906951
(57,392)
(301,83)
629.72
117.171%
737,850
368,925
368.98
(1,32)
(1,32)
(36.760)
(3676)
330,837
6,217,681
21.5
22
2040 OW1/40
2040 0201141
IOD%
988.951
(57992)
(301,838)
629,721
117.171%
737,850
368,925
368,98
(1,32)
(1,328)
(36,760)
(36.760)
330337
330.837
8.280.949
6,352.083
225
23
2041 08101141
2041 01/01142
100%
9.951
88
(57,391)
(301.83)
629.721
117.171%
737,850368.525
36698
(1,32)
(1.32)
(36.760)
(36,760)
33,837
3.837
330
330,837
6,421,146
6,468.196
8553,294
235
24
2042 0891/42
2042 07/01/43
100%
988.951
(57,392)
(301,83)
629,721
117.171%
737.850
365,925
368,925
.... _...
(1,32)
(1,32)
.one,
(36,76)
(76,76)
,x 7Pn,
330.837
2+11617
6.616.498
6877.657
24.5
8
2043 0891143
2043 07101/"
N W psob'EWIAVbusry Cxoeomk Re4are!pnaMTRTTiFDea'xlPPsnapan PaMTff Runr'Lp1a.e4 R.me I.H 14lF,eal lmPxn7Panb4an P.MTff pNu b rvn-InN•a4nW,l.la.li
1/17)2014
EHLER5
{IMraSIV hPnC IrPA>,{r
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2b
City of Edina
197,600 sq, If office and 2,600 sq, k retail - Shanahan values
Base Value Assumptlons - Page 1
rause:
1. Base values are based upon review of County website on 12.184013.
Prewedby EhNna Nla1—,hr.-Estimates 0,,d N:vdhnsoWEDINAW—INEwramk RedewbpmanaTlF\TIF O'sbk{slPenhq.n PaA11I1Runn{ipdand Runs 1.14J,I(Rsal Mp.)J udaaun Pork TIF Ph -2b run- Mnhd valves 1.14.14
ASSUMPTIONSs
RATES
INFORMATION
OlStriCtType:
Radevetopment
Tax Rales
District NamdNumber.
-
County DistrictY:
Percentage
Exempt Class Rate (Exempt)
- 0.00%
First Year Construction or Inflation on Value
2019
Commercial Industrial Preferred Class Rat.(CA Pmf.),
-
Existing District - Specify No. Years Remaining
23
FT.t $150,000
1.50%
InflationRate - Every Year:
0.00%
Over $150,000
_
2.WA
Interest Rale:
6.00%
Commercial Industrial Class Rate (Cn)
2,00%
Present Value Date:
1 -Aug -19
Rental Housing Class Rate (Rental) :
1251*
First Period Ending
1 -Feb -20
AaordaWe Rental Housing Class Rate (A0. Rental)
Oda. Tax Ca Phase
Tax Year Districtwas Certified
Pay 2014
Fast -$100,000
- 0.75%
Cash flow Assumes First Tax Increment For Development
2021
Wer 5900,000
'0.25%
Years of Tax incremam
23
Non -Homestead Residential (Nun -H Res. Unit)
-...
Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment
2043
Fast $500,000
),ggg6
Recai Disparities Election [Outside (A), lade (B), or NA)
Inside(B)
Over $500,000
125%,
Incremental or Total Fiscal Disparities
Incremental
Homestead Residental Class Rat. (Humid. Res.)
Fiscal Disparities Cmtdbubon Rado
32.4014% Pay 2014
".First $500,000 -
1;00%
Fiscal Dispedties Metro-NOde Tax Rate
163.1210% Pay 2014
Over $500,11001.00%
1.25-A
MaximurdFurten Local Tex Rate:
117.171% Pay2014
Agriculhnrai Non -Homestead
Local Tax Rate: (Use lesser of Current or Max)
117.171% Pay 2014
-
state-wide Tax Rate (C ...Ind. only used for total taxes)
53.0000% Pay 2014
Market Value Tax Rate (Used for total taxes)
0.22925% Pay 2014
rause:
1. Base values are based upon review of County website on 12.184013.
Prewedby EhNna Nla1—,hr.-Estimates 0,,d N:vdhnsoWEDINAW—INEwramk RedewbpmanaTlF\TIF O'sbk{slPenhq.n PaA11I1Runn{ipdand Runs 1.14J,I(Rsal Mp.)J udaaun Pork TIF Ph -2b run- Mnhd valves 1.14.14
BASE
VALUE
INFORMATION
(Origina( Tax
Capacity)
Building
Total
Percentage
-
Tax Year
Property
Current
Class
After
Land
Market
Market
Of Value Used
Original
Original
Tax
Original
Afler
Conversion Areal
Map
a 6 PID Owner Address Market Value
Value
Value
for District
Market Value
Market Value
Class
Tax Ca ac
Conversion
Oda. Tax Ca Phase
3102624340008 Pentagon N C 2,008,600
1,000
2,009,600
100%
- 2,009,600
Pay2014
Cil
40,192
Crl
.
40, 92
-2.M 1 G(rl
1 n x1
2 u ' rwl
2,009,600
40192
40,192
rause:
1. Base values are based upon review of County website on 12.184013.
Prewedby EhNna Nla1—,hr.-Estimates 0,,d N:vdhnsoWEDINAW—INEwramk RedewbpmanaTlF\TIF O'sbk{slPenhq.n PaA11I1Runn{ipdand Runs 1.14J,I(Rsal Mp.)J udaaun Pork TIF Ph -2b run- Mnhd valves 1.14.14
t11712014
19 EHLERS
11a0[aS W rUe1�C 1txMi[
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2b
City of Edina
197,500 sq. It office and 2,600 sq. If retail - Shenehon values
Base Value Assumptions - Page 2
Note:
1. Market values are basal upon estimates provlded by Shenehon on 141-2014.
trom year to year oepenurrsg
PROJECT•'
TAX CALCULATIONS
(Project
Capacity)
WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM
Estinated Taxable
Total Taxable
Property
ate
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
First Year
Tax
Market Value Market Value Total
e!
Market
Tax
Project
-- Project Tax Completed
Completed
Completed
2021
CompNted
F.11—
Pa Na
AraalPha"
New Use Per Sq.FWnR .Peri .FWnit Sq. IF nils
Value
Cie.,
leu Capacity
- Ca ae nit 2019
202D
Jim
100%
100%
100%
I
2022
Group
O ce 220 197.600
43,392,067 ::';
'
CO
867.841
4 60%
6 50%
100°.6
1004.
2022
Gr 4
Rem9 269 269 T 600
672 833 -
CB
13 457
ro
Note:
1. Market values are basal upon estimates provlded by Shenehon on 141-2014.
1. Taxes and tax)ncrolnent will vary signhcantly
trom year to year oepenurrsg
Upon v U., ---- -_._..__---_
TAX CALCULATIONS
which cannot be predicted.
WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM
ora
oca
ra
ate
e[
less Slale•wide Taxes
(467A88)
o
Tax
iso
Disparities
Tax
Property
Disparities
Property
Value
Total
Taxes
Texas Per
sq. Ftlumt
New Use Ca a
867,841
Tax Ca ac
281,193
Capacity
686,849
Taxes
6 82
Tues
468A84
Taxes
459, 56
Taxes
99,476
1,706,499
8.64
Office
Retail 134574
60
9097
995
10668-
69WA41
7112
4d.797
7 132
15,642
26 M6
10.58
TOTAL
Nota:
1. Taxes and tax)ncrolnent will vary signhcantly
trom year to year oepenurrsg
Upon v U., ---- -_._..__---_
which cannot be predicted.
WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM
Total Property Taxes
1,731,944
Cunard Market sue -Eat.
2•�•
41;;i901
less Slale•wide Taxes
(467A88)
New Market Value - Est.
lass Fiscal Oisp.Adj.
(466,797)
Difference
7 6
lacs Market Valu¢7axes
It9fA19)
Present Value of Tax Increment
less Bele Value Taxes
(31,834)
Difference
Value liketv to occur without Tax Increment is less than:
Amlual Gross TIF
Repared by ENnaaquodates,Inc.-ESNretesoY N:V,Ievuoex:erlAWaebgE..-R,4WM, ,,%7JMJF aelddaebNaaaa P MTIF RMAUPdead P un 1.14.141Bcal"q )—W N& W— 1- 2b m. Maatadvatwa 1. 14.14
1/17/2014
EHLERS
hart+l a rvnry nRAul
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2b
City of Edina
197,500 sq, ft office and 2,500 sq. ft retail - Shenehon values
Tax Increment Cashflow - Page 3
OTC
OTC
Project
Tax -
- Capacity
Original
Tax
Capacity
Fiscal
Disparities
Incremental
Captured
Tax
Capacity
Local
Tax
Rate
Annual
,` Gross Tax
Increment
Semi -Annual
Gross Tax
Increment
State
Auditor
036%
Admin.
at
106
Semi -Annual
Net Tax
Increment
Semi -Annual
Present
Value
PERIOD
ENDING Tax Payment
Yrs Yea oat
0 1
-
-
08/07/20
t00%
440,649
(40,192)
(129,754)
270,703
117.171%
317,186
158,593
571
( )
(15,802)
142,220
126;3fi0
0.5
02/01/21
2021 08/0121
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
158,593
333,103
(571)
(1,198)
(15,602)
(33,190)
142,220
298,713
249,040
499,208
1
1.5
2021 02/0122
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
668,576
117.171%
665,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
742,090
2
2022 08/01/22
2022 0210123
100%
881,208
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
{1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
877,897
1,206,838
1,429,107
2.5
3
3.5
2023 08/0123
2023 02/0124
2024 08/0124
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
588,576
117.171%
668,216
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
1,644,904
1,854,415
4
4.5
2024 02/01/26
100%
681,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
2,057,825
2,255,309
5
2025 08/01/25
2025 02/01/26
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
2,447,042
2,633,191
5.5
6
6.5
2026 06/0126
2026 02/0127
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
566,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
2,813,917
7
2027 0810127
2027 02/0128
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
588,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
2,989,360
3,159,732
3,325,122
7.5
8
8.5
2028 0810128
2028 02/0129
2029
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,630)
566,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
3,465,698
3,641,592
9
08101129
2029 02/01/30
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
586,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
3,792,947
3,939,895
9.5
10
10.5
2030 08/01/30
2030 02/01/31
2031
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,578
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
4,082,662
4,221,074
11
11.5
08/01131
2031 02/01/32
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
586,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,189)
(1,199)
(33,190)
298,713
4,355,551
12
2032 06/01/32
2032 02101/33
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,198)
(1,190)
(33,190)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
298,713
4,486,112
4,612,870
4,735,936
12.5
13
13.5
2033 08/01/33
2033 02/01/34
2034 08101/34
333,103
(1,199)
(33,190)
296,713
4,855,418
14
2034 02/01/35
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
(1,199)
(33,190)
298,713
4,971,419
14.5
2035 08/01/35
100%
881,286
(40,192)
(272530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
5,084,042
5,193,384
15
2035 02/0128
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,1 D3
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
5,299,542
5,402,606
15.5
16
16.5
2036 08/01/36
2036 02/0127
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
5,502,672
6,599,821
17
2037 08/01/37
2037 02/01/38
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,19D)
298,713
298,713
5,894,141
5,785,714
17.5
18
2038 08101/38
2038 02/01/39
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
668,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,198)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
5.874,619
5,960,935
18.5
19
2039 08/01/39
2039 02/01/40
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)_
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
6,044,737
6,128,098
19.5
20
20.5
2040 08/01/40
2040 02/01/41
100%
881298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
298,713
298,713
6,205,090
8,281,781
21
21.5
2041 08101/41
2041 02/01/42
2042
100%
881,298
(40,192)
(272,530)
568,576
117.171%
666,206
333,103
333,103
(1,199)
(1,199)
(33,190)
(33,190)
296,713
298,713
6.358,237
6,428,526
22
22.6
08/01/42
2042 02/01/43
2043 08101/43
P.N,t bjI-'. a Assad-. - - wy 14: NCnnsata1E01RAV4J EcsraWe RedavebPmeN\TIFlTIF Pe TIF RUMWPdWRu 1.14.14(Flsca1lmpads)V'entagw, Ik T F Phas4 M6 - IneRed VAWOS 1. 14.14
1/172014
E_H LLEE RS
uduxslRrveuanaAAc1
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2c
City of Edina
197,600 sq. R office and 2,600 sq. R retail -Shenehon values
ASSUh1PTIONS AND RATES
Base Value Assumptions - Page 1
DistdclType:
Redevelopment
Tax Rales
District NamdNumber.
-
County(istdct il:
Exempt Class Rate (E ..*)
0.00%
First Year Construction w Inflation on Value
2021
Commercial Yrdost,fa( Referred Class Rate (CA Ret)
Existing District - Specify No. Years Remakdng
21
--Fast $150.000 -
1.50%
Inflation Rate - Every Year.
0.00%Ovar
'-$150,000
2.00%
Interest Rate:
6.00%
Commercial Industrial Class Rate (CA)
2.00%
Present Value Date:
1 -Aug -19
Rental —firg Class Rale (Rental)
125%
First Period EmFng
1 -Feb -20
Affordable Rental Housing Gass Rate (Alf. Rental)
Tax Year District woe Certified:
Pay2014
First $100,000
0.75%
CashflowAssumes First Tax Increment For Development
2023
Over--.-$ID0,000 -
.025%
Years of Tax Increment
21
N—Homestead Residential (Non -H Res. Unit)
•
Assumes Last Year of Tax klcnsrent
2043
- - First $500.000
1.00%
Fecal Disparities Election (Outside (A), Inside B1. or NA]
Inside(B)
Over 6500.000
125%
Incremental wTotal Racal EX.P.4 es
Incremental
Homestead Realderdd Class Rate (Mmud. Res.)
Fecal Disparlies Contribution Reda
32-4014% Pay 2014
Fast --6500,000
1.00%
Fscai Dispadles Metro -Wide Tax Rate
163.1210% Pay 2014
Over 6500,000 -
125%
Maldmumi sten Local Tax Rate:
117.171%. Pay 2014
-. AgdcrdCrral Noriftmestead
1.00%
Cunard Local Tax Rate: (Use lesser of Curent or Max.)
117.171% Pay 2014
State-vAde Tax Rate (C Jird. only used for total taxes)
53AOOD% Pay 2014
MerketValue Tax Pate (Used for total taxes)
0.22925-/. Pay2014
Note:
1. Base values are based upon review of Countywehsite on 12.18-2013.
ft by EN.n aAsa„dabs. M..-E,1Nuh, eNy
N:NR brIEralAW W,g Emmmk fledevabgmMITIFlTIF 0isekhV'.nha.n Paa1T1FRvdsalP—dRw1.14.14(Fiscal u,Pads)-9.rP.d, TIF Faa.2cna anaaadvaW, 1.1414
1/1712014
EHLERS
llAO(x0lx FU011e rlxARy[
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2c
City of Edina
197,600 sq. R office and 2,600 sq. R retail - Shenehon values
Base Value Assumptions - Page 2
Note:
1. Market values are based upon estirretes provided by Shanahan on 1-02014.
ora
PROJECT•'
ow
TAX CALCULATIONS
oca
sca
rata -w e
a et
Total Property Texas -
1,731,944
Estimated Taxable
Total Taxable
Property
Property
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
Fimt Tear
Market Value Market Value Total
: Market
Tax
Project
Project Tax Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Full Taxes
Area/Phase New Use Per Sy. FtNnH Per Sq.FtJUnh Sq.FtJUnits
-::..-Value
Class :J`--Tas
Capacity
CapacitylUna 2021
2022
2023
2024
Payable
Group 5 Oce 210 2220 197,500
143,392,067
CJI
_..867,841
- 4 50%
10096
low/.
100%
2024
Groups Retell 269 269 2,500
672833
CA
-17
5 50%
1006
100'.6
100%
2024
,900
1,
Note:
1. Market values are based upon estirretes provided by Shanahan on 1-02014.
ora
sca
ow
TAX CALCULATIONS
oca
sca
rata -w e
a et
Total Property Texas -
1,731,944
Tax
Disparities
Tax
Property
Disperitles
Property
Value
Total
Texas Per
Naw lUa Capacity
Tax Camcfty
Capacity
Taxes
Taxes
Taxes
Taxes
Taxes
Sq. FUUnb
Office 867,841
281,193
586,649
687,382
458,684
465,956
99,476
1.,705,499
8.64
Retail 13.467
4,360
9.097
10.658
7 112
713 1
1642
' 2. 446
10.68
881,298
Nota:
286,653
1. Taxes and tax Increment will vary signficantly From year to year depending upon values, rates, state law, fiscal disparities and other factors
which cannot he predicted.
WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM
TIF?
MARKETEst!
Total Property Texas -
1,731,944
Cuaent Market aloe 1,653,000
less State-vilde Texas
(467,066)
New Market Value - Est. 44064900
lesc Fiscal Disp.Adj.
(466,797)
DiBerence
less Market Value Taxes
(101,019(
PreseMValue of Tax Increment 7
less Base Value Taxes
(24,601(
Difference
Annual Gross TIF
Value likely to occur wilhout Tax lnaemen[is less Oran:
Pmpraaby ENen a &—W, N.. - .— Orly 11AIm I.WDRIAWou,i,p---Rrdavrlepn 011RW DinmuT4nha Pah\TIF R—Upd-d Rmr 1.14.14(F—krpace)Na p, Pak t1F ft 2— 4naakd vllws 1.14.14
11172014 Tex Increment CasnBow-Page 3
EHLERS
lld RS e! ryetip 3,I,ltpl
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2c
City of Edina
197,500 sq. ft office and 2,500 sq. ft retail - Shenehon values
N,plad by EMM a A-6245, xo. -rst at-orrd 11 UnnntalEanAelovd,a ER« RadaWI.M614MRTIF DIa14dnlPad29w PAWTIF Rwuxlpdut Runs 1.1k lFk II"ds)-aya, Pa TIF Man 2e mn A,duadaawaa 134.14
TAX4AGRECTIERT
URSM
11
Project
Original
- Fiscal
Captured
Local
<.-Annual
Semi -Annual
State
Admin.
Semi -Annual
Semi -Annual
PERIOD
%of
-Tax
Tax -
Disparities
.Tax
Tax
-Gross Tax
Gross Tax
Auditor
at
Net Tax
Present
ENDING
Tax Payment
OTC
- Capacity-
'Capacity
Incremental
Capacity
- Rate
Increment
Increment
036%
10%
Increment
Value
Yrs.
Year Date
0210120
08/01/20
0210121
08/0121
0210122
08/0122
02(0123
100%
440,649
(31,060)
(132,713)
276,676
117.171%
324,419
162,208
(584)
(16,163)
145,463
114,830
0.5
2023 0810123
162,209
(584)
(16,163)
145,463
226,315
1
2023 02/0124
100%
881,298
(31.060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
450,999
1.5
2024 08/01/24
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301.957
669,139
2
2024 02/0125
100%
881,298
(31,080)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
338,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
880,925
25
2025 08101/25
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
1,086,543
3
2025 02)0126
100%
681,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117./71%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
1,285,172
3.5
2026 08/01126
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
1,479,986
4
2026 0210127
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301.957
1,668,156
4.5
2027 08101127
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
1,850,845
5
2027 02/01/28
100%
881,288
(31,080)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301.957
2,028,212
5.5
2028 08101/28
336,720
(1,212)
(33,651)
301,957
2,200,414
6
2028 02/01/29
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
2,367,500
U
2029 08/01/29
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
2,529,917
7
2029 02101130
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
2,687,506
7.5
2030 08101/30
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
2,840,504
8
2030 02/01/31
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
2,989,047
8.5
2031 OW1131
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
3,133263
9
2031 02101132
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,651)
301,957
3,273,279
9.5
2032 08101/32
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
3,409,217
10
2032 02/01133
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
3,541,195
10.5
2033 08/01/33
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
3,669,329
11
2033 02(01/34
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
3,793,731
11.5
2034 08101134
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
3,914,510
12
2034 02/01/35
100%
881,298
(31,080)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
4,031,771
12.5
2035 08101)35
336,720
(1,212)
(33.551)
301,957
4,145,616
13
2035 02/01136
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
4,256,146
13.5
2036 06/01/36
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
4,363,456
14
2036 02/01/37
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
4,467,641
14.5
2037 08/01137
-
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
4,558,792
15
2037 02/01138
100%
881,298
(31,D60)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
4,666,996
15.5
2038 WOWS
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
4,762.340
16
2038 02701/39
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
4,851,907
16.5
2039 08/01139
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
4,944,777
17
2039 02/01/40
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301.957
5,032,030
17.5
2040 08/01140
338,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
5,116,742
18
2040 02'01141
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
5,198,987
16.5
2041 08/01/41
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
5,278,836
19
2041 02/01/42
1009(0
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
$74,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
5,356,359
19.5
2042 08/01/42
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
5,431,624
20
2042 02/01/43
100%
881,298
(31,060)
(275,489)
574,749
117.171%
673,439
336,720
(1,212)
(33,551)
301,957
5,504,698
20.5
2043 08/01/43
336,720
(1,212)
(33.551)
301.957
5,575,642
21
2043 02/01144
Total
13,783,202
(49,658)
(1,374,366)
12,369,191
'_ •
'
'Present Value From 081012019
-Present Value Rate
`' 800%
-6;217,641
122,3831
11619,616)
-6,676,642
N,plad by EMM a A-6245, xo. -rst at-orrd 11 UnnntalEanAelovd,a ER« RadaWI.M614MRTIF DIa14dnlPad29w PAWTIF Rwuxlpdut Runs 1.1k lFk II"ds)-aya, Pa TIF Man 2e mn A,duadaawaa 134.14
FYIFyt�LI
49 FHLERS
We1Pi IN peel+a nk-W
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2d
City of Edina
297,600 sq. floffice and 2,500 sq. ft retail-Shenehon values
Base Value Assumptions - page 1
Distri"Type:
Redevelopment
Tax Rates
VALUE
District NamelNumber.
-
County District 8:
Exempt Class Rate (Exempt) -
` 0,00%
First Year Construction or Inflation on Value
2023
Commercial Industdal Pretend Class Rate (C11 Fret)
Percentage
Existing District - Specify No. Years Remaining
19
First "$150,000
1-50%
Inflation Rate -Every Year.
0.00%
Over $150,000::
2,00ab
Interest Rate:
9.00%
Commercial IfdusMal Class Rate (CII)
_:..2001%
Present Value Data.
1 -Aug -19
Rental Housing Class Rate (Rental) -
-x'1,25%
Fkst Period Ending
i -Feb -20
Affordable Renal Housing Claes Rate (All. Rental)
-
Tax Year District was Cer00ed:
Pay2014
First $100000
0.75%
Cashflow Assumes First Tax Increment For Development
2025
- Over ..:$100,000
0.25.5
Years of Tax Increment
19
Non -Homestead Residential (Non -H Resat U il)
750,1
Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment
2043
-' First >.-$500,000
1.0�
Fiscal Disparities Flection(Ousice(A), Inside(B),wNA)
lnside(B)
Over -- -$500,000
125%
Incremental" Total Fiscal Disparities
Incremental
Homestead ResidentallClass Rate(Hmstd. Res.)
100%
Fiscal D i pwgi: Contribution Ratio
32.4014% Pay 2014
First -.': $500,000
1.00%
Fiscal Disparities Metro -Wide Tax Rale
163.1210% Pay 2014
- Over $500,000
1.001A
local Tex Rate:
Maxent
117.171% Pay 2014
gryicWavai Non -Homestead
745,000
L. "I Tax
Current Locei Tax Rete: (Use lesser of Current of Max.)
117.171% Pey 2014
-
.1.00%
State -Vide Tax Rate (Com And. only Used for total taxes)
53.0000% Pay 2014
971,700
740,900
Market Value Tax Rate (Used for total taxes)
022925% Pay 2014
1,712,600
Pay 2014
Note:
1. Base values are based upon review of County website on 12.184013.
Repand ay EN¢n IsAaaedaP.. Inc.- a_CNy N:alMnaaaIEDINAWoustrp Ecen¢rtkR¢NvebpmantlTIFlTIF DNW1,Wentaggn P -IF Rm IVpdaled Re 134.114(R lbnpads)AP-g..Padl TIFPka¢d2d.-b,Raradvslwa 1.1414
VALUE
INFORMATIONBASE
Building
Total
Percentage
Tax Year
Property
Current
Class
After
Land
Market
Market
Of Value Used
Original
Original
Tax
Original
After
Conversion Area/
illare tl PID Owner Address
Market Value
Value
Value
for Distdct
Market Value
Market Value
Class
Tax Ca acct
Conversluu
Orig.Tax Cap, Phase
3102824 30 2 Pentagon N LLC
749.100
,600
750,1
lowh
750,100
ay2 1
CA
15,002
A
15,002
3102824430003 Pentagon N LLC
1,050,300
886,900
1,937,200
100%
1,937,200
Pay2014
CA
38,744
CA
38,744
3102824430004 Pentagon N LLC
744,000
1,000
745,000
1009A
745,000
Pay 2014
CA
14,900
CA
14,800
3102824430005 Pentagon N LLC
971,700
740,900
1,712,600
100¢1¢
1,712,600
Pay 2014
CA
34,252
Ca
34,252
3102824430006 Pentagon N LLC
969,700
742,900
1,712,600
100%
1,712,600
Pay 2014
CA
34,252
Cn
34,252
iA,.1.F.^0
2,',72.10;1
r; iJeZsat
6.867600
137,160
.._137160
Note:
1. Base values are based upon review of County website on 12.184013.
Repand ay EN¢n IsAaaedaP.. Inc.- a_CNy N:alMnaaaIEDINAWoustrp Ecen¢rtkR¢NvebpmantlTIFlTIF DNW1,Wentaggn P -IF Rm IVpdaled Re 134.114(R lbnpads)AP-g..Padl TIFPka¢d2d.-b,Raradvslwa 1.1414
111712014
19 EHLERS
llAo(" Wa(rc"7
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2d
City of Edina
297,600 sq. It office and 2,500 sq. it retail - Shenehon values
base Value Assump0ona - Page 2
Note:
1. Market values are based upon estimates provided by Shenehon on 1.9.2014.
varysignncanuy from yeano year
PROJECT••
whichcannot be predicted.
WHAT IS EXCLUDED
o sw
oe
oca
EstimatedTaxable
ate•1w a
Total Taxable
Property
Tax DlspanTies
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
First Year
Markel Value MaFketValue
Total
Markel
Tax
Prated
protectgn Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Full Taxes
ArearPhase New Use PerS .FtNna Per SQ.FWnil
FtJUnhs
.Value
class
Tax Ca eel
'� CapsciryNnit 2023
2024
2026
2028
Pa bk
Group ce 2 0 220
500
65,382,73.
Cn
7,307,255
4 50°,6
100%
100°.4
100Ya
26
Gr 6 Retail 269 269
2600
'_. S72 833 -
CA
13.467 -:_
5 50%
100%
100%
100%
2028
7
Note:
1. Market values are based upon estimates provided by Shenehon on 1.9.2014.
1. Taxes and tax Increment will
varysignncanuy from yeano year
TAX CALCULATIONS
whichcannot be predicted.
WHAT IS EXCLUDED
o sw
oe
oca
2,696,488
ate•1w a
ret
(699,977)
Tax DlspanTies
Tax
Property
Disparities
Property
Valuo
Total Taxes Per
New U•e Ca Tax Ca a
Ca c
Taxes
Taxes
T es
Taxes
Taxes Sq. FWnil
Offwe 1,507,265 123,689
083,600
1,036,424
9
692,845
149,
2,689,
Retail 13 467 4 560
8 097
10 650
7112
7132
1542
26 445 10.68
Nota:
1. Taxes and tax Increment will
varysignncanuy from yeano year
aepemmng upon varves, ra.es, smres—
aw,asca,which
whichcannot be predicted.
WHAT IS EXCLUDED
••
MARKETa
Total PrgxrtyTazes
2,696,488
Cuaml Market aiue 6,9
l71
eas State-wide Tates
(699,977)
New Markel Value - Est. 66035,961
le ss Fiscal Disp.Adi.
(698,042)
010erence
less MarketVatue Taxes
(161,387)
PresentValueofTaximerrent _5
less Base Value Taxes
108,631)
Difference 023.130
Annual Gross ilF
Value likely to cc" vdtWhd Tax Increment is less than:
N.,," e7 ENad a Asiodaas, Mn.-Euti slrn 0,d/ N.Y.—blEDIIAW—Ing Etta w Radwrbpmnan— DisMc —9•12 Pakn1F R—UP—d Ree 1.1—(Feu- bnpaM)Wneagen Pak nF Feria ad,m.NUW vanes 1.1d.1d
1/17/2014 Tax Increment CashBow -Page 3
49 EHLERS
d4lle91a N&k lla4M:(
Pentagon Park TIF District - Phase 2d
City of Edina
297,500 sq. ft office and 2,500 sq. ft retail - Shenehon values
Prepared Ey ER, It Ms ute 1 --Estimates Only n:N4n-WE01NAWou gE-Mn Red4Ve.".r ITIRTIF Dietda T,Megan PerkmF RunsWp&W Ruos 1.14.14(ri-I h pads)TeMagan Palk TIF Pkase 2 run- inhaled Valdes 1.14.14
Project
origin
- Fiscal
Captured
Local
- Annual
Semi -Annual
state
Admin.
Seml-Annual
Saml-Annual
PERI00
% of
Tax
TX
Disparities
Tax
Tax
Gross Tax
I
Gross Taz
AudOor
at
Net Tax
.Present
ENDING
Tax Payment
OTC
- Capacity
Capacity
Incremental
Capacity
Rate
Increment
Increment
0.36%
10%
Increment
Value
Yrs.
Year Date
010
-
-
-
-
0810120
-
-
-
02/0121
-
-
-
-
0810121
02/0122
08101/22
02/0123
-
-
-
-
0810123
-
-
-
-
02101/24
-
-
-
08101/24
-
02/0125
100%
860,356.
(137,150)
(169,526)
353,880
117.171%
414,410
207,205
(746)
(20,646)
185,813
130,328
0.5
2025 08/01/25
207,205
(746)
(20,646)
185,813
256,855
1
2025 02/01126
100%
1.320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
534,746
1.5
2028 08/0126
488,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
804,542
2
2026 02/01/27
100%
1;320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
458,726
(1,687)
(48,704)
420,334
1,066,481
2.5
2027 0810127
458,726
(1,887)
(46,704)
420,334
1,320,790
3
2027 02101/28
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
600,071
117.171%
937,451
468,726
(1,667)
(46,704)
420,334
1,667,692
3.5
2028 08/01/28
488,726
(1,667)
(46,704)
420,334
1,807,403
4
2028 02/01129
100%
1,329,711
(137,150)
(387,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
2,040,132
4.5
2029 08/0129
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
2,266,082
5
2029 92101/30
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
468,725
(1,687)
(48,704)
420,334
2,485,452
5.5
2030 08101/30
468,726
(1,667)
(46,704)
420,334
2,698,432
9
2030 02/01/31
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
468,725
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
2,905208
6.5
2031 08/01/31
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
3,105,962
7
2031 02/01/32
100%1.320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
468,726
(1,887)
(46,704)
420,334
3,300,869
7.5
2032 08/01/32
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
3,490,099
8
2032 02/01/33
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
466,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
3,673,817
8.5
2033 88/01/33
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
3,652,185
9
2033 02/01/34
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
4,025,357
9.5
2034 08/01/34
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
4,193,485
10
2034 02101/35
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
468,726
(1,667)
(46,704)
420,334
4,356,716
10.5
2035 08101/35
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
4,515,193
11
2035 02101/36
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
600,071
117.171%
937,451
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
4,669,055
11.5
2038 08/01/36
488,726
(1.687)
(46,704)
420,334
4,818,435
12
2036 02101/37
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
4,963,464
12.5
2037 08/01/37
488,726
(1,687)
(48,704)
420,334
5,104,268
13
2037 02101/38
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
5240,972
13.5
2038 08101/38
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
5,373,694
14
2038 02/01/39
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
486,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
5,502,550
14.5
2039 08/01/39
488,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
5,627,654
15
2039 02/01/40
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(363,490)
800,D71
117.171%
937,451
468,728
(1,887)
(48,704)
420,334
5,749,113
15.5
2040 08101)40
468,728
(1,687)
(48,704)
420,334
5,867,035
18
2040 02/01/41
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
468,726
(11687)
(48,704)
420,334
5,981,522
16.5
2041 08/01/41
488,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
6,092,675
17
2041 02/01/42
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(363,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
488,728
(1,887)
(48,704)
420,394
8,200,590
17.5
2042 08101/42
468,726
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
8,305,362
18
2042 02/01/43
100%
1,320,711
(137,150)
(383,490)
800,071
117.171%
937,451
468,728
(1,687)
(46,704)
420,334
9,407,082
18.5
2043 08101/43
Prepared Ey ER, It Ms ute 1 --Estimates Only n:N4n-WE01NAWou gE-Mn Red4Ve.".r ITIRTIF Dietda T,Megan PerkmF RunsWp&W Ruos 1.14.14(ri-I h pads)TeMagan Palk TIF Pkase 2 run- inhaled Valdes 1.14.14
Appendix E
Minnesota Business Assistance Form
(Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development)
A Minnesota Business Assistance Form (MBAF) should be used to report and/or update each calendar year's
activity by April 1 of the following year.
Please see the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) website at
http://www.deed.state.inn.us/Coinmunity/subsidies/MBAFFoi-m.htm for information and forms.
Appendix E"t
Appendix F
Redevelopment Qualifications for the District
Appendix F-1
Appendix G
Findings Including But/For Qualifications
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF
Plan) for Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District (District), as required pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows:
1. Finding that the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District is a redevelopment district as defined
in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10.
The District consists of 16 parcels, with plans to redevelop the area for commercial/industrial purposes.
At least 70 percent of the area of the parcels in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities,
paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings in the
District, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial
renovation or clearance. (See Appendix F of the TIF Plan.)
Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, tivould not reasonably be
expected to occur solely through private investment ivithin the reasonably foreseeable fitttn•e and that the
increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur ivithout the use of tax
increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result front the
proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the
maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan.
The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely
through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact
that the redevelopment proposed in the TIF Plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment. Due to
the high cost of redevelopment on the parcels currently occupied by substandard buildings, the limited
amount of commercial/industrial property for expansion adjacent to the existing project and the cost of
financing the proposed improvements, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax
increment financing. The developer was asked for and provided a letter and a proforma as justification
that the developer would not have gone forward without tax increment assistance.
The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur ti ,ithout the use of tax
incrementfinancing tivould be less than the increase in market value estimated to resultfi•om theproposed
development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increm entsfor the maxinnan duration
ofthe Districtpermitted by the TIFPlan: This finding is justified on the grounds that the cost of site and
public improvements and utilities add to the total redevelopment cost. Historically, site and public
improvements costs in this area have made redevelopment infeasible without tax increment assistance.
The City reasonably determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope is anticipated on this site
without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development.
Therefore, the City concludes as follows:
The City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the entire District will
increase without the use of tax increment financing is $0.
b. If the proposed development occurs, the total increase in market value will be $421,890,074
(see Appendix D of the TIF Plan)
Appendix G"t
C. The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration of the
district permitted by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $65,325,714 (see Appendix D of the TIF
Plan).
d. Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur, the Council
finds that no alternative would occur that would produce a market value increase greater than
$356,564,360 (the amount in clause b less the amount in clause c) without tax increment
assistance.
3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District conforms to the general plan for the development or
redevelopment ofthe municipality as a whole.
The Planning Commission reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF Plan conforms to the
general development plan of the City.
4. Finding that the TIFPlan for the District mill afford rnaxinnnn opportunity, consistent with the sound
needs of the City as a lvhole, for the development or redevelopment of Southeast Edina
Redevelopment Protect Area by private enterprise.
The project to be assisted by the District will result in increased employment in the City and the State
of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add ahigh
quality development to the City.
But -For Analysis
Current Market Value 18,724,900
New Market Value - Estimate 440,614,974
Difference 421,890,074
Present Value of Tax Increment 65,325,714
Difference 356,564,360
Value Likely to Occur Without TIF is Less Than: 356,564,360
Appendix G_2
Appendix H
Building Permits
Appendix H-1
Report Name; Permit Search
City Of Edina
•J
Printed: 1/2/2014
Permit Search Results
Page; I
Permit# Permit Tvne
Sub Tyne )York Tvne Description House
Sheet
!1011
Rac Issued Dale Fimd Dxtr Dead Date ancel
Dain
F;xo Date Valim .—,IJ!
ePrrmif
User
l User2
ED12SO97 Building
OfCa,Ban AllemWalit Install (2) 4510
77th St W
,.1220/2013.
3,600
No
k'Professio emodel fire
31
jxs
-
nal damper tnti
(324er437 ler rm1(2) in
elevator
equip rm
ED126486 Building
Onca,Ban AlterationB Interior 4600
77th St W
355
FOGG & 12/11/2013
61,480
No
jxs
k,Professio =odea tenant
POWERS/
31
nal improvemen
PENTAG
(324or437 ts
ON PARK
)
E0125655 Building
Restaurant NeNTenani Tenant 4920
77thStW
MAKERS 17!0211013
275,000
No
31
(327or437 Finish impioyemen
CAPE
ts
ED126014 Building
Offs -,Ban 'NewTenatd new tenant -4600
771hStW
200
VICTORY 11/192013
33,788
No
jo
sk
k,Professio Finish
SALES
-
nal
(374or437
)
ED127235 Building
ORce,Ban Addition Install egress 4510
77th St IN
PENTAG 11/1 512 0 13
6,700
No
)1
-sk
k,Professia. system to
ON PARK
nal cud access
(324or437 doors - fire
alert trigger
ED125439 Building
Offroe,Ban NcwTcnanl tenant 4600
77th St W
275
10=2013 '
24,720
No
jo
k,Professio Finish improvement
not t
(324or437
E0125411 Building
Industrial Maintenance- remoyeroof 4625
77th SiW
SEAGATE/0282013
157,000
No
jo
Building lRepair/Repi ittembrancA
-
(320or437 ace nslali new
ED124379 Building
ODioeBan New Tenant interior 4940
77thStW
CAPE 10/2112013
483,395
No
jl
�t
k,Pmfessio Finish buiidoutfor
INC.
nal nese tenant
(324or437
ED124861 Building
OtSee,Ban Aileration/R Inslaliegress 4570
-
77thS1W
-
PENTAG X10/182013 11/06/1013
5,300
No
jl
k,Professio emodel system to
ON PARK
-
not card access
_
(324or437 doors
-
ED124840 Building
OffceJbn Alteration/R Install egress. 4600
770, St
PENTAD .101182013 11/06/2013
5,300
No
31
k,Proressio emodel system to
ON PARK
nal card access
(324or437 doors
{
ReportNamc: Permit Search City Of Edina Printed: 1=014
Page.. 2
Permit Search Results
Permit # Permit Tyne
Sub Tme )York Tyne Descriotioo House
Strte[
Unit
llst
issued Date
FinalDat Dead Dgle Cancel Date Ern Date
Valuation
tPernal U211
User
ED125269 Building
OIBec,Ban Maintenance remodel 4625
77th St W
SEAGATE
10/172013
121302013
43,000
No
jo
jt
k,Proressio /Repair/Rep] existing
nal ace struetsteel
(324or437 support for
my air
-
- handleron
roof
ED124538 Building
OfficcBan New Tenant interior 4510
77thStW
101172013
16,538
No
j
k,Professio Finish remodel
out
(324or437
13/3123319 .Building
Restaurant NewTenant INTERIOR 4970
77th St
Red Savoy
.101172013
231,011
No
in
jlI
(327m,437 Finish TENANT
-
Pian
FINISH
_
ED121198 Building
OfDce,Ban Alterationrtt Stabalizatio 4510
77th St W
PENTAG
10115=13
82,847
No
j
jss
k,Prollessio emodel alentry A he
ON
nal - ramp, 5 exit
PARK-
(324cr437 systems,grai
JWS
Is
ED123581 Building
OfTce,Bon New Tenant smai tenant 4570
771h SI W
365
lO/I42Ot3
68,686
No
j0
k,Professia Finish fmprovemcn
nal
(324or437
ED124211 Building
OfficAllan Altetation/R Interior 4625
77thStW
Seagate-
101070013
12202013
280,000
No
j
k,Professio emodel remodel
in -fill
nal
John
-
(324or437
ED123700 Building
OfficeBan New Tenant small tenant 4600
'.77thStW,
350
101032013
10/302013 -
33,214
No
j
kyrofessio Finish lmprovemen
-
nal t
-
-
(324or437
-
ED122496 Building -
Office.Ban Alteration/R Remod.1 - 4S70
- : 77di St W
, 350
LIFESPAR 0713020/3
091102013 ;
60,503
No
3T
jsys
k,Piofessio emodel tenantofLce
K
-
-
nal suite
(324or437
ED121883 Building
OBfoe,Bm NewTenant .small tenant 4510
: 77th SiW
GREAT
.:07130/2013
-
41,236
No
j -
jss3
k,Pmfessio Finish improvamen
CLIPS
nal t
(324m437
)
Report Name: Pertnit Set rsh Printed: =014City of Edina
Permit Search Results Page; 3
Bermit0 Permit Tyne Sub Tyne Work Tyne Wserudion Hmist
§jadUnit
7,500 No gb Sir
Use
Issued Dote Final Dnte Dead Date Concel Date Date
Valunfibn
ePermit User I
User
ED121780 Building
Ofrice,Ban New Tenant SMALL 4600
77thStW
200
PENTAG
07/2312013
-
176,944
No
J
Jsss
7701StW 04/152013
k,Professio Finish TENANT
k,Professio /Repair/Rep] replacement -
ONPARK
nal atc
' .(324or437
nal IMPROVE
ED120346 Building. O[Bee,Bar1 NewTtnant window 4530
NORTH
350,000 No j --sk -
k,Professlo Finish replacement
ON PARK
net & interior
-
(324or437 MENT
-
ED121928 Building
Offiee,Ban New Tenant INTERIOR 4510
77th S1W
216
D -L
07/111.2013
"09/03!1013
9,323
No
JO
jws
k,Professio Finish REMODEL
Ftelland
nal
(324or437
E0121827 Building
Office,Ban New Tenant INTERIOR ..4510
,77thStW
130
The
07/11/2013
0008013
19,413
No
JO
jws
k,Professio Finish REMODEL
Slatery
nal
Sales
(324or437
Group
)
$0120748 Building
ODice,Ban AllerationfR Small tenant 4576
' 77thStW
315
Edina
0M250013
05292013
10,500
No
ji
sk
k,Pmressio emodel improyemen
Comfort
nal t
Care
(324or437
)
ED120747 Building
0111"an Ahnm1i6rVR Small tenant 4510
77111SLW
22Q
PENTAO
04/2$2013
-
7,050
No
J7
sk
k,Professio emodel impmvemen
ON
nal t
PARK/NO
(324or437
RTH
BLDG
ED120721 Building
Office,Ban Altemtion/R Tenant 4570
77thStW
265
SUPREM
.04252013
041302013 -
26,200
No
JT
sk
_
k,Proressio emodel improvemen
-
E
nal-. t
LENDING
(324or437
-
/PENTAO
ON PARK
ED120628 Building OffoeBon NewTcnanf Minor 4570
77thStW 335 INTERNA 04/152013 04/30/2013
7,500 No gb Sir
k,Professio Finish remodelor
T10NAL
Pal tenantoffrcc
ADOPTIO
(324or437 suite -716
N
Sri R
SERVICE
-
S
-
ED12a146 Building Ofgcoan Maintenance window 4600
7701StW 04/152013
231,1Q3 No j fk
k,Professio /Repair/Rep] replacement -
nal atc
' .(324or437
ED120346 Building. O[Bee,Bar1 NewTtnant window 4530
7701StW PENTAG 032$12013
350,000 No j --sk -
k,Professlo Finish replacement
ON PARK
net & interior
-
(324or437. finish
-
Report Name: Permit Search City Of Edina
l/3/2014
y Page: 1
Permit Search Results
Permit Permit Tvnc
Sub Tvoe Work Tvae Description
House
Sireet
lnit
Usg Issued Dat c
Final Date Dead Date Cancti Date Exp Date
Veluadon epermit User
ltser2
ED122397 Building
OMccBan Altendion(R Renovate
7600
Partdawn
408
EAGLES 07/252013
28,037
No
jl
jus
k,Proressio emodel Wsttenanl
Ave
FLIGHT
nal - space
OF
(3240037
AMERIC
A
ED121521 Building
Otiice,Ban Nc vTenant modification
7600
Patklasm
225
CALHOU 07/152013
72,650
No
jo
jiVs
k,Proressia Finish ofrdsting
Ave
N
Flat - tenant space
COMPANI
(324or437
ES
ED121254 Building
OlEta )3an Altcm6on/R Renovations
7600
Parklawn
PENTAD 06272013
104,020
No
31
qi
k,Proressio emodel to interior
Ave
-
ON PARK
-
nal common
(324m,437 spaces
)
ED12169D Building
011tea,Ban AltemdoWlt Tenant
-7600
Pa!kiawn
200
TheDcley 06262013
23,613
No
Jf
Jws
k,PmOssio emodel improvemen
Ave
Group
nal t-"isdno
(324or437 offfcespace
-
-
ED101268 Building
OfficaBan New Tenant interior
.7600
Pat lasvn
103
MARTIN 08!112010
09/012010
40,000
No
jo
)k
k,Professio - Finish mmudel
Ave
EYE
nal
CARE
(324or437
CDO84278 Building
Oiic:.Ban Maintenance TENANT
7600
Porklawn
403
THURL 10116/2007
(1/062007
12,000.
No
B
-
k,Profasio /RepaidRepi REMODEL
.Ave
QUIGLEY
oat ace
-
(324or437
ED045038 Building
OfficcAft Alteration/K Tenant
7600
PARKLA
150
FIDELITY 041302007
01222010
423,000
No
-
chousc emodel finish
1VN AVE
BANK
-
(3200x437
ED039308 Building
- Offrce,Bon Alteralion/R Tenant
7600
PARKLA
450
ALL 06/02/20D6
07/13/2006 -
60,000
No
14Prokssi0 emodel finish
WNAVE
CITIES
nal
MORTGA
(324or437
GE
-
ED032017 Building -
OfficeAVar Altension/R Tenant
7600
PARKLA
225
REALTY 072312005
-
17,550
No
choose emodel finish
WN AVE
(320or437
)
ED024835 Building
Offite,Ban Aheralion/R Tenant
7600
PARKLA
350
FARMER olrosnow
0224/2001
3S,S32
No
k,Proressio emodel 6MPROVE
V/N AVE
S
nal MENTS
FINANCi
(324or437
AL
REPORT OF
INSPECTION PROCEDURES AND RESULTS
FOR
DETERMINING QUALIFICATIONS OF A
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
AS A REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Pentagon Park TIF District
Edina, Minnesota
January 13, 2014
Prepared for the
City of Edina
Prepared by
LHB, Inc.
701 Washington Avenue North, Suite 200
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
LHB Project No. 130270.00
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART1— EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................I........................2
Purnose of Evaluation............................................................................................ 2
Scopeof Work....................................................................................................... 2
Conclusion............................................................................................................. 3
PART 2 — MINNESOTA STATUTE 469.174, SUBDIVISION 10 REQUIREMENTS ............. 3
A. Coverage Test.................................................................................................. 3
B. Condition of Buildings Test............................................................................. 4
PART3 — PROCEDURES FOLLOWED..................................................................................... 5
PART4 — FINDINGS.................................................................................................................... 5
A. Coverage Test.................................................................................................. 5
B. Condition of Building Test.............................................................................. 6
1. Building Inspection............................................................................. 6
2. Replacement Cost................................................................................ 6
3. Code Deficiencies............................................................................... 7
4. System Condition Deficiencies........................................................... 7
C. Distribution of substandard structures............................................................. 8
PART5 - TEAM CREDENTIALS............................................................................................. iu
APPENDIX A TIF Analysis Summary Spreadsheet
APPENDIX B Building Code and Condition Deficiencies Reports
APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports
Code Deficiency Cost Reports
Photographs
PART 1— EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PURPOSE OF EVALUATION
LHB was hired by the City of Edina to inspect and evaluate the properties within a Tax
Increment Financing Redevelopment District ("TIF District") proposed to be established by the
City. The proposed TIF District is concentrated along West 77th Street and is roughly bounded
by Parklawn Avenue to the east, Fred Richards Golf Course to the North, and Highway 100 to
the west (Diagrams 1). The purpose of LHB's work is to determine whether the proposed TIF
District meets the statutory requirements for coverage, and whether the eighteen (18) building's
on sixteen (16) parcels, located within the proposed TIF District, meet the qualifications
required for a Redevelopment District.
Diagram 1— Proposed TIF District
SCOPE OF WORK
The proposed Pentagon Park TIF District consists of sixteen (16) parcels with eighteen (18)
structures, inspected on June 18, 2013, June 25, 2013 and November 25, 2013. A draft TIF
report was prepared on October 4, 2013, including thirteen non-contiguous parcels with fifteen
buildings. In November, 2013, three additional parcels (with three buildings) were added to the
proposed District, allowing for one contiguous Redevelopment TIF District. City of Edina
building permit records were reviewed to ensure that previously -inspected buildings had not
been improved between June 18, 2013 and this current report. Previous Architectural,
Structural, and Environmental reports made available by the Owner were also consulted in the
preparation of this analysis. LHB - generated Building Code and Condition Deficiency reports
are located in Appendix B.
CONCLUSION
After inspecting and evaluating the properties within the proposed TIF District and applying
current statutory criteria for a Redevelopment District under Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.174, Subdivision 10, it is our professional opinion that the proposed TIF District qualifies as
a Redevelopment District because:
• The proposed TIF District has a coverage calculation of 100 percent which is above the
70 percent requirement.
• 56 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard which is above the 50 percent
requirement.
• The substandard buildings are reasonably distributed throughout the geographic area of
the proposed TIF District.
The remainder of this report describes our process and findings in detail.
PART 2 — MINNESOTA STATUTE 469.174, SUBDIVISION 10 REQUIREMENTS
The properties were inspected in accordance with the following requirements under Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), which states:
Interior Inspection
"The municipality may not make such determination [that the building is structurally
substandard] without an interior inspection of the property..."
Exterior Inspection and Other Means
"An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that
(1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best
efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and
(2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally
substandard."
Documentation
"Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspection was not
conducted must be made and retained under section 469.175, subdivision 3(1)."
Qualification Requirements
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10 (a) (1) requires two tests for occupied
parcels:
A. Coverage Test
..."parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings,
streets, utilities, or paved or gravel parking lots"
The coverage required by the parcel to be considered occupied is defined under
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(e), which states: "For purposes of
this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or paved or gravel
parking lots unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains building, streets, utilities,
or paved or gravel parking lots."
B. Condition of Buildings Test
..."and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally
substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance;"
1. Structurally substandard is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174,
Subdivision 10(b), which states: "For purposes of this subdivision, `structurally
substandard' shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of
deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection
including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar
factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify
substantial renovation or clearance."
a. We do not count energy code deficiencies toward the thresholds required by
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b)) defined as "structurally
substandard", due to concerns expressed by the State of Minnesota Court of
Appeals in the Walser Auto Sales, Inc. vs. City of Richfield case filed November
13, 2001.
2. Buildings are not eligible to be considered structurally substandard unless they meet
certain additional criteria, as set forth in Subdivision 10(c) which states:
"A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building
code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a
cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same
square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not
disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of
reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the
average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable
evidence."
"Items of evidence that support such a conclusion [that the building is not
disqualified] include recent fire or police inspections, on-site property appraisals or
housing inspections, exterior evidence of deterioration, or other similar reliable
evidence."
LHB counts energy code deficiencies toward the 15 percent code threshold required
by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c)) for the following reasons:
• The Minnesota energy code is one of ten building code areas highlighted by
the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry website where minimum
construction standards are required by law.
• The index page of the 2007 Minnesota Building Code lists the Minnesota
Energy Code as a "Required Enforcement" area compared to an additional
list of "Optional Enforcement" chapters.
• The Senior Building Code Representative for the Construction Codes and
Licensing Division of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry
confirmed that the Minnesota Energy Code is being enforced throughout the
State of Minnesota.
• In a January 2002 report to the Minnesota Legislature, the Management
Analysis Division of the Minnesota Department of Administration confirmed
that the construction cost of new buildings complying with the Minnesota
Energy Code is higher than buildings built prior to the enactment of the code.
• Proper TIF analysis requires a comparison between the replacement value of
a new building built under current code standards with the repairs that would
be necessary to bring the existing building up to current code standards. In
order for an equal comparison to be made, all applicable code chapters should
be applied to both scenarios. Since current construction estimating software
automatically applies the construction cost of complying with the Minnesota
Energy Code, energy code deficiencies should also be identified in the
existing structures.
PART 3 — PROCEDURES FOLLOWED
LHB was able to inspect the Pentagon Park office buildings during the day of June 18, 2013,
June 25, 2013 and November 25, 2013. The inspections were limited to what could be seen
walking through the buildings as no destructive testing or material removal was undertaken. In
addition, we reviewed a significant number of Architectural, Structural and Environmental
reports outlining the results of recent thorough investigations of each building.
PART 4 — FINDINGS
A. Coverage Test
1. The total square foot area of the parcels in the proposed TIF District was obtained
from City records, GIS mapping and site verification.
2. The total square foot area of buildings and site improvements on the parcels in the
proposed TIF District was obtained from City records, GIS mapping, site verification,
and recent investigative reports.
The percentage of coverage for each parcel in the proposed TIF District was
computed to determine if the 15 percent minimum requirement was met. The total
square footage of parcels meeting the 15 percent requirement was divided into the
total square footage of the entire district to determine if the 70 percent requirement
was met.
Finding:
The proposed TIF District met the coverage test under Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.174, Subdivision 10(e), which resulted in parcels consisting of 100 percent of the
area of the proposed TIF District being occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved
or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures (Diagram 2). This exceeds the 70
percent area coverage requirement for the proposed TIF District under Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision (a) (1).
Diagram 2 — Coverage Diagram
Shaded area depicts a parcel more than 15 percent occupied by buildings, streets, utilities,
Paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures
B. Condition of Building Test
Building Inspection
The first step in the evaluation process is the building inspection. After an initial
walk-thru, the inspector makes a judgment whether or not a building "appears" to
have enough defects or deficiencies of sufficient total significance to justify
substantial renovation or clearance. If it does, the inspector documents with notes and
photographs code and non -code deficiencies in the building.
2. Replacement Cost
The second step in evaluating a building to determine if it is substandard to a degree
requiring substantial renovation or clearance is to determine its replacement cost.
This is the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on
site. Replacement costs were researched using R.S. Means Cost Works square foot
models for 2013.
A replacement cost was calculated by first establishing building use (office, retail,
residential, etc.), building construction type (wood, concrete, masonry, etc.), and
building size to obtain the appropriate median replacement cost, which factors in the
costs of construction in Edina, Minnesota.
Replacement cost includes labor, materials, and the contractor's overhead and profit.
Replacement costs do not include architectural fees, legal fees or other "soft" costs
not directly related to construction activities. Replacement cost for each building is
tabulated in Appendix A.
3. Code Deficiencies
The next step in evaluating a building is to determine what code deficiencies exist
with respect to such building. Code deficiencies are those conditions for a building
which are not in compliance with current building codes applicable to new buildings
in the State of Minnesota.
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), specifically provides that a
building cannot be considered structurally substandard if its code deficiencies are not
at least 15 percent of the replacement cost of the building. As a result, it was
necessary to determine the extent of code deficiencies for each building in the
proposed TIF District.
The evaluation was made by reviewing all available information with respect to such
buildings contained in City Building Inspection records and making interior and
exterior inspections of the buildings. LBB utilizes the current Minnesota State
Building Code as the official code for our evaluations. The Minnesota State Building
Code is actually a series of provisional codes written specifically for Minnesota only
requirements, adoption of several international codes, and amendments to the adopted
international codes.
After identifying the code deficiencies in each building, we used R.S. Means Cost
Works 2013: Unit and Assembly Costs to determine the cost of correcting the
identified deficiencies. We were than able to compare the connection costs with the
replacement cost of each building to determine if the costs for correcting code
deficiencies meet the required 15 percent threshold.
Finding:
In total, thirteen (13) out of eighteen (18) buildings (721/o) in the proposed TIF
District contained code deficiencies exceeding the 15 percent threshold required by
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c). A complete Building Code
and Condition Deficiency report for the buildings in the proposed TIF District can be
found in Appendix B of this report.
4. System Condition Deficiencies
If a building meets the minimum code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes,
Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), then in order for such building to be "structurally
substandard" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b), the
building's defects or deficiencies should be of sufficient total significance to justify
"substantial renovation or clearance." Based on this definition, LHB re-evaluated
each of the buildings that met the code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes,
Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), to determine if the total deficiencies warranted
"substantial renovation or clearance" based on the criteria we outlined above. Based
on our initial evaluation, buildings that did not "visibly" appear to be substandard or
were likely not to be found substandard due to recent investments, were not evaluated
further.
System condition deficiencies are a measurement of defects or substantial
deterioration in site elements, structure, exterior envelope, mechanical and electrical
components, fire protection and emergency systems, interior partitions, ceilings,
floors and doors.
The evaluation of system condition deficiencies was made by reviewing all available
information contained in City records, and making interior and exterior inspections of
the buildings. LHB only identified system condition deficiencies that were visible
upon our inspection of the building or contained in City records. We did not consider
the amount of "service life" used up for a particular component unless it was an
obvious part of that component's deficiencies.
After identifying the system condition deficiencies in each building, we used our
professional judgment to determine if the list of defects or deficiencies is of sufficient
total significance to justify "substantial renovation or clearance."
Finding:
In our professional opinion, ten (10) out of eighteen (18) buildings (56%) in the
proposed TIF District are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial
renovation or clearance, because of defects in structural elements or a combination of
deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection
including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar
factors which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify
substantial renovation or clearance. This exceeds the 50 percent requirement of
Subdivision 10a(1).
C. Distribution of substandard structures
Much of this report has focused on the condition of individual buildings as they relate
to requirements identified by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10. It
is also important to look at the distribution of substandard buildings throughout the
geographic area of the proposed TIF District (Diagram 3).
Finding:
The substandard buildings are reasonably distributed throughout the geographic area
of the proposed TIF District.
Diagram 3 — Substandard Buildings
Light Red shaded area depicts parcels with substandard buildings —
Darker Red shade depicts substandard buildings
PART 5 - TEAM CREDENTIALS
Michael A. Fischer, AL4, LEED AP - Project PrincipaffIFAnalyst
Michael has twenty-four years of architectural experience as project principal, project manager,
project designer and project architect on municipal planning, educational, commercial and
governmental projects. He is a Senior Vice President at LBB and currently leads the
Minneapolis office. Michael completed a two-year Bush Fellowship at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology in 1999, earning Masters Degrees in City Planning and Real Estate
Development. Michael has served on over 35 committees, boards and community task forces,
including a term as a City Council President, Chair of a Metropolitan Planning organization, and
most recently, Chair of the Planning Commission in Edina, Minnesota. He was one of four
architects in the country to receive the National "Young Architects Citation" from the American
Institute of Architects in 1997.
Philip Waugh —Project Manager/TIFAnalyst
Philip is a project manager with 13 years of experience in historic preservation, building
investigations, material research, and construction methods. He previously worked as a historic
preservationist and also served as the preservation specialist at the St. Paul Heritage
Preservation Commission. Currently, Phil sits on the Board of Directors for the Preservation
Alliance of Minnesota. His current responsibilities include project management of historic
preservation projects, performing building condition surveys and analysis, TIF analysis, writing
preservation specifications, historic design reviews, writing Historic Preservation Tax Credit
applications, preservation planning, and grant writing.
Ben Trousdale, AL4 — Inspector
Ben is a project architect in LHB's Minneapolis office with 20 years of experience working on a
variety of multi -family housing and commercial projects. He has extensive skills in creating
quality construction documents that convey a building's fundamentals and unique design
details. His responsibilities include project management, code analysis, and overseeing
document production. Ben is a licensed architect in Minnesota and is involved with AIA
activities including Search for Shelter charrettes.
MAl3Proj\130270\400 Design\406 Reports\TIF\Final Report\Final\Revised Final Report 1-13-14\Pentagon Park Redevelopment TIF Report 1-
14-14.doc
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet
APPENDIX B Building Code and Condition Deficiencies Reports
APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports
Code Deficiency Cost Reports
Photographs
10
APPENDIX A
Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet
®111111
on
Pentagon Park
Proposed Redevelopment TIF District
INyllo. I AOM I O.meateu,Ne,a I Propnyadtre,s I ImpmzG or Var,N VunUAgY I se. tesl I Np�cmanh ICcven e c'Ml Ou+ a it I RaPlalem,nt I RagaNemW I Oelik eks �,aueeNM 16%� OetmmNeU
KQM Subtotal Coverage Percent[ 100%
i. wma ux hasa eiyw,lewsse, —1 Percent of buildings exceeding 15 percent code deficiency
x,s wnduaun Percent of buildings
z mla swans w„ ma,n"e rohrv, agealuw�ce, canmwlnaaJacerteubune>an 1, mewsoln0 ae�wnuona,ne awza nn.
akaylo Nw wwghmn6tlalEakMmW fn E, envaMeq,umtaMar4 biw NRMrworkxa, mrWerM
APPENDIX B
Building Code and Condition Deficiencies Reports
APPENDIX C
Building Replacement Cost Reports
Code Deficiency Cost Reports
Photographs
Council." Therefore, the decision to require a Small Area Plan can be made by the City
Council at the Sketch Plan review.
Appearing for the Applicant
David Anderson, Frauenshuh and Nick Sperides, SRa
Applicant Presentation
Mr. Anderson addressed the Commission and reported their intent is to rezone the property from POD1,
(Planned Office District) to PCD2, (Planned Commercial District). Anderson explained this is a sizeable
employment area, adding their goal is to repurpose the property to better serve neighborhood
commercial service demands and the economic viability of the property.
With graphics Anderson pointed out "before" and "after", schematics of the property noting the building
is low level. If the Commission and Council are agreeable to repurposing the property the following
changes to the property would include:
• Implement an updated landscape plan
• Improve and repair the building's_ exterior, to include lighting, awnings and other architectural
features
• Create a better pedestrian experience by including walkways and outdoor seating areas
• Potential for a drive-through option
• Reconfigure the parking in keeping with ordinance requirements and
• Improved internal vehicle access and circulation.
Concluding Anderson asked the Commission for their opinion on the sketch plan.
Discussion
Commissioner Platteter commented that he likes the concept; however, believes this is a hard site to get
in and out of.Platteter suggested reconsidering access points (eliminate west entry along Edina Ind.
Blvd.) and changing the location of the proposed drive-through; possibly to the rear. Continuing,
Platteter also suggested energizing the corner of Metro Blvd/Edina Inc. Blvd. to be more pedestrian
friendly. Concluding, Platteter stated he understands the requested change, adding it would continue
the synergy of the areas service component; however, this is a hard site.
Mr. Sperides responded that they looked at different scenarios for the drive-through but found out that
moving it to the rear wouldn't work because of the three lanes (in, out & Drive-through), circulation and
the difficulty in ensuring that the driver is on the proper side. Commissioner Platteter agreed driver
placement was an issue, he noted in the Grandview area a drive-through is located between buildings;
In the middle. Mr. Sperides added they are open to revisiting drive-through placement, adding they
don't know if a drive-through would be part of the equation; however, want that option kept open
because it's important to retail. Continuing, Sperides said another point they needed to keep in mind
was stacking. Platteter agreed, adding as presented he is unsure if stacking would be adequate. Mr.
Page 11 of 15
hl�
Sperides pointed out adequate stacking capacity is also very important for the retailer; without
adequate stacking the business would suffer too.
Chair Staunton commented that it is important to both the Commission and City Council that adequate
stacking space is provided for drive-through window components. Staunton asked the applicant what
their vision is for this property.
Mr. Anderson said Frauenshuh observed this area was undergoing a change and creating an opportunity
to repurpose the property In response to that change would benefit everyone. Anderson said what they
do know Is that the employment base is there and retail services to respond to that base are needed.
Continuing, Anderson said the vision Is to capture the current activity in a positive manner. Anderson
added in his opinion this area has become more of a mixed use area, reiterating the introduction of
more retail is good.
Commissioner Potts stated In his opinion this area is very challenging and if redeveloped a complete
traffic analysis needs to be completed. Planner Aaker responded if a formal application to rezone the
property is submitted a traffic analysis Is a requirement of that, process.
Commissioner Carr said she realizes this is only in the "sketch plan"phase; however if redeveloped she
would like the applicant to pay attention to aesthetics; such as lighting, landscaping, outdoor seating
areas, etc. to create a more attractive place to visit and view. Anderson commented the intent would
be to revitalize the site.
Commissioner Forrest commented that she's not sure she's on board with the rezoning request. Forrest
said she is concerned with parking, vehicle circulation and the potential drive-through space.
Continuing, Forrest pointed out as previously mentioned by Commissioner Potts that much depends on
the outcome of the traffic analysis.
Mr. Anderson said the initial thought was to gain Commission and Council input on the proposed
rezoning. Anderson said if that support was present it would allow them to prepare a site plan
supported by a completed market and traffic analysis for formal review. Anderson explained that Is the
reason why the plans presented aren't firm, reiterating they felt the first step was to gain Input on the
rezoning.
A discussion ensued on if the Commission felt extending the PCD zoning designation to this side of the
street makes sense. Commissioners expressed the opinion that pedestrian and vehicle safety is of the
utmost importance, pointing out the volume of activity is this "neighborhood" is very high.
Commissioners also observed that it Is difficult to make a decision without the facts; such as tenant mix
and how that mix relates to traffic.
Page 12 of 15
Commissioner Forrest asked Planner Aaker if the site were rezoned would all uses within the PCD -2
zoning district be allowed. Aaker responded in the affirmative; adding parking requirements need to be
met for each use which could limit uses.
The discussion continued on the rezoning clarifying without the traffic analysis and knowledge of the
uses in the tenant space it is difficult to make an educated decision. Commissioners suggested moving
forward keeping in mind how important the relationship is between traffic and use. It was further noted
that if it is found that pedestrians do want to cross the street both ways having these amenities makes
sense and would be of benefit to the area and areas users.
Mr. Anderson thanked the Commission for their comments, adding they would speak with City staff
before submitting the sketch plan to the City Council.
B. ResidedWai Redevelopment Ordinance - Recap from City Council Meeting
Chair Staunton remin ed the Commission of the numerous meetings held on residentia edevelopment
and amending the Zoni Ordinance. Staunton said the Commission forwarded thenal draft to the
City Council for their July 1 a' meeting. Staunton stated he along with Commis ers Forrest and Potts
attended that meeting to pre s t the Commission's recommendations. Stau on stated after Council
action there was concern that th Council didn't understand the intent of a Commission on specific
issues; mainly building height, 2nd st step elimination and setbacks.
Chair Staunton said in speaking with City ff he felt there was a ed to reiterate to the Council the
Commissions intent on one set of items (#3 p memo) and ref red the Commission to the attached
statement of intent and graphics.
Clarifying Staunton said at their July 16th meeting the o cit adopted a 30 -foot cap on building height
and elimination of the second floor setback; however a Ined to adopt the side yard setback formula.
Staunton added he doesn't want to second guess t Coun I and is agreeable with their decision;
however, reiterated he wants to make sure they nderstood a Commissions intent on side yard
setback as part of a "bundle" that works simul neously. Staunt referred to the table provided in the
Ordinance amendment on yard setbac and wondered if the uncil thought this table was too
cumbersome. Staunton said the goal of a Commission was also to vide the public with greater
clarity in the Ordinance; however, the ouncil may not have felt this was chieved in the Commission's
final draft.
Staunton told the Commission would be forwarding his statement along wit he graphics provided
by Commissioner Potts to th Council before their final reading on the Ordinance a endments at their
August 5`" meeting. Stau n asked the Commission for their input on the "statemen ". He
acknowledged the stat ent also recommends that on lots narrower than 75 -feet in width that there
beat least a total of % of the lot width (with a minimum setback no less than what currently exists).
Page 13 of 15
44
C47 6,�60vicJ
V1 An
Motio
V111.8. SKETCH PLAN—S801 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD —REVIEWED
Assistant Planner Presentation
Ms. Aaker presented the sketch plan to re -develop 5801 Edina Industrial Boulevard from office uses to
retail uses including a drive-through. Currently, the building contained a real estate office, a hair loss
treatment center, a telecommunication switching site, and a small vacancy formerly occupied by a builder
office/showroom. The applicant, Frauenshuh Commercial Real Estate Group, would like to repurpose and
remodel the existing building with neighborhood retail services. To accommodate the request, the
following would be required: 1) A Rezoning from POD, Planned Office District -I, to PCD -2, Planned
Commercial District -2; and, 2) A Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Neighborhood
Commercial.
Ms. Aaker reported the subject property was located just west of Highway 100 and across the street from
retail uses that are zoned PCD -2, Planned Commercial District. Uses included a gas station, Burger King,
and small retail strip center. North and east of the site were office/light industrial uses. Use of the
property would be consistent with the existing land uses to the south. This property was located within an
area the City designated as a "Potential Area of Change" within the 2008 Comprehensive Pian. The
Comprehensive Plan stated that within the Potential Areas of Change, a development proposal that
involved a Comprehensive Plan Amendment or a rezoning would require a Small Area Plan study prior to
planning application. However, the authority to initiate a Small Area Plan would rest with the City Council.
Ms. Aaker stated staff had noted the following issues for discussion in relation to the sketch plan: 1) Drive-
through in front of the building with consideration of moving it to the back of the building; 2) Elimination
of the existing western access to Edina industrial Boulevard, as the access was too close to the
intersection; 3) Concern over a lack of parking space for conversion into retail spaces; 4) The parking
shortage could further increase if a restaurant use were to go into the site; 5) if the drive-through were to
be moved to the back there might not be adequate area for two-way circulation; and, 6) Office land uses
to the north and west. Ms. Aaker stated the Planning Commission considered the sketch plan proposal
and generally believed that the use was appropriate as long as adequate parking was provided.
The Council discussed sidewalks and connectivity, parking, pervious surface requirements, and stacking in
relation to the sketch plan.
Proponent Presentation
David Anderson, Frauenshuh, stated the intent was to re-energize this corner of the City. Mr. Anderson
discussed that in relation to parking, some of the retail uses on the site might be serving pedestrians,
which would reduce the parking demand, that the drive-through proposed on the site offers flow, and that
there was also the potential to reduce the square footage of the building to lower parking requirements.
The proponent was aware of the discussion on stacking in relation to the site.
The Council discussed landscaping with Mr. Anderson, and encouraged engaging the public from the curb
area to the building. The importance of connectivity and safe pedestrian crossing, including a buffer
between the sidewalk and street, and squaring off the corner to slow traffic down was discussed. The
Council requested review of the zoning options for potential uses and to ensure the required parking was
provided. Council support was expressed for a neighborhood retail use in the area under the category of
Planned Commercial. A drive-through on the site was discouraged. The Council agreed that a Small Area
Plan should not be necessary for the sketch plan as presented.
VIII.G RESOLUTION NO. 2013- ADOPTED—ACCEPTING V Oi1S DONATIONS -ADOPTED
Mayor Hovland explained that in o r to comply w ate Statutes; all donations to the City must be
adopted by Resolution and approved fou orable votes of the Council accepting the donations.
City Hall • Phone 952-927-8861
Fax 952-826-0389 - www.CityofEdinacom
Date: February 12, 2014
To: Planning Commission
From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director
Re: Zoning Ordinance Amendment Consideration — Tree Preservation
MEMO
Based on the discussion at the Planning Commission meeting of January 22, 2014, and
recommendations from the city attorney; attached is a revised ordinance regarding tree
preservation. Revisions are highlighted in green. The Planning Commission is asked to
again discuss the ordinance, and make recommendations.
A public hearing has been scheduled for February 26, 2014.
City of Edina - 4801 W. 50th St - Edina, MN 55424
Draft 2-12-2014
ORDINANCE NO. 2014 -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING TREE PRESERVATION
The City Council Of Edina Ordains:
Section 1. Chapter 10, Article III of the Edina City Code is amended to add Division 3 as
follows:
DI�6lWN Ill. `iRWFR0"tK,,,n liN
..: 1:i..�,..,,...�....,...:%..rt.�.�.t.^;afw.w�,.;a..�r:...w..rw,w..aw.wcr•.rr-L.r�w.ru.iraww.iSmaM awwiroesw�r Aluw'n�,aarw
�, P�t�tt art er�l��� the istldct hard" �, �4
Existing text — XXXX
Stricken text —XXM
Added text—iC
OF �,Jjjjlv
I
0
AbOw
Ira) OMO*Ox tom:
Existing text — XXXX
Stricken text — XXXX
Added text
2
b wfthti dti wu"ays ;IOa soa ,
Section 2. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage and publication,
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Published:
ATTEST:
Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor
Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on:
Existing text - XXXX
Stricken text — XXXX
Added text — f XXX
3
Send two affidavits of publication.
Bill to Edina City Clerk
CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby
certify that the attached and foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the Edina City
Council at its Regular Meeting of , 2014, and as recorded in the
Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of
City Clerk
Existing text — XXXX
Stricken text — XXXX
Added text —
4
City Hall - Phone 952-927-8861
Fax 952-826-0389 - www.Cit)mfEdina.com
Date: February 12, 2014
To: Planning Commission
From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director
Re: Sketch Plan Review — 5108 Edina Industrial Boulevard
MEMO
The Planning Commission is asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to re -develop
5108 Edina Industrial Boulevard from office uses to retail uses including a drive-through.
(See location on pages Al A4.) Currently the building on the site contains a real estate
office, a hair loss treatment center, a telecommunication switching site and a small
vacancy formerly occupied by a builder office/showroom.
The applicant, Frauenshuh Commercial Real Estate Group, would like to tear down the
existing structure and build two new buildings. Proposed uses would be retail and office
totaling 9,450 square feet. The existing building is 12,196 square feet. (See applicant
narrative and plans on pages A6—A9.)
To accommodate the request, the following would be required:
1. A Rezoning from POD, Planned Office District -1, to PCD -2, Planned Commercial
District -2.
2. A Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Neighborhood
Commercial.
Sketch plan review of this same site was done in 2013 for consideration of remodeling
the existing use into retail space. (See Planning Commission and City Council minutes
on pages Al3-A17.)
The property is located just west of Highway 100 and is located across the street from
retail uses that are zoned PCD -2, Planned Commercial District. Uses include a gas
station, Burger King, and a small retail strip center. North and east of the site are
office/light industrial uses. (See the Zoning for the area on page A2, and the
Comprehensive Plan designations for the area on pages A10—Al2.) The proposed use
of the property would be consistent with the existing land uses to the south.
City of Edina - 4801 W. 50th St. - Edina, MN 55424
MEMO
City of Edina 4801 W. 501+ St - Edina, MN 55424
J000
This property is located within an area of the City that is designated as a "Potential Area
of Change" within the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. (See page Al2.) The Comprehensive
Plan states that within the Potential Areas of Change, "A development proposal that
involves a Comprehensive Plan Amendment or a rezoning will require a Small Area Plan
study prior to planning application. However, the authority to initiate a Small Area Plan
rests with the City Council." The City Council did not recommend a Small Area Plan as
part of the last Sketch Plan review of this site.
The following is a compliance table demonstrating how the proposed building complies
with the PCD -2 Zoning Ordinance Standards.
Compliance Table
City Standard (pCD-2)
Proposed
(Existing)
Building Setbacks
Front--: Edina Ind. Blvd
35 feet
70 feet
Front— Metro Boulevard
35 feet
32 feet
Rear— East
25 feet
60 feet
Side - North
25 feet
50 & 40 feet
Building Height
4 stories
1 story
Maximum Floor Area
1.5%
.16%
Ratio (FAR)
Parking Stalls (Site)
51
66
Drive Aisle Width
24 feet
24 feet
Comprehensive Plan Inconsistency
The site is guided for Office Uses in the Comprehensive Plan. The above mentioned
Commercial sites located south of the subject property, are guided for Industrial use,
therefore, they are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (Page A10.) If the
applicant pursues a Comprehensive Plan amendment, staff would also recommend that
these Commercial sites also be included for consideration of a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to Neighborhood Commercial to bring the existing uses into compliance.
City of Edina 4801 W. 501+ St - Edina, MN 55424
MEMO
w91��A
4 e �1
Additional Identified Issues
Staff would highlight the following issues for discussion:
Develop a site plan with the property to the east, which is also in for consideration
of a sketch plan for redevelopment. A unified site plan with cross access
easements could provide for better site circulation and access to Edina Industrial
Boulevard and Metro Boulevard. Consideration of one entrance onto Edina
Industrial Boulevard between the two sites to align with the westernmost Shell
Gas Station entrance. (See page A4.)
➢ Consider PUD zoning in developing the site with the adjacent property to the
east.
Consider moving the building to the corner street corner to create a more
pedestrian friendly environment. Drive-through would have to be along the east
and/or north elevation.
Traffic/Parking
A traffic and circulation study would need to be completed to determine impacts on
adjacent roadways.
City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St • Edina, MN 55424
fl
City of Edina
-
trff fAsf p 1a
sip 7 J f1 n l S 1 1 /
IlpldiihltrfpMtf ..... .
L�ad�ee
f
rt u
s:efroee�niHwniquaUlr
sro6
Hsi{
SeWla
rama
1 HN
firs fill
1 MI►202 'l l�
KoweJNmbWLWWs
JIp
MWA
7316 f7 �
i4ulpertal LaMls
I
.. Ali
f✓
fm
fNf
rod].I13 HS6
JI
Jtp - "to f01 IIp ! JL►a, IGMae , .
%, We N elaa
Off
A9 JI
Q Wes
N#1I7!_T,
i�*f�}vl
0 Nlka
T7}
dIp 1400 SISI
USA lot �
0 falNlt
rJ
I
* !31St J
iN11!
7Sif
dNJ sip
1 sur int 3112 rsii If f1 lid
H�aN
j A
Mr.� %fIiy
7335
Ieti dill I � 1 E
H 11!11
IH! 7A0 J
t6ae
1 �
iiN fIW:�
_ pfB tMT
• •
Jli"s=�Jr KfJs , toI
�l nsrn f
JIM r11f $100Tf1Nf►W
ffer
H1s p
1 _i N� si 1119
ndJ
Sf5! an
Sm fiH JtJ1t'I'si
HSI 7130 I'm
Nn 24
din
to So.
d 137J1r7 li
np
froJ 1100 rp f liffsnnrel
nlr Jxl
f/01 out
nH
lift
"to rJ11
sssstnr iesl
F411 loll Tip
AM �g AM FM
'Y�y�
i/f/
is- s7p
fW
M
5201 J11t
3020
1pfHJs
'760
e10i scil
Hli
0#1iH
�tllN
fi flJi
6e....1.*Susi kr .cf+aatisloa pis
ftp ones"'
a Sttn
K
��I:•ki
fl
wn a=,rwwmoaacan WE all pO Wf e®
t
r '
City of Edina
flu;!,�
pa
A-`
LmosMMp Nous. Number
r of
Neuso Nombor LMmk
a
Uft
� o
flet NF rri'Y-
AW
lre3
A»
• I!!
f/ MOs
EJ kokoNomss
/101
!rN
#Htf
l ►fOt
?�M
�
t;
a
�roNmsAaruaoaa�ten
rst
w
r!!e
!►p ;
�
ussapY�.rowire.s■roar*
rsrf
,:ms sre:
�
sur
ryes
Ylo-spY.aorrts.woaror
�
NrPa(11rµVYwApal�adsr
_
w tea
►
rooaumwcurv�wraaN
�
sWstssude.an.waoW
»» m!
�'rus
reoaur+.ae�..arrww
mN
Io!
sew
t ..
r"M
�: ro wwrM
7%et
Ileo
»ranw
Movre,+ro.�aswnr
ME 7l00
-
�
iH re ret
eooalw..las.orrar
snfe �
•. Moa
,rpo _
•.�
++!
Mosamwrr+.ar' wa�ur
.!!H
rp!r!ldNtulYrr�tl.Owpr
rtm
\
>f!!
21
..:;
qtr
MWI/wMRaTy.lrlD-M"
ewo+pr.sres r�rrmad*
tTly
1100
Neo �!
rm/r+riwt f7tt
MOa1tr�S.Mtf.iNRdtIi07W
ear sme
Nir
_
got
wr
rest
slrr
Nxro�msr.M
rue reeo
loyrnr
»!r
orprwewWYw
mr
!!ei
$ pr7
i.,
IrMNIrNrrsYoalorda)
►orsAs
»nSOME
p
,mr out
QD
Nt!em! !»r!»e
enr
mer
SHE
filllwntOwn
»
are
wn a=,rwwmoaacan WE all pO Wf e®
t
r '
43
J Y
FRA UENSHUH
Commercial Real Estate Group
January 31, 2014
Mr. Cary Teague
Planning Director
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Re: 5108 Edina Industrial Boulevard — Redevelopment Plan
Dear Mr. Teague:
In connection with our recent discussions, this letter and the enclosed drawings provide an overview of
the potential redevelopment plan for the property at 5108 Edina Industrial Boulevard ("Property").
Overview
Frauenshuh is the owner of the Property, located at the northeast intersection of Edina Industrial
Boulevard and Metro Boulevard. The Property consists of approximately 1.3 acres with an existing one-
story multi -tenant commercial building located on the site.
In July of 2013, Frauenshuh met with the planning commission to discuss the concept of repositioning the
property for retail oriented use given the area service demand and property characteristics. The
feedback on the concept of retail use was favorable, while certain design, circulation and parking
considerations were noted as refinements needing further development.
The property will also require rezoning from POD1(Planned Office District) to PCD2 (Planned Commercial
District) to accommodate a broader range of retail use on the Property. Rezoning would be consistent
with existing neighborhood zoning and land use patterns and would be processed with a site plan review
application.
Redevelopment Plan Hiahliehts
The enclosed plans illustrate a two -building redevelopment concept for the Property. The existing
structure would be removed from the site and the two building plan would be constructed in one or two
phases depending on the timing of tenant occupancy.
The redevelopment plan provides the opportunity to create a new, very functional building and site plan
with a highly attractive architectural aesthetic, improved traffic flow in and out of the site and good
circulation, parking and pedestrian orientation for retail tenants and customers. The total square footage
of buildings would be reduced from the current 12,196 sq. ft. building to 9,450 sq. ft., creating a better
site layout and parking configuration for retail use.
7101 West 78* Street, Suite 100 • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55439 0 Tei: 952.829.3480 ■ Fax: 952.829.3481
Several food, service providers and neighborhood retail uses have expressed interest in the
redevelopment plan and location. Some of the redevelopment plan highlights would include:
• Creation of high quality and consistent architectural aesthetics between the two buildings
(incorporation of stone, glass, metals and high quality building signage);
• Installation of pedestrian enhancements, including sidewalks, interior walkways, outdoor seating
areas and related improvements;
• Improved site landscaping including boulevard trees and shrubs and internal landscape elements
conducive to the retail environment.
+ Drive-through on the west building with the potential of a drive through on the east building,
subject to tenant requirements;
• Reconfiguration of parking layout, with a parking ratio of 6.5 - 7:1000 for the overall site;
• Improved internal vehicle access and site circulation.
Timine and Next Steps
Frauenshuh is prepared to proceed with the submittal of the formal site plan and rezoning applications,
following feedback from the City on the sketch plan review. If you have questions in the meantime,
please contact me at (952) 829-3480.
Sincerely,
David M. Anderson
Senior Vice President
Enclosures: Redevelopment Concept Plan
cc: Nick Sperides, SRa
Dean Williamson, Frauenshuh
M
ui
w
EDINA INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD
5 ,0 26 100
5108 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD
SRa. '" mAff ''st` FRAUENSHUH
9Z-tF LI��A u4sea d�lunwwoo pue esn pue7 ,p jaideyo
gDOz ojepdn ueiddwoo eung
am so o
V--Lj—u 8Mt1rims e1tQ
a;apdn veld 9njsuayatdwo3 90OZ
Mid ssn pusti can#nd vw" 1p i jo Ama
gib o�aB�d -
19
• !r ^+. r ..r....•r.. .orr
i$/ C d Ix�wi - �m••war»t+M•M•» -
s rlr.I;u g
6W1M ti.N•INTI•IM®MpIfNTWNeWaq I�WI�MNW�AM•�M•
.IM�Mfsil•avT/ Mf•.61MT•!»I- saM»llNagw+nn-Wt O;i
�T•II.I.NN•.q•AO � MM•O ,. P.I+rN111•NMN.Nl.+1•TA11 Q
/.ININArq 1111- s1•M�q»•O•gQ I[.111•Y4TM.'�/•tNl
pub:�
��"'g• � �Ci �
,r_ (111
ii
19
• !r ^+. r ..r....•r.. .orr
i$/ C d Ix�wi - �m••war»t+M•M•» -
s rlr.I;u g
6W1M ti.N•INTI•IM®MpIfNTWNeWaq I�WI�MNW�AM•�M•
.IM�Mfsil•avT/ Mf•.61MT•!»I- saM»llNagw+nn-Wt O;i
�T•II.I.NN•.q•AO � MM•O ,. P.I+rN111•NMN.Nl.+1•TA11 Q
/.ININArq 1111- s1•M�q»•O•gQ I[.111•Y4TM.'�/•tNl
pub:�
Nonresidential and
Description, Land Uses
Development .
Density
Mixed Use
Guidelines
Guidelines
categories
MXC
Established or emerging mixed
Maintain existing, or
Mixed -Use Center
use districts serving areas larger
create new,
Floor to Area
Current examples.
than one neighborhood (and
pedestrian and
Ratio -Per
• 5e and France
beyond city boundaries),
streetscape
current
Primary uses: Retail, office,
amenities; encourage
Zoning Code:
• Grandview
service, multifamily residential,
or require structured
maximum of
institutional uses,, parks and
parking. Buildings
1.5
open space.
"step down" in height
1 - 2
Vertical mixed use should be
from intersections.units/acre
4 stories at 50th Et
encouraged, and may be
required on larger sites.
France, 3-6 stories at
Grandview
CAC
The most intense district in
Form -based design -
Community Activity
terms of uses, height and
standards for building
Floor to Area
Center
coverage.
placement, massing
Ratio -Per
Example: Greater
Primary uses: Retail, office,
and street -level
current
Southdale area (not
lodging, entertainment and
treatment.
ZoMng Code;
including large multi-
residential uses, combined or in
Buildings should be I
maximum of
family residential
separate buildings.
placed in appropriate
0.5 to 1.0*
neighborhoods such
Secondary uses: Institutional,
proximity to streets to
2-3
as Centennial Lakes)
recreational uses.
create pedestrian
units/acre
Mixed use should be encouraged,
scale, Buildings "step
down at boundaries
and may be required on larger
with touter -density
sites.
districts and upper
stories "step back"
from street.
More stringent design
standards for
buildings > 5 stories,
Emphasize pedestrian
circulation; re-
introduce finer -
grained circulation
patterns where
feasible.
i
Applies to existing predominantly
Performance
Industrial
industrial areas within the City.
standards to ensure
Floor to Area
Primary uses: industrial,
compatibility with
Ratio: Per
manufacturing. Secondary uses:
adjacent uses;
Zoning Code:
limited retail and service uses.
screening of outdoor
0.54
activities.
Edina Comp Plan Update 2008
Chapter 4: Land Use and Community Design
M
4-29
(tVt ft" l �10A
0,44 (
a compromhalt
hat may work; however as previa y mentioned without seeing it it is difficult
to design or env n. It was further suggest hat staff conditions (all) be available for review at the
Council level.
Concluding, Commissioners nk the developers for their response to their earlier comments adding .
in their opinion this will be ago oject and possibly the first in the redevelopment of the Grandview
area.
Ayes; Carpenter, Pg{s, Platteter, Carr, Forrest; Staunton. Motion carried.
VI. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Sketch Plan Review— Frauenshuh Commercial Real Estate Group - 5801 Edina industrial
Boulevard, Edina, MN
Staff Presentation
Planner Aaker informed the Commission they are being asked to consider a sketch plan
proposal to re -develop 5801 Edina Industrial Boulevard from office uses to retail uses
Including a drive-through. Currently the building on the site contains a real estate office,
a hair loss treatment center, a telecommunication switching site and a small vacancy
formerly occupied by a builder office/showroom. The applicant, Frauenshuh Commercial
Real Estate Group, would like to repurpose and remodel the existing building with
neighborhood retail services.
Aaker explained to accommodate the request, the following would be required:
1. A Rezoning from POD, Planned Office District -1, to PCD -2, Planned Commercial
District -2.
2. A Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Neighborhood
Commercial
Continuing, Aaker reported that the property is located just west of Highway 100 and is
located across the street from retail uses that are zoned PCD -2, Planned Commercial
District. Uses include a gas station, Burger King, and a small retail strip center. North and
east of the site are office/light industrial uses. The proposed use of the property would
be consistent with the existing land uses to the south. Aaker noted this property is
located within an area of the City that is designated as a "Potential Area of Change"
within the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan states that within the
Potential Areas of Change, "A development proposal that involves a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment or a rezoning will require a Small Area Plan study prior to planning
application. However, the authority to initiate a Small Area Plan rests with the City
Page 10 of 15
413