Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-12-04_SPECIAL MEETINGSN7 Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Gordon Hughes, City Manager Date: December 1, 2006 Re: 2007 CITY BUDGET Enclosed is a packet concerning the 2007 City of Edina Truth in Taxation hearing. This packet together with a summary of the budget will be available to taxpayers attending the December 4, 2006, Truth in Taxation hearing. Copies of the entire budget will also be available for those desiring more detailed information. On September 5, 2006, the Council established dates and times for our Truth in Taxation hearings and also adopted the maximum property tax levy for 2007. This proposed levy is the amount used by Hennepin County for the purpose of calculating the proposed property tax bill for each tax parcel in the County. This calculation is then included in the Truth in Taxation notice sent to the owner of each parcel. In accordance with State law, the final property tax levy certified by the Council may not be greater than the preliminary levy adopted in September. The Truth in Taxation process allows a further opportunity for taxpayers to speak to the proposed budget prior to its adoption. The Truth in Taxation process is tightly regulated by the State which prescribes virtually all aspects of the process including notices, advertisements and meeting dates and times. Key Dates December 4, 2006 at 5:00 P.M. - City Council conducts a Truth in Taxation hearing. The Council may continue this hearing until December 11, 2006 at 5:00 P.M. if it feels additional time for testimony is needed. The Council typically has not needed such a "continuation hearing" in past years. December 19, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. - City Council conducts a Levy and Budget Adoption hearing. At this hearing, the Council must take official action to adopt the final levy and budget. • Page 1 2007 Edina City Budget Facts Q. What is the dollar amount of the proposed City expenditures for 2007? A. $28,888,666. Q. How much of an increase is this from 2006? A. $1,847,577 or 6.83 %. $300,000 of this increase represents "one- time" costs associated with updating the City's Comprehensive Plan. Q. How much do tax revenues need to increase from 2006 to support the 2007 City Budget? A. $704,398 or 3.48 %. Q. What are the major categories of City Spending? A. Chart 1 - Distribution by Type of Expenditure Central Services Debt Service 9.8% 5.7% Equipment 4.4% Commodities 4.5% contractuai services 12.9% Salaries 62.5% Chart 2 - Distribution of Expenditures by Area Public Safety 46.3% Debt Service 5.7% Park & Rec. 12.3% Non - Departmental 1.9% General Government 12.6% Aic Works 21.2% Q. What are the sources for City revenues? Chart 3- Revenues by Type General Levy 66.9% Debt Levy Q. How are taxes determined for my home? icenses & Permits 9.0% Fees & Charges 8.7% Court Fines 3.1% gov't Aid. 2.6% Misc. Revenue 4.5% A. For an owner - occupied house or condominium: The first step is to multiply the 2006 assessor's estimated market value (EMV) /Taxable Market Value of your home by the "class rates" imposed by State Law. The result is known as your home's "tax capacity" (i.e. its taxable value). (The class rates for owner - occupied housing are 1 % for the first $500,000 of market value and 1.25% for the market value in excess of $500, 000.) The next step is to multiply the tax capacity by the extension rate (i.e. tax rate) calculated for each taxing jurisdiction based upon their proposed expenditures. The final step is to multiply your tax capacity by the market value homestead credit rate. The result is a subtraction off your total tax bill. The maximum credit is $304.00 and is realized at $76,000 taxable market value. The credit diminishes after $76,000 taxable market value until it is a $0 credit at approximately $413,800 taxable market value. The result is your tax bill. Example $359,300 Home in the Edina School District $359,300 x 1 % _ $3,593.00 $ 0 x 1.25% _ .00 Tax Capacity 3,593.00 Extension Rate x 87.029% Tax $3,126.95 9 I_1 Plus - School Bond Levy Market Value $359,300 Referendum Rate x .14745% School Bond Tax $529.79 Plus - Park Bond Levy Market Value $359,300 Referendum Rate x .00641 % Park Bond Tax $ 23.03 Plus - County Solid Waste Levy Market Value $359,300 Solid Waste Rate x.01585% Solid Waste Tax $ 56.95 Less — Market Value Homestead Credit Market Value Maximum Credit Balance Total Taxes on Home $359,300 76.000 X.40% 283,300 x.09% $3,687.69 304.00 Maximum Credit 254.97 Reduction to Credit 49.03 Homestead Credit Why did my tax bill increase more than the City's increase in its property tax levy? Tax increases result from 1) spending /levy decisions made by the city, county and school district and 2) "non- spending" factors that adjust the tax burden shared by different types of properties. First, the spending decisions. The City's tax levy is proposed to increase by 3.48% and the County's levy is proposed to increase by 5.5 %. Changes in the various school district levies will also have an impact. Second, the "non - spending' factors. • In terms of tax capacity, the tax base of the city increased by 11.3% for taxes payable in 2007. The tax base of residential property increased by 12.2 %. This means that, as a class, residential property will bear a greater share of the tax burden in 2007 than in 2006, and commercial property will bear a lesser share of the tax burden in 2007 than in 2006. • Limited Market Value. For taxes payable in 2005, 61 % of the residential properties benefited from limited market value. For taxes payable in 2006, 33% of the residential properties benefited from limited market value. For taxes payable in 2007, only 27% of residential properties will continue to have a limited market value. The average market value increase for taxes payable in 2007 (2006 assessment) was 11.1 %. The average limited or taxable value increased by 11.3 %. Market Value Homestead Credit. Pursuant to State law, a portion of residential property taxes are "subsidized" by the State through the market value homestead credit. This credit is on a sliding scale that decreases as value increases. It phases out at $413,000 of value. Therefore, as valuations increase, the market value homestead credit comprises a smaller percentage of the tax bill. Although this shows as a credit on the property tax statement, the City again is not budgeting for State reimbursement for this credit. Q. Is there a program to offset unusually large increase in my tax bill? A. The State provides a maximum refund up to $1,640 for homeowners having incomes as high as $87,780. The actual refund depends on your individual income and tax bill. The targeting portion of the program offers tax relief no matter what your income is. If your taxes increase by more than 12 percent and at least $100, the State will refund 60% of any amount paid beyond those limits, up to a maximum of $1,000. The Minnesota Department of Revenue administers both the circuit breaker and targeted form of the Property Tax Refund. Q. The assessor's market value of my property seems too high. Can this be lowered? A. Taxes payable in 2007 are based upon the assessor's valuation of your property on January 2, 2006. This value cannot be changed. The 2007 valuation of your property will be sent to you early in 2007 and will be the basis for your 2008 tax bill. The value placed on your property should reflect a price that could be obtained on the open market between a willing buyer and seller. If you do not feel the value placed on your property on January 2, 2007 could be realized on the open market, it may be appealed to the Edina Board of Appeal and Equalization in April 2007. Q. Where does my tax dollar go? A. Chart 4 - 2007 Property Tax Distribution Metro & Watershed 9% City of Edina 21% Hennepin County 38% Local Schools 32% * Please note, this distribution represents taxes on a $359,300 home in the Edina School District ( #273). Some homes in Edina are in different school districts. Please reference the attached map to see what the school district boundaries are. Property Tax Impact on Residential Homesteads in Edina 2006 Payable Taxable Value 2007 Payable Taxable Value 2006 Total Tax 2007 Proposed Total Tax $ Change % Change 2006 City Tax 2007 Proposed City Tax $ Change % Change 150,000 165,800 1,393 1,501 108 7.75% 301 314 13 4.34% 200,000 221,000 1,982 2,124 142 7.16% 429 443 15 3.43% 250,000 276,300 2,570 2,750 180 7.00% 554 584 30 5.43% 325,300 400,000 359,300 442,000 3,456 4,335 3,688 4,597 262 6.04% 933 963 30 3.22% 600,000 663,000 6,749 7,250 501 7.42% 1,455 1,531 76 5.22% 800,0001 884,000 1 9,377 1 10;029 1 652 1 6.95%1 2,035 1 2,129 1 94 1 4.62% Note: The above chart : 1.) Assumes an 10.5% average increase in taxable value. The actual value increase varies from property to property. 2.) Is based upon proposed 2007 spending by all taxing jurisdictions. Property Tax Impact on Commercial Property in Edina 2006 Payable Market Value 2007 Payable Market Value 2006 Total Tax 2007 Proposed Total Tax $ Change % Change 2006 City Tax 2007 Proposed City Tax $ Change % Change 300,000 328,000 8,416 9,020 604 7.18% 885 885 - 0.00% 550,000 601,000 16,369 17,437 1,068 6.52% 1,725 1,715 10 -0.58% 800,000 874,000 24,321 25,854 1,533 6.30% 2,566 2,545 21 -0.82% 1,700,000 1,858,000 52,950 56,193 3,243 6.12% 5,591 5,535 56 - 1.00% 1,900,000 2,077,000 59,311 62,945 3,634 6.13% 6,264 6,200 64 -1.02% 2,100,000 2,295,000 65,673 69,666 1 3,993 1 6.08%1 6,936 1 6,863 73 -1.05% Note: The above chart : 1.) Assumes a 9.3% average value increase. The actual change in value varies from property to property. 3.) Is based upon proposed 2007 spending by all taxing jurisdictions. r ' ASSOCIATION OF �►� .� r • � MC MINNESOTA COUNTIES Cawp of nwo& 06m A D71- T4 M.,.1, N"E�41��►`S P �[�lf' TAAEt4 � ��1F�7"M ASSESSOR • Locates the property to be taxed, estimates its market value (how much the property would sell for in today's market), and assigns it to a class according to its use. • Sends out notices in the spring to "all property owners.' ' Multiplies the estimated market value of each piece of property by the tax capacity percentage set by law for its class. The result is the tax capacity. • Adds together the tax capacities for all the property in the taxing district and gives the total to: Property owners who disagree with the assessor may appeal to: BOARDS OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION CITY OR TOWNSHIP BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION: The.city council or township board. • Meets between April 1 and May 31. COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION: • County board of commissioners. • Meets for two weeks in June. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION: Commissioner of Revenue. • Meets between April 15 and June 30. • The review board may change the estimate of the market value of the classification. MINNESOTA TAX COURT: • Small claims or regular division. TAXING DISTRICTS (YOUR SCHOOL DISTRICT, CITY OR TOWNSHIP, COUNTY, ETC.) • Determine the services (such as street maintenance, fire and police protection) to . be provided in the coming year. • Estimate the costs of those services and determine what portion will come from property taxes. • Prepare proposed budget/levy amounts • Send final levy amounts to: ..................... . • Hold Truth -in- Taxation (Tnb hearings on budgets (if required by state law). • Send final levy amounts to: • • • FINANCE DEPARTMENT AUDITOR/TREASURER • Determines the tax capacity rates and also uses the state general tax rate by dividing the proposed levy by the proposed total amount of tax capacity in the taxing district. • Auditor uses state general tax rate to compute taxes (certified by the Commissioner of MN Dept. of Revenue). • Calculates the amount of each property owner's proposed state paid credits and net tax amount. • Prepares TnT notice and mails to each taxpayer. • Recalculates the amount of each property owner's tax based upon the final levy amounts. . Prepares a listing of the tax on all property owners in the county and gives the list r to: • • • • • • • • • • • • •. • • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • • • • • Creates the property tax statements from the county tax lists. • • Mails the statements by March 31 of the following year. • Property owners mail in their payments (due in two installments on May 15 and October 15; except that the second installment of taxes on agricultural property is due on November 15). 1 i, ak y THE DIAGRAM BELOW SHOWS THE STEPS IN CONTESTING YOUR PROPERTY VALUATION VISIT YOUR LOCAL ASSESSOR'S OFFICE • Check the facts. • Compare neighboring property values. . Seek an adjustment. • • • APPEAUT"ITY OR TOWNSHIP BOARD OF REVIEW • Meets in Apr r May.. • a peal° ns,�nppeerss ,n or by letter. • < Call city or township clerk f6riroir t '- APPEAL TO COUNTY "BOARD OF EQUALIZATION" • . Meets for two weeks in June. • ''Appe@ in p a4 rior by letter. .;Call cpurittyt. uditor or assessor for appointment. • • APPEAL TO MINNESOTA TAX COURT • Appeal by April 30 of year following assessment. • ............. .-1W REGULAR DIVISION • Attorney recommended. • Decisions appealable to Supreme Court. • Can be used for any property. • Must be used for property assessed over $100,000. SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION • Attorney not necessary. • Decisions are final. • Use for your home, or any property assessed under $100,000. - -- - - -- - - - -- - - -- i- --- - -- 3 -STEP APPEAL Al cC r ' • ry • • " n • • • APPEAUT"ITY OR TOWNSHIP BOARD OF REVIEW • Meets in Apr r May.. • a peal° ns,�nppeerss ,n or by letter. • < Call city or township clerk f6riroir t '- APPEAL TO COUNTY "BOARD OF EQUALIZATION" • . Meets for two weeks in June. • ''Appe@ in p a4 rior by letter. .;Call cpurittyt. uditor or assessor for appointment. • • APPEAL TO MINNESOTA TAX COURT • Appeal by April 30 of year following assessment. • ............. .-1W REGULAR DIVISION • Attorney recommended. • Decisions appealable to Supreme Court. • Can be used for any property. • Must be used for property assessed over $100,000. SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION • Attorney not necessary. • Decisions are final. • Use for your home, or any property assessed under $100,000. 1-ST, . Al cC r ' • ry • • • • APPEAUT"ITY OR TOWNSHIP BOARD OF REVIEW • Meets in Apr r May.. • a peal° ns,�nppeerss ,n or by letter. • < Call city or township clerk f6riroir t '- APPEAL TO COUNTY "BOARD OF EQUALIZATION" • . Meets for two weeks in June. • ''Appe@ in p a4 rior by letter. .;Call cpurittyt. uditor or assessor for appointment. • • APPEAL TO MINNESOTA TAX COURT • Appeal by April 30 of year following assessment. • ............. .-1W REGULAR DIVISION • Attorney recommended. • Decisions appealable to Supreme Court. • Can be used for any property. • Must be used for property assessed over $100,000. SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION • Attorney not necessary. • Decisions are final. • Use for your home, or any property assessed under $100,000. r E r" � r s o rt: l aw"w WHAT THEY ARE, HOW THEY WORK The classification rates on selected properties for taxes payable are.shown below: PROPERTY TYPE '06 CLASS RATE PROPERTY TYPE '06 CLASS RATE Disabled homestead up to $32,000 0.045% Seasonal Recreational Residential Residential Homestead Up to $500,000 1.00 Over $500,000 1.25 Up to $500,000 1.00 Over $500,000 1.25 Agricultural Land & Buildings Homestead 3 Residential Nonhomestead z Up to $600,000 0.55 Single unit Over $600,000 1.00 Up to $500,000 1.00 Nonhomestead 1.00 Over $500,000 1.25 Miscellan, ous Properties 2 -3 unit and undeveloped land 1.25 : t61f1:i:e (open to public) 1.25 �r Nonprofit servic"eisrg5 i tza i�onnss 1.5 Apartments Fraternity /sorority houses 1.00 Regular 1.25 z :Manufactured home park land $ 1.25 Metro indoor rec. facilities 1.25 f- Noncommercial aircra*�'angars Commercial- Public Utility ` inw,dustrial- 4 �; s o ` c i a oi .. r'3 Over $150,000 - 2.00 x Electric generation machinery 2.00 Seasonal Recreational Commercial Homestead resorts 1.00. Seasonal resorts C Up to $500,000 1.00 " Over $500,000 1.25 ' School operating referendum levies (sometimes called "excess levy" referenda) and all county, city, and township referendum levies are levied on referendum market value. School debt levies are levied against all property based on net tax capacity. 2 Includes dwellings located on agricultural nonhomestead property. 3 House, garage, and one acre have same class rates and are generally treated the same as residential homestead. I2v, tfl.: user clrss�c r Example: Suppose your home is valued at $90,000 and your local tax rate is 1.35 (135% of tax capacity) Then: Your Home's Tax Capacity = $90,000 times .01 =$900 Your Property Tax = $900 times 1.35 = $1,215 CATEGORICAL AID: Aid given to a local unit of government to be used only for a specific purpose. CIRCUIT BREAKER: See "Property Tax Refund." CLASS RATES: The percent of market value set by state law that establishes the property's tax capacity subject to the property tax. COUNTY PROGRAM AID: State property tax relief aid to counties, distributed with a formula based on needs (households on foodstamps, age of the population, number of serious crimes) and tax base equalization for counties with smaller tax. bases. EDUCATION AID: The total amount of state dollars paid for K -12 education. This aid is paid to the school districts. FISCAL DISPARITIES: A program in theTwin Cities metropolitan area and on the iron range in which a portion of the commercial and. industrial property value of each city and township is contributed to a tax base sharing pool. Each city and township then receives a distribution of property value from the pool based on market value and population in each city. GENERAL PURPOSE AID: Aid given to units of government to be used at their own discretion. Examples are Local Government Aid and County Program Aid. HIGHWAY AID: Motor fuels tax and license tab money the state distributes to counties, cities and townships for highways and bridges. HOMESTEAD: A residence occupied by the owner. INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX: A state tax on the income of residents and non - residents with Minnesota sources of income that is deposited into the state general fund. LEVY: The imposition of a tax, associated with the property tax. LEVY LIMIT: The amount a local unit of government is permitted to levy for specific services under state law. LIMITED MARKETVALUE: A state imposed limit on properly value increases for the purpose of calculating property taxes. MINNESOTA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES www.mncounties.org 5i �_ -,SA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID (LGA): A state government revenue sharing program for cities with low property wealth or high service burdens that is intended to provide an alternative to the property tax. LOCAL SALES TAX: A local tax, authorized by the state, levied on the sale of goods and services to be used for specific. purposes by the local government. LOCAL TAX RATE: The tax rate usually expressed as a percentage of tax capacity, used to determine the property tax due on a property. MARKET VALUE: An assessor's estimate of what property would be worth if it were sold. MARKET VALUE AGRICULTURE CREDIT: A state credit to reduce the property tax paid by agricultural homesteads to the 1p.;al taxing jurisdiction. MARKET VALUE HOMESTEAD CREDIT: A state credit to reduce the property tax paid by a residential homestead to the local taxing jurisdiction. PROPERTY TAX: A tax levied on any kind of property. PROPERTY TAX REFUND: A partial property tax refund program for those who have property taxes out of proportion with their income. This program is available to homeowners and renters. SALES RATIO STUDY: A study conducted by the Department of Revenue of open market property sales, which is then compared to local assessments to ensure that local assessments. adequately reflect the market. STATE GENERAL PROPERTY TAX: A state - imposed property tax on commercial, industrial, and seasonal recreational properties. STATE SALES TAX: A state tax (6.5 0/6) levied on the sale of goods and services that is deposited into the state general fund. TAX CAPACITY: The valuation of property based on market value and class rates, on which property taxes are determined. www.mnmsba.orcl November 2006 L M"c .League of Minnesotc Cities Cities promoting excellence www.imnc.org Capital Improvement Plan Bonds for the City of Edina Ehlers &Associates December 4, 2006 History of Law ■ Counties in Minnesota have long- standing authority to issue.general obligation (G.O.) Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) bonds for a variety of purposes including recreation, buildings,,, and roads without a direct referendum. ■ The Legislature extended CIP Bonds to Minnesota cities and townships in 2003.under M.S. 475..521, but with limitations on the use of the debt to: city halls, public. safety buildings, .public works facilities, and libraries. Process • City must hold_ a hearing on the capital improvement plan and the proposed bond issue after a published notice of no more than 14 days and no less than 28 days. • Capital improvement plan must contain — The specific capital improvements to be constructed; — The estimated schedule, timing and details, and the sources of revenue to pay for the improvement; — Any planned construction of other capital improvements in the municipality over the next .five years; and — Analysis of 8 factors Process ■ Factors under CIP Law — Condition of the City's infrastructure and need for the project —.Demand for the improvement — Cost of the improvement — Availability of public resources — Level of overlapping debt — Cost /benefits of alternative uses of funds, — Operating costs of the planned improvements — Options for shared facilities with .other cities or local governments. Process ■ Capital improvement plan and associated analysis. under 475.521 is usually limited to improvements financed with CIP bonds rather than entire list City capital improvements ■ After hearing, citizens have 30 days to gather a petition of at least 5% of voters in last election to place bond issue on ballot (reverse referendum) ■ If no petition is received, G.O. bonds can be issued without referendum Limitations ■ Subject to city's net debt limits — Edina has over $125M of unused debt limit based upon 2% of market value ■ Annual debt service cannot be more than .16% of taxable market value — City could pay of $13M in debt service each year ■Approval is conditioned on 3 /5th majority of governing board. ■Maximum term on debt is 30 years Options ■ Shared facilities with other jurisdictions- can be financed under the CIP authority — Each entity must follow process ■ CIP bonds can refinance facilities previously funded with lease revenue bonds, as long as process for refunding bonds is followed. ■ Debt service on bonds is taxed on tax capacity, unless a petition is received. — If petition is received and referendum passes, voted bonds are paid by market value taxes Fire Station CIP Bonds • Estimated project cost of $5.57M • Expect to receive construction bids in spring with bond issue in April, 2007. • To pay debt service until first tax received in 2008, funding $237,,000 in capitalized interest • Total bond issue with costs estimated at $5,920,000 • 20 years of debt service to be paid with taxes z0 Fire Station.CIP Bonds ■Hold CIP hearing on December 19 — Review specific provisions of CIP and factors under the law —Start 30 day reverse referendum process Adjust size of bonds-when construction bids are known in spring Type of Property Residential Homestead a Taxable Market Value $200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 800,000 900,000 1,000,000 9r. $10 15 20 25 31 37 43 49 56 I r� 4 Edina Art Center Capital Improvement Plan Proposal November 16, 2006 Submitted by Ken Rosland, Mike Kelly and James VanValkenburg The Edina Art Center board recommends to the Edina City Council the following five year capital plan. The board realizes that there are many financial pressures on the Council but they also feel strongly that the Art Center along with other Park facilities need to be maintained and upgraded to remain as premier facilities. The Art Center itself has been described by many as a "gem" of the City. The major portion of the plan calls for a two (2) floor 3200 Square foot addition to be built in the years 2010 — 2011 at a cost of approximately $785,000. One level would be to enlarge the pottery department. The department now serves more than 2,000 students each year in very right quarters. The expansion would also include rental studios for a continuing source of revenue. There is a pressing need for storage at the Center and this addition would help alleviate that problem. Needs prior to the construction of the new addition are as follows and are recommended for the year 2007: 1. Parking lot $70,000. Expand existing parking lot to accommodate 55 cars. Pave and improve entry. Extend lot to west side and create double entrance driveway and drop -off area. Student base has grown to the point where they must often park on the street as far away as the tennis court at night. Curbs at entry are worn away and drop -off pattern is congested. Current on site stall count is significantly short of need. 2. Roofing $15,000. Shingled areas that don't show were not done in 2004 and are over 30 years old. Wheel room roof will be 18 years old. 3. Office Remodel $15,000. Renovation is needed to make operations more efficient and create a pleasing office /store. Computers, files, and desk need upgrading. 4. Redo sign at 66`h and Valley View Road $6,000. The sign has not functioned properly almost since its original installation. The improvement of LED signs is such that underground controls are not needed. The sign can be programmed by way of remote. The sign, because of the location of the Art Center, is important to get messages across to the art world and the citizenry. 5. Media equipment $9,000. Due to the rapid change in media technology upgrades are needed to continue servicing our media public. The movie transfer projection station is the most -often used equipment in the Peggy Kelly Media Arts Studios. The present projectors are more than 30 years old and spare parts for repair are almost impossible to obtain. A new technology has been introduced within the past three years promising increased quality and enhanced longevity. The Tobin 8mm and Super 8mm film transfer projectors have demonstrated superior image quality and excellent serviceability. Most of the five year plan would be to create a dedicated reserve for the building addition. 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 (dollar amount in thousands) 1. Parking lot 70 2. Reroof 15 3. Main office remodel 15 4. New sign 6 5. Media equipment 9 Building reserve 60 175 175 175 200 785 reserve total Totals 175 175 175 175 200 900 5 year plan total An alternative for the Council to consider is to fund Projects 1— 5 in 2007, and start the building reserve in 2008 — thus raising each year the dedicated reserve by $15,000 for the years 2008 — 2011. Updating Edina's Comprehensive Plan What is a Comprehensive Plan? A broad statement of community goals and policies that direct the orderly and coordinated physical development of a city into the future. Anticipates change and provide` specific guidance for future legs islative w and administrative actions k4 r Reflects the results of citizen involvement, technical analysis, and the judgment of decision- makers What should the final Product do? Identify community assets and issues. Articulate broader community vision and goals. Act as catalyst to address and achieve consensus on redevelopment issues. Produce implementation strategies and tools to manage and shape future change Program regular updates to respond to changes within the community. s, S /Zlit Comprehensive Planning 101 Managing and Shaping Change What does a Comprehensive Plan do ?l The maps, goals, and policies of the plan provide the basis for the adoption of regulations, programs, and services which implement the plan. The plan serves as a guideline for designating land uses and AM infrastructure development as well as developing community services. How does the Comprehensive Plan help a Mayor and City Council govern? This is going to say something REALLY cool! General Comprehensive Plan Info New Plan due in 2008 The Met Council has asked that each community in the seven - county metro area update their current Comprehensive Plan by the end of 2008. Regional Plans • 2030 Regional Development Framework • System Plans - Transportation - Water Resources - Parks & Open Space Ism l'ounesy of Rubin l'aufman Content requirements M.S. 473.859 • Subd. 1 Foundation • Subd. 2 Land Use • Subd. 3 Public facilities • Subd. 4 Implementation • Subd. 5 Urbanization & Redevelopment (Optional) The Met Council's Involvement in Comprehensive Planning Courtesy of Robin Caufman, Metropolitan Council Sector Representative Local Planning Handbook Help cities prepare for comprehensive plan updates due to Council in 2008 - Sent system statements - Created web -based Local Planning Handbook town y of Robin Caufi,,,, Content requirements Foundation • Policies & objectives • Planning area designation for the municipality • Forecasts for population, household numbers, & employment l'oun"y of Robin l auiin.�i� 7 Content requirements Land Use • Existing land & water • Future land use & staging to accommodate forecasted growth - Location, intensity & extent • Housing plan • Special resources: Solar access, historic preservation, aggregate & Critical Area Counwy of Robin Cxafiean Content requirements Public Facilities — Water Resources • Wastewater - Sewers +` - Septic systems • Surface water • Water supply Counmy of Robin Cau bnan Content requirements Implementation • Official Controls - Zoning •,,, - Subdivision • Capital Improvement Programs • Housing Implementation Program i'1 —.1Y of Hi.l.in 1 ,-1 I'll Content requirements Public Facilities - Transportation i� • T ff' A I ra is na ysis Zones • Roads & Highways • Aviation • Transit • Bicycles & '''" ' ?•�. T Pedestrians a,R Coons y of Rohin Caufinan Content requirements Public FacilitiE • Regional Parks • Regional Trails • Local parks & open spaces Coutesy of Robin l'au fman Met Council Assistance • Russ Susag appointed by Gov. Pawlenty to represent District 5 (Edina, Richfield, and Bloomington) • Denise Engen is our Sector Rep. at the staff level. We met with her on June 29 to review their requirements and our approach. Edina's Work Program for the 2008 Edina Comp Plan Work Program for the Plan Staff reviewed the following Chapters: -Land Use -Housing -Heritage Preservation -Transportation •Stormwater and Sewer -Airport and Aviation -Parks and Recreation Work Program for the Plan Public Engagement Process • Obtain input on issues and values • Articulate opinions on the desired future of Edina • Build consensus • Review goals and policies for growth management and redevelopment Work Program for the Plan The Planning staff have completed a review of the existing 2000 Comprehensive Plan to determine what's still valid, what needs updating, and what must be added. Work Program for the Plan New elements for the 2008 Plan: -Urban Design -Public Safety -information Technology -Communications and Marketing Work Program for the Plan Each Department has a role in updating the plan -4 Work Program for the Plan City Manager's Office Heather Worthington will provide overall coordination of Departmental input and work closely with Communications and Marketing on website updates and the final product. Work Program for the Plan Engineering Consultants will be hired for the following Chapters: • Water Resource Mgt (water supply, surface water, and wastewater) -Transportation Work Program for the Plan Communications and Marketing Staff will prepare Communications and Marketing portion of the Community Service and Facilities Chapter. Staff will guide the production of the final Comprehensive Plan document. Work Program for the Plan Planning Dan Cornejo, as Comp Plan Coordinator, will guide the public engagement process, and prepare the Community Facilities Chapter and Implementation Program. Joyce Repya is working with the Heritage Preservation Board to complete the Heritage Preservation Plan. A lead consultant will prepare the Existing Conditions, Vision and Goals, Land Use Plan, Urban Design Framework, and Housing sections. Work Program for the Plan Parks, Open Space, and Natural Resources A Consultant is currently conducting a needs assessment. Parks and Rec staff will prepare this Chapter. Work Program for the Plan Information Technology Edina's IT manager will be working with the Planning Dept to set up parameters to encourage cooperation between Edina and surrounding sources for the sharing of services. i Work Program for the Plan Police and Fire Departments The Police and Fire Departments were asked to evaluate their needs for the next ten years for a section titled Public Safety. wrnwrwww . � y f Role of the Planning Commission Appointed a Task Force to: • act as focal point for public input • monitor work progress • provide advice on community values and development issues • review interim work and final document. Role of the City Council • Advise on community values, opportunities, and needs. • Meet jointly with Planning Commission to review progress reports. • Review and adopt final 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Work Program for the Plan Health Department Evaluating the Community needs in terms addressing public health threats ranging from food illness outbreaks to bioterrorism and disease pandemics PC Comp Plan Task Force • John Lonsbury • Michael Schoeder • Mike Fischer • Kevin Staunton • Geof Workinger The 2008 Edina Comp Plan Questions, Comments, Concerns? G CONTEMPORARY RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ISSUES IN REGARDS TO TEAR DOWN DEVELOPMENT IN Edina, Minnesota AUGUST 15 2006 Har �oaes US Bank Plaza, Suite 165 220 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 T. 612.338.4590 F. 612.337.4042 Table of Contents Executive Summary Chapter I Introduction: Edina's, Historic Periods and Change Chapter II Case Studies *Atlanta, Georgia •Boulder, Colorado •Chapel Hill, North Carolina •Evanston, Illinois •Oak Park, Illinois *Rockville, Maryland Chapter III Methods of Evaluation •Faceprints -National Register Guidelines -Visual Impact Assessment Chapter IV Alternate Methods of Regulation • Flex Zoning • Community Education • Tax Incentives Chapter V Task Force Findings and Recommendations HAY DOBBS P.A. US Bank Plaza, Suite 165 220 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.338.4590 Cover Image Source: From the Collections of the Minnesota Historical Society Circa 1940 new housing in Edina Executive Summary The American residential landscape has taken a surprising turn. Over the last several decades, we've believed that large new houses were only built in "sprawl" suburbs on the metro edge. But the market and cultural forces behind them is now heavily affecting established, inner -ring suburbs. "Tear down" construction can be described as a complement to sprawl, providing the homeowner the best of both worlds. The process of demolishing an older residence within an established first ring neighborhood gives developers the ability to construct large homes formerly associated with gated communities and development on former farmland without the extended commute. However, as this type of development becomes more frequent, the drawback to tear down development is becoming increasingly apparent. Immediate concerns are how these new homes loom over adjacent properties, and how the bulk of the structure affects the entire neighborhood. Other concerns involve the rights of property owners and affect the value of surrounding homes.. As a historic suburb, Edina is also experiencing the effects of tear down development. On several occasions, community members have expressed their concerns regarding new residential construction not in character with their neighborhood. Recognizing that the phone calls will only increase in number, the City of Edina created a task force in order to examine tear down construction in the city. Hay Dobbs, P.A. worked in conjunction with the task force to prepare this document describing a number of possible future policy, public education and tax incentive options. As a national trend, the reaction to tear downs and the policy written to address it vary greatly. This report documents the actions and procedures executed by six communities in order to manage tear down construction while allowing for future development to occur. Introduction Source: From the Collections of the Minnesota Historical Society Aerial view of Edina and Lake Harvey American suburbs are not homogenous. Nor are they entirely new. Since the 18t' century, Americans have lived on the outskirts of the business districts in which they worked. Like many established suburbs, Edina was once a free - standing farm community that was later surrounded by urban expansion. As a community, Edina represents many of the most significant residential architecture and site planning trends of the 20" century. It is a collection of neighborhoods, often built by one developer and planner. Each has its own scale and character - defining features. One of the most important lessons of the city's design history is that no single set of regulations can guide compatible infill development for the future. Rather, each neighborhood has a character of its own dependent on street layout, lot size, topography, spatial patterns, vegetation, architectural style, scale, materials and massing. Each of these variables adds up to a rich tableau with a character that can be respected by new construction that does not necessarily have to literally mimic the past. EDINA MASSING STUDY 7 HAY DOBBS Chapter I: Edina's Historic Periods and Change Source: from the Collections of the Minnesota Historical Society HAY- h "The challengeforstewarding neighborhood identity is• can neighborhood, architecture, character and scale be documented and respected while remaining relevant for modern needs ?" In the 20'h century, a number of social and entrepreneurial forces shaped the development and quality of housing in emerging suburbs such as Edina. These include the Better Homes movement of the 1920s and the influential housing and subdivision principles of the Federal housing Administration in the 1930s.i The Small House Architect' Service Bureau was established in Minneapolis in 1919 with the goal of making architect - designed plans available to builders nationwide. Sponsored by the American Institute of Architects, this non -profit organization helped to make quality architect affordable for many. Edina's oldest neighborhoods such as Morningside reflect the relatively small scale and stylistic diversity of housing options during this time. Many houses were built from pattern books like those of the Small House Service Bureau or even pre - manufactured and shipped to the site offering significant value for the price. The challenge for stewarding neighborhood identity is: can neighborhood, architecture, character and scale be documented and respected while remaining relevant for modern needs. AUTOMOBILE SCALE AND ACCESS Unlike much of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, Edina was built around the automobile and not the streetcar. A major factor in Edina's growth was the development of "Lilac Way" or the beltline highway that is now Hwy. 100. Initiated in the 1930s, Lilac Way introduced to Minnesota new highway concepts being pioneered in the German autobahns including limited access, cloverleafs, and directional separation. As part of the nationwide park improvements efforts of the New Deal CCC and WPA, relief workers build charming rest stops with limestone pools, benches, tables and historical markers. 9 HAY ~D-3 THE COUNTRY CLUB ERA Developed by Thorpe Bros., Edina's Country Club District is the state's premier .� example of inter -war era planned residential development. Designed with unified ` covenants for housing style and size, the overall neighborhood mirrored national trends of the time with its picturesque curving roads and accommodation for the "■ Wpr pi ` ia rising importance of the automobile. Houses were designed in nostalgic period - revival styles including Tudor Revival, Colonial Revival and French Norman Revival w-111 -' among others. More ominously, Edina's Country Club District, like most of its W. counterparts nationwide, was racially- restricted, with minorities allowed to reside Source: From the Collections of the Minnesota Historical Society there only as domestic servants. This policy continued until outlawed by a Supreme Court fair housing ruling in 1948. FINE — GRAINED NEIGHBORHOODS: 1935 -1950 >, Just before and after WWII, developers such as Carl Hansen and Bloomberg Builders built well - detailed houses in the eastern part of the city near France + ; Avenue. Today, streets such as Halifax Lane contain unified collections of small houses, many under 2,000 SF at a fine - grained scale. Now over fifty years old, such - =Z neighborhoods may be eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places for their architectural quality, integrity and representation of an important chapter in social history. Yet, because of their fine grained scale, the historic spatial patterns of such areas is highly vulnerable and could easily be weakened by Source: From the Collections of the Minnesoa Historical Society renovation or rebuilding of wider or taller houses. AUTOMOBILE SCALE AND ACCESS Unlike much of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, Edina was built around the automobile and not the streetcar. A major factor in Edina's growth was the development of "Lilac Way" or the beltline highway that is now Hwy. 100. Initiated in the 1930s, Lilac Way introduced to Minnesota new highway concepts being pioneered in the German autobahns including limited access, cloverleafs, and directional separation. As part of the nationwide park improvements efforts of the New Deal CCC and WPA, relief workers build charming rest stops with limestone pools, benches, tables and historical markers. 9 HAY ~D-3 THE PASTORAL MODERN NEIGHBORHOOD: 1950 -1970 After World War II, developer - builders such as Carl Hansen and Ecklund & Swedlund worked with some of Minnesota's most experienced landscape architects, especially the venerable firm of Morel] & Nichols to plan numerous mid - century subdivisions. By the 1950s, the influence of Frank Lloyd Wright's prairie style horizontal roofs and functional "Usonian" houses had filtered down to the developers' vernacular. Edina's subdivisions of the 1950s, such as Parkview Circle, are home to superb examples of upper -level housing from this era, with three to five bedroom homes on large lots. Many Edina houses of this era are well- crafted with stone exterior elements, hardwood floors and plaster walls. GROWING SIZES FOR NEW HOUSES: CONTEXT FOR THE TEAR DOWN PHENOMENON Throughout all of these historic chapters, the average size of Edina's houses has grown. This tradition continues today. The median size for a new American house is today 2162 SF, up more than 600 SF since 1975.' According to the National Association of Home builders, 18 percent of the houses built in 2001 provided at least 3,000 SF of living space. Seventeen percent of American homes now have garage space for at least three cars.' In understanding homeowner desires to tear down and build larger, we should consider how most new houses are produced in the country today. Architects design fewer than 5% of new houses for specific owners. Rather, builders, as they have been for over a century, design most houses. Since 1980, many national developers such as Toll Brothers have come to the Twin Cities to compete with local builders. They term their houses their "product" and create essentially standardized designs that can be customized with options for home entertainment systems, bathrooms, kitchens and detailing. Developers compete on the allure of live -in kitchens, spa baths, and impressive "Great Rooms," all of which add to the overall footprint. ~HAY D l I0 Source: From the Collections of the Minnesota Historical Society Source: From the Collections of the Minnesota Historical Society Source: From the Collections of the Minnesota Historical Society Source: From the Collections of the Minnesota Historical Society ( Endnotes) 1. National Register Bulletin. Historic Residential Suburbs. Guidelines for Evaluation and Documentation for the National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 2002. 2. "Are McMansions Going Out of Style ?" by Fred A. Bernstein, New York Times, October 2, 2005. 3. National Association of Homebuilders, Housing Facts, Figures and Trends, 2001 4. "Big builder on the prowl," Jon Gertner, New York Times 5. Protecting America's Historic Neighborhoods: Taming the Teardown Trend, by Adrian Scott Fine and Jim Lindberg, National Trust for Historic Preservation, 2002. According to a New York Times article reprinted in the Star Tribune, one in four new American houses is built by a large publically- traded builder. "Several Wall Street analysts and most of the big home builders seem confident that their companies will build half of all new houses in the United States within 10 years.. "4 One of the greatest challenges for these "custom" builders is to acquire land on which to develop new houses either on speculation or as pre -sold. The growth limitation of the Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA) posed by the Metropolitan Council limit new building and available land. Increasing traffic to distant suburbs such as Plymouth, Maple Grove and Victoria are also making inner -ring, well - located suburbs such as Edina increasingly attractive. The conflict between older Edina neighborhoods and new or renovated construction today occurs when homeowners seek to live in the community yet achieve the spatial scale and character of new houses on the suburban fringe where lots are generally larger and there exist no smaller homes in the context. NATIONWIDE REACTION TO "MCMANSIONS" Recently, there has been a growing reaction to the large house trend nationwide with homeowners seeking new alternatives. Based in Massachusetts, the Taunton Press publishes "dwell books," the most celebrated of which are the Not So Big House series by former Minnesota architect, Sarah Susanka. To date, her books have sold well over a million copies reflecting a deep desire among many to live in smaller, but more thoughtfully- designed homes tailored to their needs. In 2002, The National Trust for Historic Preservation documented more than 100 communities in 20 states that are experiencing significant numbers of tear downs.' Often located in inner -ring suburbs near vibrant economic centers, the tear down phenomenon introduces new or expanded houses of 3,000 to 10,000 SF in neighborhoods of much smaller bulk and height. An Internet search on the pejorative keyword "McMansions" yields surprisingly abundant results, many of which focus on neighborhood dismay at new construction. Such a search leads to many of the community ordinances and policies across the country that are discussed in the pages to follow. The National Trust Study listed a number of policy and zoning procedures now being applied by affected communities. HAY S AUGUST 15, 2006 Chapter II: Case Studies To determine the most appropriate course of action if for the City of Edina, the study of other communities facing similar issues is a valuable tool for considering regulatory options. The following case studies describe how six communities addressed tear down construction through the use of zoning regulation and ordinances. In some cases, the use of regulation proved controversial and was ultimately rejected or pared back. These case studies provide context for understanding the nationwide reactions to tear downs and larger houses. They can help Edina to decide what steps, if any, are required to address the neighborhood change with architectural guidelines. The list of communities is as follows: • Atlanta, Georgia • Boulder, Colorado • Chapel Hill, North Carolina • Evanston, Illinois • Oak Park, Illinois • Rockville, Maryland 13 HAYIS Atlanta and Dekalb County, Georgia Chattahoochee_ Ri-r L ,a OS Nan Rec AWa ChetbhooChe Dul.:;h e01 ra f R- Area.loiye Bringe - Rckall6 M -N St.. Hulc $da &u O sk..a .n. Hr"keley Lake C. dn. 107 Corn (pp ; 11u4Mr. i aka Kennesaw Mi. t07 �+ L• *c Lawmncawitc Net Battefiv d Park a07 tJOrcrOks tdt d07 r07 Bruro to D—, va �p .v ie �J t- a r X07 .srr H✓am .r . Cnam�,M1- Smyrna ae7�7 Li6,m a07 xe Gayann I�+ IA, tP.�w +� Lake Powder$pnrgp c,=. Sne ivi In cagwr a0] a07 I .� Lda W] Lake �a del 1 urwnr D A-1r del 10 Bnawr.. Creyvoro a0T `el !'I:1AS6�i� i,.y. Lake u,✓,ns Stone. Mcwr,{,un a07 ' GreNarn Lslu ddb V.n: i rk Wke a a GI � aka daT Gap ro�.n, Swoe!wae•Gnwk ^ a01 402 1 au• pouglasvdk Ahanta .... L. cw�*wr 1�,�rkpkeed La^orMLW sai lrtvMn�.� a,x� Lakes .�.yUl. . re LA. Ea.1 no,.r. apT 16i .__ i•r. Neurvc•r .�. vtl•"`Y°' Cast Prvni lrakw Lxw C— A•ae�e khway.✓r L.- bt •. State Park ..,.. CW.c7.Part H.ya•,ak Word cr,ny- S w Crank -war•. Veaavr✓ l.x'ya L.A. �. .••• _ _ de] irV FLre 13 Cmamvet —Park a0T forest Park •r..L crt Mc:. u•a :�..• st—x Lake City tur Ynrn I akw L.V... b1 Lxe Lake �1 W 7 Morrow • -. � ,., ... Riverdale Sags Regulation Type: None at this time. Zoning code update under study by task force. Criteria for Selection: NA Nomination & Approval. NA Activities Regulated: NA Managed By: NA Approved: NA �T 1 HAY DOBBS In Atlanta, extreme traffic congestion in new suburbs is accelerating the tear down phenomenon within the Perimeter, the older core of the region. Many of Atlanta's new infill houses are three times the national median size (2162 SF). New homes generally replace houses ranging from 1600 -1800 SF, only a fraction of their expanded size.' Atlanta has once the highest levels of tear downs in the country and much citizen support for regulation. City Council member Mary Norwood has advocated regulation for several years resulting in a Housing Task Force formed in 2004. ATLANTA'S SELF -STUDY PROCESS The City of Atlanta's Infill Housing Task Force worked with the Georgia Tech City and regional Planning Program to measure infill housing scale.' The goal was to create a database of neighborhood housing characteristics to tailor guidelines to each area. The Study addressed three questions: • Would current zoning regulations control the scale of single family houses? • If not, what methods are available to measures the scale of houses? • Could these measures be used to develop appropriate regulations? In December 2004, Council Member Norwood released the study which concluded that current zoning limitations on height, lot coverage, front and side setbacks and floor to area ratio "were not capturing the concept of scale that was needed in examining infill residential construction," according to the report. REGULATION THROUGH THE "WEIGHTED FACEPRINT" The study and task force concluded than none of the current measurements were appropriate for shaping and respecting neighborhood scale. The study proposed a new concept called the "weighted faceprint," which has two components: "Faceprint" and "observed building height." "Faceprint" is the percentage of a photo frame taken from the curb farthest from the house that is occupied by the facade. The same base photo is used to determine observed height. The composite rating must be compared with the weighted faceprint of neighboring houses for an accurate sense of scale appropriateness. EDIT A MASSING STIJDY 15 HAYD08BS POLITICAL CONTROVERSY The prospect of house size regulation in Atlanta and Dekalb County has spurned heated debate over property rights and government intrusion. Citizens and real estate groups opposed to new regulations questioned the validity and reliability of the Georgia Institute of Technology Study and the methodology of the "Weighted Faceprint" given varying camera types. Citizens have argued that the method is subjective and discourages change in even neighborhoods of 1000 SF ramblers that do not meet contemporary needs. Citizen arguments in favor of property rights and continued unregulated tear downs in Atlanta include: • New infill housing capitalizes on existing infrastructure and often improves it without the use of public funds • Infill increases property values and tax revenues • Infill reduces land consumption on the fringe • It brings people and jobs closer together and reduces traffic pollution • It revitalizes depressed areas In January 2006, Atlanta mayor Shirley Franklin issued a temporary building ban on large new houses. She called for the city to address the infill issue by rewriting city zoning codes that have not been updated since 1982. After the city council defeated the highly - controversial moratorium in mid - February, a new task force of real estate experts is crafting legislation that would prevent construction of out -of scale homes in existing neighborhoods. The task force will include engineers, real estate lawyers, developers, residents, some city's planners and lawyers and others who are vested in the issue HAY DOBBS 16 A U G U r 15, 2006 DEKALB COUNTY 2006 SPECIAL ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT In February 2006, response to significant pressure on older neighborhoods, the Dekalb County, Georgia commissioners approved a zoning code that allows neighborhoods to seek special overlay district. At least 55% of residents in a defined geographic area must sign a petition to request the overlay. The overlay districts will be regulated by a two -point code that forbids new houses higher than 28 feet from the front threshold to the highest roof peak. Also prohibited is raising the threshold more than two feet higher than that of the previous house. The overlay district approach is a compromise between no regulation and a proposed countywide infill ordinance that would have limited new houses in existing neighborhoods to a size not much larger than the houses they replace. (Endnotes) 1 "Fitting into intown: Incompatible infills anger neighborhoods," by David Pendered, Atlanta Journal - Constitution, June 20, 2005. 2 "Measuring the Scale of infill Residential Properties," Georgia Institute of Technology, December 2004. HAY DOBBS Boulder County •^,ry f,ryay,f �ry KM ►M ilwe Regulation Type: Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Regulations Criteria for Selection: Neighborhood initiated (minimum 15 homes) Nomination & Approval: Nomination of the district require signature from a minimum of 50% of the proposed district residents Approval requires 60% or residents signature Activities Regulated: Regulation requires review and Adoption by the Boulder County Land Use Department Managed By: County of Boulder after Adoption Approved: June 2002 HAY DOBBS BACKGROUND In Boulder Colorado, McMansions were originally associated with the development boom and resulting issues of sprawl. However, with the decline of the first ring suburbs and old neighborhoods within the limits of the city, the issue of tear down construction and infill housing became one and the same. The Land Use Department has received numerous requests to limit the height or footprint of new development throughout the county, each with a specific set of issues and criteria associated with it. As a result, the question was how the city would control this type of development without infringing upon the rights or desires within individual neighborhoods. OVERLAY DISTRICTS Rather than rely upon the creation of one set of complex rules that applied to the entire City, the County Land Use Department determined that Overlay Districts would prove to be a much more efficient use of time and resources. Overlay regulations are used, when applicable, in conjunction with the Site Plan Review currently used by the Land Use Department in order to review projects. The Site Plan Review does consider the compatibility of any future development within the neighborhood, but the Overlay District Regulations provide additional governance regarding the construction provided that they are not in conflict or supersede the zoning codes regulated by the county. The goal of the Neighborhood Overlay District is to create a set of guidelines that reduce the number of conflicts that arise with exiting and new development. At the same time it is managed in such a way that it also tries to lessen the impact that this additional regulation would have on the County review process. LOCAL CONTROL The unique aspect of the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Districts in Boulder County is that they are not controlled by the County. Instead of creating another level of bureaucracy in defining districts or neighborhoods, the County has created a set of guidelines that members of the community may use in order to establish a Conservation District. This is submitted for review and adoption to the County Land Use Department. This proposal process is structured by the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Regulations, a document prepared by the County in order to ensure that each Overlay District organization understand the purpose and requirements in order to create the District. "AS.SII1',JC , J )Y 19 HAY DOBBS THE PURPOSES OF OVERLAYS As a document that is designed to assist in the regulation of a range of development types, the Overlay Regulations, a general set of provisions were established as follows. • To preserve and protect the character or valued features of established Neighborhoods • To recognize the diversity of issues and character in individual neighborhoods in the unincorporated parts of Boulder County. • To reduce conflicts between new construction and existing development in established neighborhoods. • To provide knowledge and reliance about the parameters of neighborhood character. • To allow neighborhoods to work together with the County to formulate a plan that defines their community of common interest and that fosters a defined community character consistent with County zoning, the Land Use Code, and the Comprehensive Plan. • To complement the County's Site Plan Review process in neighborhoods that have defined their community character pursuant to these regulations. These purposes are further defined by the creation of a map delineating a Neighborhood Conservation District, in which all future development shall be required to comply with the adopted regulations. However, it is important to note that the guidelines set forth by the Overlay District do not replace zoning codes already in place. Nor shall they apply existing structures, making them compliant or noncompliant, based on the wording of the Overlay. Finally, all Overlay districts must be in compliance with the County Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Code. HAYD08BS 20 AUGUST 15, 2006 BOTTOM -UP DESIGNATION The creation of an Overlay District must be initiated by members of the community, and in no instances may the County Board of Commissioners or the Planning Commission initiate the creation of an Overlay District. In order to create a District, the following requirements must be met for Adoption by the County: • Shall include a minimum of 15 adjacent privately -owned parcels, unless the area proposed is an extension of the boundaries of an approved Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. • Shall include privately -owned parcels that are closely settled and of similar size, and which are associated by common characteristics of geography, development, services, and interests. • Should consider other adjacent privately -owned parcels having shared distinguishing characteristics that could be found to comprise a logical neighborhood unit, when determining the boundaries of a Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. • Shall exempt privately -owned parcels of five acres or greater, unless the owner of the parcel agrees to inclusion of that parcel into the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. The establishment of defined district requires signatures from a minimum of 50 percent of the property owners within the delineated area. In the application for the Overlay District, a statement of purpose explaining the intent of the District with a description of the neighborhood and the valued features is required. Also required is a description of land use within the proposed area and history describing the evolution of the history. Finally, a list of homeowner associations or other parties interested in the potential Overlay District must be included in to be considered for adoption. Once this information has been compiled for processing, the proposed Overlay district will go through a series of public meeting reviews prior to final submission to the County for review and adoption. Signed approval of 60 percent of the residents of the district is required for this to occur. Subsequently, the County shall review the proposed Overlay District, evaluating the similar character of the land use types and sizes, and compliancy with Land Use code. EDI",AIA MASSING STrl1 Y' 4 21 HAY DOBBS Chapel Hill, North Carolina r, Ourte� q a C!!T) to, &I tei n Regulation Type: Neighborhood Conservation Districts Criteria for Selection: (see Designation Criteria below) Nomination and Approval: 51% landowner signatures Activities Regulated: massing, lot coverage, orientation, hardscape, roof line and pitch, site planning, floor area ratio, style, materials, garage entrance Managed By: Town Manager Approved: January 2003 �T 22 HAY DOBBS BACKGROUND In January 2003, the Town of Chapel Hill adopted a Land Use Management Ordinance that includes provision for the creation of Neighborhood Conservation Districts (NCD). Since that time, five neighborhoods have enrolled or are undergoing the enrollment process. An application by at least 51% of the land/ property owners within a defined district is needed to begin the process. The Town of Chapel Hill Website contains the following information on NCD's in the city: Purpose Statement Within the Town of Chapel Hill there are unique and distinctive older in -town residential neighborhoods, or commercial districts, which contribute significantly to the overall character and identity of the Town and are worthy of preservation and protection. Some of these districts are designated as historic districts, others may lack sufficient historical, architectural or cultural significance at the present time to be designated as Historic Districts. As a matter of public policy, the Town Council aims to preserve, protect, enhance, and perpetuate the value of these residential neighborhoods or commercial districts through the establishment of Neighborhood Conservation Districts. Purpose The purposes of a Neighborhood Conservation District in older Town residential neighborhoods or commercial districts are as follows: • to promote and provide for economic revitalization and /or enhancement • to protect and strengthen desirable and unique physical features, design characteristics, and recognized identity, charm and flavor; • to protect and enhance the livability of the Town; • to reduce conflict and prevent blighting caused by incompatible and insensitive development, and to promote new compatible development; • to stabilize property values; • to provide residents and property owners with a planning bargaining tool for future development; • to promote and retain affordable housing; • to encourage and strengthen civic pride; and to encourage the harmonious, orderly and efficient growth and redevelopment of the Town. Cs @ n.9 A r1 A S S � �'I C S, T 4 )1)'Y' 23 HAY DOBBS DESIGNATION CRITERIA To be designated a Neighborhood Conservation District, the area must meet the following criteria: 1. The area must contain a minimum of one block face (all the lots on one side of a block); 2. . The area must have been platted or developed at least 25 years ago; 3. At least 75% of the land area in the proposed district is presently improved; and 4. The area must possess one or more of the following distinctive features that create a cohesive identifiable setting, character or association; a. scale, size, type of construction, or distinctive building materials; b. lot layouts, setbacks, street layouts, alleys or sidewalks; C. special natural or streetscape characteristics, such as creek beds, parks, gardens or street landscaping; d. land use patterns, including mixed or unique uses or activities; or e. abuts or links designated historic landmarks and /or districts. 5. The area must be predominantly residential in use and character. 6. Any designated Historic Overlay District shall be deemed to satisfy the criteria listed above. ZONING AUTHORITY Separate ordinances are required to designate each district. Ordinances designating each Neighborhood Conservation District shall identify the designated district boundaries, and specify the individual purposes and standards for that district. 1. Overlay District - Neighborhood Conservation Districts are designed as overlays to the regular zoning districts. Property designated within these districts must also be designated as being within one of the General Use Districts. Authorized uses must be permitted in both the General Use District and the overlay district. Property designated as a Neighborhood Conservation District may have additional designations. Such property shall comply with all applicable use restrictions. HAYDOBBS 24 AUGUST 15, 200 CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 2. Zoning Designation a. The zoning designation for property located within a Neighborhood Conservation District shall consist of the base zone symbol and the overlay district symbol (CD) as a suffix. Neighborhood Conservation Districts shall be numbered sequentially to distinguish among different districts, i.e., R -4 (CD -1), R -1 (CD -2), etc. b. The designation of property within a Neighborhood Conservation District places such property in a new zoning district classification and all procedures and requirements for zoning /rezoning must be followed. c. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of a specific Neighborhood Conservation District ordinance and the General Use District regulations, the provisions of the Neighborhood Conservation District ordinance shall control. d. Except as modified by this Section, the procedures for zoning changes set forth in Section 4.4 shall otherwise apply, to the designation of an area as a Neighborhood Conservation District. e. Upon designation of an area as a Neighborhood Conservation District, the Town Council shall cause notice of such designation to be recorded in the official public records of real property of Orange County. Application Procedures 1. proposal for designation as a Neighborhood Conservation District may be initiated: a. at the direction of Town Council, or b. at the request of owners representing 51% of the land area within the proposed district, or c. at the request of 51% of property owners in a proposed district. 2. Following initiation for designation of a Neighborhood Conservation District, the Planning Board shall develop a neighborhood conservation plan for the proposed district that includes: a. maps indicating the boundaries, age of structures and land use of the proposed district; EDa'J,4, it ;SSFNG STUD" 25 HAYDOBBS b. maps and other graphic and written materials identifying and describing the distinctive neighborhood and building characteristics of the proposed district; and c. design standards for new construction, additions or alterations to the street facades of existing buildings or structures within the proposed district. 3. All property owners within the proposed district shall be afforded the opportunity to participate in drafting the conservation plan. A conservation plan shall be approved as part of a Zoning Atlas.Amendment creating a Neighborhood Conservation District. DESIGN STANDARDS 1. The conservation plan approved as part of the zoning ordinance creating a Neighborhood Conservation District shall include design standards for new construction or placement of any building, structure, foundation, sign, public art or outdoor apparatus or equipment (including visible utility boxes or mechanical equipment; trucks; lawn or landscaping equipment, but not including lawnmowers or hand tools; playground equipment; or sports equipment),, and any additions, alterations, relocation or rehabilitation to the street facades of existing buildings,' structures, foundations, sign, public art, or outdoor apparatus or equipment. 2. The conservation plan, and requisite design standards shall not apply to those activities which constitute ordinary repair and maintenance, i.e., using the same material and design. 3. The Design Standards for the Neighborhood Conservation District shall include the minimum following elements governing the physical characteristics and features of all property (public or private) within the proposed district: a. building height, number of stories; b. building size, massing (frontage, entrance location /features); c. lot size, coverage; d. front and side yard setbacks; e. off - street parking and loading requirements; HAYDOBBS 26 4 GUST 15; 2006 CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA f. roof line and pitch; g. paving, hardscape covering. In addition, the Design Standards may include, but shall not be limited to, the following elements: a. building orientation; b. general site planning (primary, ancillary structures); c. density; d. floor area ratio; e. signage; f. architectural style and details; g. building materials; h. garage entrance location; i. front window, dormer size and location; j. landscaping; k. fences and walls; 1. entrance lighting; m. driveways and sidewalks; n. satellite dishes, utility boxes; o. street furniture; p. public art; q. demolition (see subsection E). EDMA MASS €NG, STUCNY 27 HAYDOBBS ADMINISTRATION OF ORDINANCE 1. No building permit shall be issued for new construction or an alteration or addition to the street facade of an existing building or structure within a designated Neighborhood Conservation District without the submission and approval of design plans and the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit by the Town Manager. 2. The Town Manager shall review the design -plans to determine compliance with the design standards contained in the neighborhood conservation plan adopted for the district. 3. If the Town Manager determines that the design plans are in conformance with the design standards adopted for the district, the Town Manager shall approve the plans and issue a Zoning Compliance Permit and the Department of Building Inspections may issue a building permit. 4. If the Town Manager determines that the design plans are not in conformance with the design standards adopted for the district, the Town Manager shall not approve the plans, and will issue Notification of Non - Compliance, identifying the specific Design Standards violated. 5. The applicant may appeal the Town Manager's determination to the Board of Adjustment for a final determination. HAY D08BS 28 AUGUS7 15, 2006 E-DINA MAISING ST UIDY 29 Evanston, Illinois Regulation Type: Criteria for Selection: Nomination and Approval: Activities Regulated: Managed By: Approved: HAY DOBBS Part of zoning code NA NA Height, lot percentage, and garage regulation City planning office NA lur * _` do ra • T t u+ i �, . ,w M a + ►� �` Mod,,, C.M.. vw.w. t,.«.s '►.,.,y..< � ..r a .. , f � i _ A�� • '�w� � M • r C.r•.t ' frJ . w ! w • . w. s w . t e i ///Ci...r . f 5«w yr crar,ce 4WI * +,Is . «.� �., �....:s ate,► J t � � Regulation Type: Criteria for Selection: Nomination and Approval: Activities Regulated: Managed By: Approved: HAY DOBBS Part of zoning code NA NA Height, lot percentage, and garage regulation City planning office NA BACKGROUND Like Edina, Evanston is a first -ring residential suburb just north of Chicago. Developed along Lake Michigan and commuter rail lines, Evanston focuses on a historic downtown and nearby Northwestern University. Numerous historic neighborhoods, especially near the lake and University have faced significant pressure for larger houses. In 2003, led by Alderman Eb Moran, the Zoning Committee of the City's Plan Commission worked to develop a Sixth Ward Conservation District to fill gaps in the existing zoning ordinance to control large tear downs and renovations. , REGULATIONS OF THE PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT In a guest essay for The Round Table of Evanrton, Alderman Moran wrote that in the last five years, the city's Sixth Ward had seen a steady rise in new houses that are much larger than the homes they replaced. In November, the Committee voted unanimously to create a Neighborhood Conservation District that regulated the following: 1. The maximum height of a house will be measured from street level rather than from the top of the basement, often four feet above street level; 2. The height of rebuilds could exceed the height of their predecessors. However, the height could not exceed a 20 percent increase in the average height of its four neighboring houses. Thus, neighborhoods need not be static. Change, however, would be evolutionary - not overwhelming; 3. The side yard setbacks for rebuilds would have to be at least 15 percent of the lot width but, in any event, no less than five feet on each side; 4. The impervious surface of the entire lot could not exceed 45 percent; 5. 50 percent of the area of a front porch would be exempt from lot coverage and impervious surface limitations. The regulations proved controversial. In February 2004, the Evanston City Council voted not to consider the conservation overlay district in the Sixth Ward. The case of Evanston is, as far as the research of this study has found, the only occasion in which a city council has rejected a task force or planning commission proposed neighborhood conservation district. EDINA MASSING S I UDY 31 HAYDOBBS LIMITED REGULATIONS AS PART OF ZONING CODE Instead, the Council adopted a few of the Plan Commission's recommendations as part of the zoning code including: • a formula for height limitation that includes a measurement from grade level rather than first floor • a limit on percent of a lot that can be covered by impervious surfaces • the prohibition of garages with street access, if there is an alley behind the house. The Round Table of Evanston editorialized the following week: `:.. the City Council took the path of least resistance, adopting a piecemeal solution, adding a few more patches to a Zoning ordinance that still does not fully address the problem of single family home infill development that is out of scale and sync with the harmony of the neighborbood.. . Left unattended is the problem of sideyard setbacks. A 40-foot-tall house may still be built seven feet away from a modest, older home, if that home is only two feet away from the lot line because it is a legal non - conforming use. Left unattended is the issue of - dwarfing and sbadowing: A 40-foot-tall house may still be erected next to an 18 foot -tall ranch house. '° The editorial went on to recommend using a different tool — "the resurrection of floor area ratios, which would tie the size of a house to the size of the lot, in the City's Zoning Ordinance." Since that time, the City's zoning ordinance was supplemented with a "porch allowance" that permits a builder to increase impermeable surfaces if he or she could build a house with a front porch. A second change was a clearer definition of a "remodel" and a "renovation" in the code to prevent projects from being grandfathered in that are essentially an entirely new, and larger house, built on an existing structure. (Endnotes) 1. Evanston Round Table, Feb. 11, 2004 HAYDOBBS 32 AUGUST 15, 2006 EVNSTON, ILLINOIS 1-DINA r11ASSNG 5 TUDY 33 HAYDOBBS Oak Park Illinois Apyw<.r, r +nf S z n � ll,wrvs1y Core tl�a h��O i i � � f �21y 3 U n wy n}..y n Chicago faes' Oak ;'.1k " - b�` m forest vaM { MalGolri w,.f..w4 � uMi.�N S ti..:,,. r• r :..vw _ -_ % � {tl) ; - _ . - wl.vnv, 4 W iw. Y' 4 � Unlve 1 J,,•rq viy � � a lile'°5 {.vMr Ymr Cer41{ry 1 Of IlNrgf 9 JT A! C.rarJrt ® Y Al Ch—J. L n.•kl n�;,v. [D { Vele,enf ^,ftrAlan Nofp+dl lt�fn tltlnm NoM 1--d. "." w trs s n C_ � w tx a 1 ftc,.an Noefe S t:AIµ tTt N-4. c 1 r S Regulation Type: Zoning Ordinance Criteria for Selection: Tear down construction was defined as construction or remodeling of single - family and certain two family residences to "at or near the maximum allowable size" under the zoning ordinance in neighborhoods characteristically containing substantially smaller homes. Nomination and Approval: Approval is awarded based on compliance to the revised Zoning Ordinance Activities Regulated: Zoning Districts R- 1, R -2, R -3 and R -4 Single Family Districts Managed By: Village of Oak Park Approved: January 2003 �T 3.1 HAY DOBBS 117_[4I3elA611I►I97 The population of the community is approximately 52,000 people with a median age of 36. More significant is the diversity within the community with a non -white component of thirty percent. The city claims this that it has one of the most diverse ranges of ethnicity, race and culture in the region. A goal of the community is to maintain this range of diversity and providing persons from the City of Chicago with a means to purchase homes in the suburbs. These goals were effectively identified in the housing objective of the 1990 Comprehensive Plan, which are as follows: -To support racial integration throughout Oak Park and prevent resegregation in any part of the village. -To support an economically diverse housing stock for all income and age groups living or working in Oak Park. -To enhance and maintain the quality of housing stock for all income and age groups living or working in Oak Park. -To maintain and enhance the residential character of existing residential areas. -To preserve and maintain structures of historical or architectural value and their immediate environment. -To stabilize the size of Oak Park's population. Is has been the concern of the community the trend in tear down construction would be contrary to the goals set forth in the plan, creating a community that did not reflect their identity with in the greater Chicago region. In September of 2002, a present a draft ordinance in regarding the tear down phenomenon was presented for public review. It was acknowledged in the proposal that property values were going to continue to increase, but the concern•was that tear down construction was going to create a situation in which property values would raise at a rate that would transform Oak Park into an exclusive community. Tear down construction was defined as construction or remodeling of single - family and certain two family residences to "at or near the maximum allowable size" under the zoning ordinance in neighborhoods characteristically containing substantially smaller homes. EDINA MASSINf_ S`T`UDY 35 HAYD013BS THE COMMISSION REPORT Recognizing the potential for problems relative to future tear down construction, the Village board directed the Plan Commission to hold a series of public meetings in order to study the issue relative to the concerns of the community members. Based on the community input, research and site visits, and case studies the Commission made recommendations to the Village board. It was proposed that changes be made to the zoning ordinance regarding the following residential types: R -1: Single Family District R -2: Single Family District R -3: Single Family District R -4: Single Family District For each district type, the general description placed emphasis on the preservation and protection of the physical qualities of the within the respective neighborhoods. This goal was supported through the revised Zoning regulations, presumably designed to lessen the impact of tear down construction. These regulations were structured around the use of set backs in order to maintain a consistent appearance on the street. In the case of the front street, setback was determined first by a minimum number off the property line, with the added requirement that it be within the average setback around the house. The average setback was determined by the following formula: a. The average front setback is equal to one half of the following sum: the'Average Adjacent Front Setback (as hereinafter defined) plus the Average Non - Adjacent Front Setback (as hereinafter defined). (1) The Average Adjacent Front Setback is the average front setback of the buildings or structures on the lots immediately adjoining the subject lot, weighted in accordance with HAYD08BS 36 . AUGUST 15, 200-0 VILLAGE OF OAK PARK, ILLINOIS the width of each such lot. (2) The Average Non - Adjacent Front Setback is the average front setback of the buildings or structures on all of the non - adjacent lots that are in the same or more- restrictive district, in the same block and on the same side of the street as the subject lot, weighted in accordance with the width of such lot. b. For averaging purposes, vacant lots shall be treated as having the minimum required setback of 30 feet. When the subject lot is a corner lot, the side street shall be treated as a lot having the minimum required setback of 30 feet. Side yards were determined by a using a fixed dimension or a percentage of the lot depth, whichever number was the lesser. Side yards were defined as minimum distances setback from the property line. Building heights were also defined as a set maximum height, although exceptions were described for use types that were not residential. Because this formula was applied to four different zoning types, they were used relative to a base dimension appropriate to the zoning district. As an example, in R -1 and R -2 districts the front yard was required to be set back a minimum of 30 feet whereas the require set back in districts R -3 and R -4 require a set back of only 20 feet. Based on the recommendations the zoning ordinances for R -1 through R -4 were revised in January of 2003. However, the Commission did stress the continued observation would be required in order to determine if this first round of changes would be appropriate for use as a means to regulate tear down construction. €D!NA MASSI[\JG STUDY" 37 HAYDOBBS HAYDOBBS 38 AUGUS.`f 15, 2006 Rockville, Maryland sq7 �•,- 14wJ.i� W Regulation Type: None at this time. Topic presently under review Criteria for Selection: NA Nomination and Approval: NA Activities Regulated: NA Managed By: NA Approved: V. -1 39 HAY DOBBS BACKGROUND Rockville and the surrounding Montgomery County is a densely populated suburb of Washington D.C. While the phenomenon of constructing large houses was not new to the area it was previously limited to areas of development with strict development guidelines and review processes. With continued growth and development of the city and county, this construction trend has increasingly spilled over into neighborhoods where the houses have smaller footprints and lower roof heights. WHITEPAPER STUDY The City has taken the process of updating zoning ordinances in order to respond to current needs and concerns. Among these concerns is mansionization and how it has started to impact the City. As a construction trend, mansionization was not something that was new in the City or the surrounding Montgomery County, let alone the entire region surrounding Washington, D.C. Typically, it was managed through neighborhood covenants and architectural reviews. However, it has become an issue of increasing concern as the city is continued to be developed. The Study addressed four concerns: • Property Value • Infrastructure • Environment • Compatibility SPRAWL AND PROPERTY VALUE At the heart of the all the concerns regarding mansionziantion are the issues of sprawl, development and property values. Rockville continues to develop as a community, but is rapidly becoming built -out, rapidly decreasing the number of lots available. Residential development opportunities were also limited by the increase of development of property in the county adjacent to the city limits. This has resulted in tear down residential development that is increasingly evident within the limits of the city, but not restricted by any of the residential covenants used in other neighborhoods. While the pattern of re- development is not entirely clear, preference is given to areas close to mass transit, location relative to the central core and the amount of land attached to the property that was purchased. HAYDOBBS 40 AWGUST 15, 2006 ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND Current residents of the more desirable neighborhoods are concerned that the value of their homes will be limited by tear down development. They are also concerned 4 that the sudden change in property values may change the demographic character of the neighborhood, making the homes less affordable to middle -class home buyers. Some residents are concerned that the increase property values may result in increased taxes while other feel their property values may decrease relative to the new homes. The city recognizes these concerns, but also is faced with the demands of a highly competitive housing market within the county and Washington D.C. region. Rapid transformation of the neighborhood character could place a burden on the current residents in the form of taxes. On the other side of this issue is the concern that a lack of development within a community could generate stagnant market conditions, resulting in decreased property values. This was compounded with the fact that housing stock must be repaired or replaced as it becomes inadequate for use. While renovation is a an option, it had become economically more sensible to tear down the existing residence in many case. Hence the charge of the white paper was to describe a number of options that could be used in order to regulate mansionaization, while allowing for development to occur without the use of covenants or other elaborate forms of regulation. REGULATION ALTERNATIVES Within the white paper, five methods of regulating mass were described in addition to a brief discussion of architectural requirements. The five methods of regulating mass were as follows: • Building Envelope Regulations • Floor Area Ratios • Cubic Content Ratios • Second Story regulation • Daylight Plane Regulation Building envelope regulations were described as the traditional means of regulating building construction through the use of defined setbacks on a sliding scale. This is traditionally defined in terms of the footprint occupying a percentage of the lot. This is used with a defined height limit in order to determine the cubic volume of the residence. Presently, the footprint a house may occupy on a lot in Rockville ranges from 25 to 35 percent. Of significance is the manner in which the building height is measured. The maximum height of a house is 35 feet, measured from E_DINA MASSING STUDY 41 HAYDOBBS the mid -point on a gabled roof. Depending on the slope of the gable, this means of measurement may allow for what appears to be an additional floor within the house. This may create a significant difference in visual appearance relative to home neighboring this house. FLOOR AREA RATIOS Floor Area Ratios are typically used to regulate commercial development or multiple residences, units such as apartment buildings. In Rockville, they are typically used in situations where setbacks were not an issue. The paper does note that FAR regulations does not allow for regulations regarding the height of a building, as it defines only the gross area of a house. Hence, a height restriction would still be required in order ensure that the bulk of a new house does not impede of the exiting neighboring structures. In addition to this, the setback regulations would also be required, as this is not regulated by FAR regulations. Cubic content ratios operate in a similar manner and face the same regulatory hurdles as Floor Area Ratios. SECOND STORY REGULATIONS Second Story Regulation involves control of the allowable square footage of a second floor on a house in conjunction with defined setbacks in order to diminish the bulk and visual impact of new construction. Defined as a percentage of the footprint and additional fixed setbacks, this form of regulation is a stepped appearance in the house. However, this form of regulation best suites new construction as exiting homes that are renovated with a second floor may not have load bearing points that correspond with the setback prescribed by regulations. DAYLIGHT PLANE REGULATION Day Light Plane Regulation is the most difficult of all five methods to regulate. In this method, the maximum height of a house is defined by projecting imaginary planes through the lot from a defined height at the side property lines. The imaginary planes define the maximum height of the house at any given location on the lot. However, there may be exemptions such as towers and dormers,•and sloping topography on the site exaggerates the maximum height through the site. In addition, as the heights are determined by the lot area, they require additional review for each project. Finally, the Daylight Plane only serves as a supplement to regulation regarding setbacks and footprint areas. IMPLEMENTATION An equally difficult task to the means of regulation is the means of implementation. The methods of implementation discusses were Additional Neighborhood Review, Overlay Districts and New Permitting Definitions. The Neighborhood Review HAY DOBBS 42 THE DAYLIGHT PLANE CROSS SECTION OF THE DAYLIGHT PLANE SIDE PROPERTY UNE AUGUST 15, 2006 ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND would require that the proposed construction go through additional review procedures in order to gain approval. One example requires that the house builders gain the approval of the property owners on the adjacent lots after construction exceeded a certain limit. DEFINING HISTORIC AND CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICTS Overlay Districts were separated into two subcategories, Historic districts and Conservation Overlay Districts. In each case specific polices and requirements are written in order to protect and retain the visual quality of the existing neighborhood. In the case of Historic Overlay Districts, attention may be placed on material selection and color. More significantly, development is subject to review by a board or commission in order to gain approval for construction. Conservation Overlay Districts lack this final review and approval process. Research into the architectural history and character of the specific overlay district is required in order to create a set of regulation that regulates future development in a manner that reflects the neighboring buildings. The creation of new definitions involves changing definition of the terms "demolition" and "substantial alteration' in order to discourage tear down construction. This would also involve alteration of review procedures within the City or Rockville. Based on the review, the following recommendations were made in the white paper • Limit mansionization regulation to the smallest three lot zones. The remaining residential lot types were thought to be adequate to absorb any large residential development without any adverse impact on the adjacent properties. • Modify and add definitions for demolition and substantial alteration. The current definitions are too lenient, as they were not written with the expectation that this construction pattern would occur as a phenomenon, • Establish polices and procedures to create Neighborhood Conservation Districts. This will assist in retaining the architectural character of neighborhoods that are seen as potential areas of redevelopment, while retaining flexibility applicable to each neighborhood. • Additional side yard setbacks after a certain level. The recommended additional setback was 2 feet when the house reached a height beyond 25 feet. EDINA MASSING STUDY 43 HAYDOBBS Chapter III: Methods of Evaluation Case studies of previous zoning ordinances serves as a useful method of exploring means of regulation, but evaluation is limited by the definitions set forth in the each case study. This makes it difficult to evaluate the physical conditions of a specific community relative to the housing stock. In the previous section, a number of approaches were taken according to the respective social agendas. What was not evident in these case studies was the appearance of the historic building fabric. The appearance of the homes, placing the previous zoning ordinances into question, also not evident in these studies. Typically, these houses are described as being "out of scale" or as the odd tooth in a smile. How is it that this is determined? How the bulk of a building is measured relative to the street and the neighboring properties should be examined as part of this process. Hay Dobbs has executed a secondary research exercise examining three means of identifying or measuring the bulk of a residence. The Methods of evaluation are as follows: • Faceprint Assessment, the results of a Georgia Tech research project on tear downs • Evaluation Criteria for the National Register, prepared by the National Park Service • Highway Visual Impact Assessment, Prepared by MnDot HAY DOBBS 1 / Face Print Analysis In 2003, Georgia Tech University was contacted regarding the visual impact that the tear down development was having on adjacent properties and neighborhoods. The goal of the project was to address three key questions that were identified by the City of Atlanta's Infill Housing Task Force. The questions that were brought to bear were as follows • Would current zoning regulations control the scale of single - family residential structures? • If not, what methods are available (or could be developed) to measure the scale of residential structures? • Could these measures be used to develop appropriate control mechanisms in parts of Atlanta? The Georgia Tech study took an approach that primarily addressed the second question in an effort to find answers for the other two. The result of their research and study was a photogram metrical process called "faceprinting." Rather than rely upon more traditional means of measurement, such as measuring the foot print of a building or using established setbacks, their goal was to create a system of measurement that would measure the house's visual impact relative to the street. The first part of the process involves photographing the house from the street. The photographer would face the house in question with their heels placed against the curb on the opposite side of the street. The camera settings are to be set at the widest angle possible in order to get as much of the house in the frame as possible. The resulting image is then used in order to determine the relative size of the house. The image would be imported into any computer application that was capable of measuring polygons, such as cad. This part of the process involves creating an outline of the house in order to measure the area of the house relative to the area of the photograph. The measured area of the house is then divided by the area of the photograph, yielding a percentage. This is then multiplied by the observed building height, yielding a number that is the weighted faceprint. While the study does serve as a means to measure the scale of an object relative to the frame, it does not provide a clear means by which a house may be measured relative to the context that is in. As an example, two houses may have identical faceprint ratios while having drastically different footprints. Secondly, each house is considered as an object within a frame, with no concern as to how it is situated of the property. How a residence is placed within the boundaries of the lot play an important part in their visual impact on the adjacent properties and the neighboring houses. ^5 � HAY DOBBS Technically, there were some parts of this process that are not clear. It is assumed that the camera used will have settings similar to any other camera used to execute the same process. These setting include those of the aperture and the physical position (height) of the camera. Hence, two different cameras could yield drastically different results when measurements of the same house are taken. Granted, the measurements for each set of studies would be consistent, but lens selection could skew the calculations. This would result in lower number, making the house appear smaller based on the measured value of construction. In addition, the measured faceprint does not take the side elevations of the house into account. In a effort to be in compliance within the designated range for a faceprint, a the bulk of a house could be positioned on along the property line. This would result in a house that was compliant, but would still be visually encroaching on the adjacent property. Finally, this appears to be a method of evaluation that is reactionary, using existing out of scale construction as a means to determine the maximum allowable ratio. However, it would be difficult to enforce future construction limitations based on the notion that the house with the highest number exceeds the a number set post construction. HAY ~- ^ 6 pr 14 _• ' - National Register Requirements Another method of determining could be based on restructuring the guidelines used to designate Historic Suburbs prepared by the U.S. Department of the Interior. Written in 2002, the Bulletin, Historic Residential Suburbs. Guidelines for Evaluation and Documentation for the National Register of Historic Places identifies significant suburban forms in order to preserve their historic fabric for future generations. This Bulletin is of particular relevance to Edina because the community embodies many of the qualities identified that make properties eligible for the National Register. Of particular note is the historic Country Club district, which has a distinct history as a community within Edina. Contemporary construction is still driven by a strict set of covenants and guidelines. While the rest of the community may not have the advantage of covenants as construction guidelines, they are all parts of a rich tapestry of developed landscapes, each with its own unique history and relationship with the surrounding landscape. An advantage over the Faceprint study is that the analysis could occur prior to the construction of any homes that seem out of scale. The resulting guidelines could be used to ensure that future construction be done in such a manner that is not only appropriately scaled, but also is in keeping with the architectural fabric surrounding it. Evaluation involves the following three activities: • Defining historic significance, and assessing the historic integrity of the community. • Intensive building and site inventories of the history and condition of a neighborhood is related to the historic patterns of suburbanization that shaped the locality or metropolitan area where it is located. • Final evaluation to determine whether or not a property meets the National Register criteria for evaluation and is eligible for National Register listing. EDiNA MASSING STUDY 47 � HAYDOBBS For the purposes of the creating construction guidelines, the second and third point would not be stressed in favor of a more extensive examination of the physical attributes of the community in order to'generate construction guidelines. In keeping with the requirements set forth by the Department of the Interior, appropriate means of evaluating the community could be: • Spatial Organization and Land Patterns • Topography • Vegetation • Circulation • Structures, Furnishings and Objects In addition to these points, histories of the developers should be examined, along with an examination regarding the history of how the parcels were developed. This would allow for some flexibility in regulation, recognizing that the community was developed in phases, and not as a single event. While this would have the advantage of allowing. for some flexibility in regulation, the adoption the National Register guidelines as a foundation for construction regulation could ultimately prove problematic. The first issue would be the assumption that all the neighborhoods had historic value of some form. If that was not the case, it could be a contentious matter to determine which neighborhoods deserve designation versus those that do not. Granted, evaluation on historical merit could be apparent, but those communities that were not selected for conservation would most likely experience a backlash possibly resulting in an even faster rate of tear down construction. This could possibly be interpreted as a form of redlining in the community. HAYDOBBS 48 AUIU "aT I5, x006 0 Highway Visual Impact Assessment; Prepared by MnDot The final method of evaluation that could be used to identify restrictions could be the Highway Visual Impact Assessment prepared by the Minnesota Department•of Transportation.. Based on a 1999 visual survey and published in 2001, the Visual Impact Assessment documents the results of three different highway view sheds in the.state of Minnesota. In each of the surveys the highway view sheds of urban corridors were selected andused as the basis of examination. In each survey, volunteers were required to ride as a group through the corridor, calling out points of interest, regardless of whether they were deemed attractive or otherwise. In the course of the survey, several key elements were identified as a means to determine the legibility of the surrounding landscape and to identify any unsightly conditions. Individuals would -call out to identify points of significance while "the other volunteers would note and assess the view on a scale of 1 -5. While these points were assessed by the passengers, MnDOT staff gave the point an identification number and wrote down the mileage to allow for further review and photographs at a later date. In addition to the areas that were identified by the volunteers, a number of locations had been identified by MnDOT for assessment. In these locations, specific elements of the landscape were evaluated as required. The advantage_ of this format was that it allowed for a broad range of considerations with relative anonymity. Because the volunteers were required to identify and rate the points on the tour, a more comprehensive assessment of the corridors was compiled. Based on this, MnDOT was able to identify a number of identifiers that were common to the evaluation of the highways. These were as follows: • Maintenance • Planting design • Structural design • Vistas from the highway EDIT cc "tip STUDY 49 HAY DOBBS In the case of evaluating tear downs, this process may provide means of determining common aesthetic themes in the built community. 'A similar process in Edina could. . involve a tour of the city in order to identify a range of housing conditions in order to determine how residents of the city feel about recent construction trends. This information could be used to create a foundation for a set of guidelines to regulate future development in the city. As a tool, it combines the means of assessment used in the face print study with that of the National Register Requirements. It allows people to visually assess and rank residential construction as a visual exercise, with the ability to compile data for quantification. That being said, it embodies the problems involved with both of the. methods as well. The unspoken caveat in the Visual Assessment method is that there is a group of undesirable residences by default. Most likely these will be determined not by a common sense of aesthetics but by the tastes of the individual who have volunteered for the exercise. This could generate dissent among members of the community as their homes would be singled out as being "bad" or in "poor taste." It could also have the potentially undesirable effect of creating additional incentives for tear down construction in areas with smaller homes. AUG,UST 15, 2006 Chapter IV: Alternate Means of Regulation LIMITATIONS. OF CONVENTIONAL ZONING Based on our research, the use of conventional methods of zoning will not be suitable for the regulation of tear down construction patterns as they appear today. Conventional zoning should be considered as a method of regulation that determines the maximum bulk that a residence may have relative to the size of the property, defined by a maximum foot print and defined maximum height or construction. What is not taken into account in this method of assessment is context. While a new residence may be designed and constructed in full compliance with the zoning code, the difference in size may be significant enough to make it "stand out" from the older homes in the neighborhood. Therefore, it seems clear that part of the process of regulating tear down construction would be creating policies or process that takes the neighborhood, or the physical context into account. Any alternate means of regulation should take into account relationships between the builder, community regulation and existing residents in the neighborhood. To that end, there are possibly three different approaches that may be.taken in order to establish a process in which the physical qualities of new construction are considered relative to existing physical character of the neighborhood. These are: flex zoning regulations, community education and tax incentives. 1. Flex Zoning Flex zoning is a method of encouraging and regulating growth in dense areas where mixed use types may be effectively combined in a manner not permitted with traditional zoning definitions. It is important to note that typically, this form of regulation is not defined as an overlay district, but is intended to serve as part of a revitalization or redevelopment process. Hence, the goal is to encourage growth and development with areas that are traditionally commercial and residential in nature. . In these cases, bulk is not regulated by building height, but is examined on a case by case basis; with emphasis placed on the effective combination of use types. Commonly associated with principles of smart growth, Flex zoning serves as a means to create efficient urban environments while preserving undeveloped land for future use. In the context of saturated building environments, it creates an opportunity to make new districts based on the exiting urban fabric. Relative to the process of regulating residential construction, flex zoning can create opportunities EDINA MASS,II .3G STUDY 51 HAYOOBBS in communities that encourages the continuous evaluation of residential renovation and construction in order to maintain or encourage growth. As a principle of smart . growth, it is recommended that flex zoning be used as part of a comprehensive set of regulations and guidelines that include community education and tax incentives. It must be stressed that flex zoning typically does not address bulk specifically. Instead, new regulations and guidelines would be required in order to properly address how new construction is situated within the existing residential fabric. Dom Yw q M Form- bared building code from Salinas, CA shoWring setback and marling limitations. This verygeneral level of regulation, tailored to the scale of each neighborhood, can be Written into Edina' general code in tandem with the update of the Comprehensive Plan. HAY DOBBS 52 AUGUST 1 S, 2006 2. Community Education In addition to regulatory options and visual assessment, Edina has the opportunity to take an educational outreach approach to addressing neighborhood change. In many historic districts across the country, business and homeowners are encouraged to follow voluntary guidelines for materials replacement, setbacks, and signage. For Edina, there are several strategies through which appropriate yet varied construction and renovations can take place under voluntary programs with clear recommended guidelines. Some of the strategies to disseminate information as follows: THE EDINA DESIGN FORUM:. CITIZENS COMMITTED TO RESIDENTIAL DESIGN Whatever form they take, Edina's design education, review and outreach programs will need coordination. The current task -force could continue as the Edina Design Forum —a mix of residents of varied backgrounds and expertise, this group would work with city staff to coordinate and evaluate the success of the possible programs. Overtime, ineffective programs could be phased out and popular programs improved. GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATIONS AND DISCUSSION MATERIALS Future forums, discussion groups and consulting will require visual examples of models for renovation and new design. A first task can be writing an illustrative booklet demonstrating appropriate massing, setback, window patterns and materials for various Edina neighborhoods. The book can describe the historic evolution of Edina, how lots and houses changed in scale, and how best to adapt them to today's needs without overwhelming smaller nearby properties. The book would be filled with photo, sketches, simulations of appropriate and inappropriate alterations, text, and sources for further information and materials. WEB SITE AND INFORMATION FORUM The Task Force can operate a website to include the graphic booklet along with links to appropriate city officials or other information sources. ?r ^, MASSING STUDY 53 HAYDOBBS PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS Regular public presentations can be planned for each of the city's neighborhoods to review Edina's history and change, the contents of graphic booklet and to answer homeowner questions. This presentation can also be brought to specific neighborhoods at their request. ARCHITECT AND CONTRACTOR CONTINUING EDUCATION Because most residential projects involve contractors and designers, the Forum can host special workshops for the building trades and professions: Topics can include Edina codes, review process, recommended materials, appropriate scale and approaches for conflict resolution with neighbors. Relevant city staff can also attend to introduce themselves: The goal would be to create a common understanding of high- quality design that can avoid community protest, delayed approvals, and costly redesigns. . VOLUNTARY DESIGN REVIEW Homeowners seeking to build or renovate should be able to come to the Forum for voluntary design review. A volunteer panel of design professionals from Edina can provide advice, critique and support for projects when they are in the early schematic design phase. This input will help owners and contractors to. have a clear, sense of expectations and the opportunity to.address them in the most cost - effective, way possible. PRO -BONO PROFESSIONAL ADVICE The Forum can also establish a program whereby local design experts can provide 2 -3 hours of pro -bond advice for residents who are beginning to consider a building project. ANNUAL AWARDS PROGRAM This program can recognize complementary new construction and renovation in Edina while also lauding the work of specific volunteers.or groups. Models include awards programs from the Minneapolis Committee on the Urban Environment (CUE) and awards programs from the Preservation Alliance of Minnesota. See the Preservation Alliance website and awards at: . www.. mnpreservation. o rg/ awards2005 HAYDOBBS 54 AUGUS' `, 2 006 3. Tax Incentives With a possible model of historic preservation tax credits at the federal level; Edina can offer tax incentives in the form of delayed valuation increases or abatements for homeowners who pursue the voluntary design review process and follow volunteer panel advice. Current house assessed values could be frozen for five years after the project's completion. A second option is to reduce the tax mill rate for a set period of time. 55 HAY D08BS Chapter V: Task Force Findings and Recommendations The following findings and recommendations are supported by the Task Force based on discussion and the research presented herein: Findings: I. Massing is a nationwide issue. The Task Force defines "massing" as: `The overall volume and scale of a building relative to the heigbt, roof peek, setbacks, width, and sideyards of neighboring houses. Massing' is not an absolute set of measurements but is contextual. Massing is based on existing neighborhood character, especially that experienced when moving along the street. " • Many cities are addressing the issue. • No city has found an Ideal solution. • The Issue revolves around property rights. 2. Overall, residential rebuilding in Edina has been positive • Design has been pleasing and a good fit for the neighborhood; • Construction has been of good quality; • While the mass of new houses generally has been larger than neighboring houses, the mass has typically not been overwhelming, and • Residential rebuilding signals rebirth of neighborhoods. HAY D08BS 56 3. Where residential reconstruction has raised concerns, the following were generally true: • The rebuilt house was in a neighborhood of small and /or narrow lots; and • The most common concern was that the rebuilt house was "too high," and /or too close to the lot line or too large for the lot relative to neighbors. 4. Residents expressed concern about lack of notification for teardowns and expansions. 5. Residents expressed strong concerns about disruption and neighborhood livability during the construction of a new house or a major remodeling of an existing house. 6. To address neighborhood livability, the existing city codes may not be adequate to regulate residential projects. Some projects meeting city codes have raised citizen concerns. 7. In addressing new residential .. construction and expansions, the challenge is to find the appropriate balance between: -The right of a land owner to develop property; and The right of neighboring land owners to the "peaceful enjoyment" of their property. AUGUST 15, 2006 Recommendations: I. Mandatory neighbor notification prior to permit letting. Property owners who intend to build a new house or substantially rebuild an existing house should be required to notify neighboring property owners. The'notification should involve demolition and construction start and completion dates along with elevation and site plans. Preferably, a perspective drawing showing the view of the completed project from the street should also be provided as part of the notification. The City should not issue 'a building permit until the notification has taken place. Ideally, the city should post these and other permit - related drawings on the city web site for public review. L NA M�;SSING STUDY 2. Neighborhood design. education. Create and support an ongoing outreach program for neighborhood education and project review. Staffed by the city, volunteers, and possibly outside consultants, this group could create "neighborhood handbooks" tailored to the scale,.history, style and setbacks of each neighborhood. This handbook could identify character - defining features for each neighborhood and how to meet modern needs while protecting them. 3. Neighborhood. focus for comprehensive plan update. When the Comprehensive Plan is updated in 2008, neighborhood geographic definition and character should be addressed. After completion of the update, the zoning and building codes could be adjusted to address issues including: height, bulk, driveway coverage, and setback. These guidelines would be customized by lot size and neighborhood context. They would not restrict style, materials, or colors. 4. Voluntary Neighborhood Conservation Districts Groups of adjoining homeowners could have the option to create their own Neighborhood Conservation Districts which could further guide construction activity. 5. Proactive Residential Construction Oversight and Regulation: • Start time • Parking • Congestion • Safety • Damage to adjoining property • Time to complete • Trees — loss & damage • Road damage • Storm water system damage • Propane tanks Dumpsters • Portable toilets 57 .HAY DOBBS Appendix- this Appendix is divided into the following sub- sections: • National and regional news articles _ • Community case studies and white papers • National Trust for Historic Preservation Studies • Sample research and perception study methodologies • Task Force Meeting Minutes • Other All of these sources informed the contents of this study and recommended options. _AUGUST 1S, 2006 W Station Areas ALTERNATIVE (Sq. Ft.) PROPOSED (Sq. Ft.) EXISTING (Sq. Ft.) Offices (Red) 945 960 960 General Offices N/A 914 806 Fire Chiefs Office 240 208 .208 Fire Chiefs Administrative Assistant 80 N/A N/A Assistant Fire Chiefs Office 150 N/A N/A Captain's Office/Room 240 N/A N/A Fire Marshall's Office 204 N/A 240 80 Fire Marshall's Administrative Assistant N/A N/A Training Chiefs Office 150 N/A N/A Inspectors N/A N/A 288 96 Inspectors' Plan Review /Files N/A N/A File /Records Storage Room N/A N/A 256 225 Dispatch 92 256 Conference Room (Seats 6 -8) N/A N/A 216 Co /Fax Room 96 N/A N/A Offices Total 2,357 1418 1270 Support (Green) 945 960 960 Dining 192 288 288 Kitchen 256 192 192 Kitchen Storage N/A N/A 80 48 Janitor 48 48 General Storage N/A N/A 280 Mechanical 320 144 144 Electdcal/Telephone Data 192 N/A N/A Equipment Storage /rooms 192 N/A N/A Server/Telephone /Communications 96 N/A N/A -Laundry Rooms 48 N/A N/A Support Total 1,6561 6721 672 Date: 05 JULY 2006 Project No.: 06004.002 "1 %5 O Q0 Lavatories (Magenta) 945 960 960 Men's Locker Room 480 324 256 Men's Toilet/Shower 320 288 256 64 Men's Restroom N/A N/A Women's Locker Room 128 N/A 320 Women's Toilet/Shower 320 256 N/A Women's Restroom 64 N/A N/A General Toilets 432 70 70 ,Storage 12 N/A N/A Lavatories Total 2,000 1066 582 Fitness /Company (Pink) 945 960 960 Dayroom 400 340 500 Exercise 748 N/A 960 N/A Quiet/Study 128 N/A Computer /Study /Library 144 N/A N/A Com uterlStud /Libra Shelving 18 N/A N/A Recreation /Leisure Total 1,5221 12161 500 Sleeping (Blue) Dormitory 945 960 960 Sleeping Total 945 960 960 Circulation (Tan) 12,015 1,802 (Incd. /Dorm.) 960 (Incd. /Dorm.) 960 Vestibule 64 52 52 Patio 640 640 640 Lobby 42 112 192 48 3' Counter 48 48 Awards/Display Area 32 32 32 Stairs N/A N/A 480 Elevator 80 N/A N/A Elevator Equipment 100 N/A N/A Circulation Total 1,636 814 884 Training/Medical (Dark Gray) Training Room (49 Occupants - 1 x 23 Each) 12,015 1,802 (Incd. /Dorm.) 960 (Incd. /Dorm.) 960 1,127 Training Room Lobby 500 N/A N/A EMS Supply Room 192 N/A N/A EMS Clean Room 80 N/A N/A Training Total 1,899 0 0 Subtotal Station Areas Subtotal Station Circulation 12,015 1,802 6,146 718 4,868 718 Total Station Areas 13,817 6,864 5,586 STATION 1 PROGRAM AREA(S) COMPARISON CHART EDINA FIRE STATION REMODEL City of Edina Edina, Minnesota HAY DOBBS SK. 14 Date: 05 JULY 2006 Project No.: 06004.002 asF OFFICE 1925E OFFICE IMF APPARATUS BAYS VESTIBULE 525F LOC ERHROOM II TOILETESHOWER II OISPH LOBBY 2565F Z565F 1125E PATH) OFFICE W KITCHEN TOILET 1925E MECH. 305E FIRE CHIEFS OFFICE 2085E TOILET 405F D9HNG 2885E OFFICE 45MF EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN DIAGRAM (5586 FT2) EDINA FIRE STATION REMODEL City of Edina Edina, Minnesota N 0' 8' 16' 32' HAY'DOBBS 61:161.7 Date: 05 JULY 2006 Project No.: 06004.002 AAIROR DIERCISE 74B5F MEN'S TOILET /SHOWER 288F MEN'S LOCKER ROOM 324SF APPARATUS BAYS KITCHEN TOIL ET 30F QUIET 144SF STUDY 1785E WOMEN'S LOCKER WOMENS DISPATCH 288E ROOM TOILET /SHOWER 42SF 128F 256F BAY ROOM KITCHEN TOIL ET 30F MECH. 144SF TOILET 40F DINING 288E OFFICE 450E BAY ROOM FIRE MARSHALL 340SF 204SF PAT10 PROPOSED EXPANSION PLAN DIAGRAM (6864 FT2) EDINA FIRE STATION REMODEL City of Edina Edina, Minnesota VESTIBULE 52SF LOBBY 42F OFFCE 108SF OFFICE 845F FIRE CHIEF'S OFFICE 208F N 0' 8' 16' 32' HAY DOBBS SK. 16 Date: 05 JULY 2006 Project No.: 06004.002 APPARATUS BAYS CAPTAIN'S 45E 225SF ICE II DISPATCH II �64SF STAIR 16GF II ELEVATOR LOBBY 6O¢ 2nSF PATIO FIRST FLOOR - ALTERNATE TWO STORY PLAN DIAGRAM (5606 FT2) EDINA FIRE STATION REMODEL City of Edina Edina, Minnesota HAY DOBBS - SK.17 FIRS CLEAN ASSISTANT FIRE ROOM BOSF EMS SUPPLY CHIEFS OFFICE ROOM 1 WSF 1925F 365E CAPTAIN'S 45E 225SF ICE II DISPATCH II �64SF STAIR 16GF II ELEVATOR LOBBY 6O¢ 2nSF PATIO FIRST FLOOR - ALTERNATE TWO STORY PLAN DIAGRAM (5606 FT2) EDINA FIRE STATION REMODEL City of Edina Edina, Minnesota HAY DOBBS - SK.17 f Date: 05 JULY 2006 Project No.: 06004.002 ELECTRICAL/ TELEPHONE/ DATA 1935E EIERCISE 974SF SEINER/ TELEPHONE/ COWA. 965E GENERAL STORAGE 1906F TRAINING ROOM 10006F GENERAL TOILETS 4325F COPY /FAX/ II II STORAGE STAIR 2055E 16osF II FI� II FIRE 40 TR CNINING 20SF EFS OMCE 150 M STAIR FILE /RECORDS OPEN OFFlCE STORAGE ROOM 1605E 256SF 4�SF SECOND FLOOR - ALTERNATE TWO STORY PLAN DIAGRAM (6661 FT2) EDINA FIRE STATION REMODEL City of Edina Edina, Minnesota LOBBY 45W BREAK ROOM 20B5F CONFERENCE 2605E FIRE INSPECTORS (4) PLAN REVIEW FILES (1) 5605E STAIR 16MF ELEVATOR BOSF N 0' 8' 16' 32' HAY DOBBS __ SK.18 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Date: 5 JULY 2006 Project 0 No.: 06004.002 E D I N A FIRE STATION REMODEL City of Edina Edina, Minnesota HAY DOBBS SK.19 Date: 05 JULY 2006 Project No.: 06004.002 INTERIOR PHOTOGRAPHS EDINA FIRE STATION REMODEL City of Edina Edina, Minnesota HAY DOBBS - SK.20 EDINA CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP for I:NTEF ___ACHEN' BOULEVARD I BLAKE I C AD ►i'' V1 PRO VEMENT T ��CITY OF Ec�rrr4 1. Introductions 2. History of Pathway /Corridor Agenda 3. Application 4. Design — General Guidelines, Design, Video 5. Federal Requirements — Application, Schedules 6. Other options �� ctTv OF Eotr��► Project History Studies /Reports: 1972: Bicycle &Commuter Paths Study —Edina Junior Federated Women's Club Conservation Committee 1980: City comprehensive plan 1984: Council Resolution supporting application for Federal Funds for pathway 1985: Council report on unsafe corridor 1997: Hennepin County Bike Plan 1998: Transportation Safety Program r � ��CITY OF EDiHa Project History Studies / Reports: 2001: Interlachen Blvd turned back to City 2003: Municipal State Aid Sidewalk Report — missing segments 2003 - August: Resolution Supporting Application for Federal Funds 2004: Funds appropriated for Pathway Project 2004: Municipal State Aid Sidewalk Report — missing segments 2006 — March: 1 St Open House r PREFERRED SCHEME nR*F TILE YEA _ nmaIMILaaaNr_q WATAL J "I Project History 2000 Study for Hennepin Parks i r v � �+ - _� _ �►', lAYl4 CCIRID 1 OrLDDADWW ..� MAN now SCN4FIGFHD ! j I . �aoox 1 � Ei - '� aplvtFa —TAO.,f7 }fdD .� .,` - mr,el rwc r>:1�iM �'eOa trn oop.rr:... "—W-- AL0.1ag2m Project History 2000 Study for Hennepin Parks i r v � Project History City of Edina Transportation Plan Fig �13 =' - Pedestrian /Bicycle Facilii [311 CITY OF EDINA an- - Application • Application for Federal Funding made to the Metropolitan Council in 2003. • Project was selected for funding ($1,000,000) in 2003, for Fiscal Year 2007. The project was selected based,�� on a number of factors. GO ' CITY OF EeINo Application Project Selection Based on the following: • Purpose • Logical Termini • System Continuity /Need is Resolutions /Letters of Support (Edina, Hopkins, Hennepin County, Three Rivers Park District) (See Copies of Application) [30 CITY OF EDINA on - i Design Design based on: • Mn /DOT Bicycle Facilities Guidelines • State Aid Standards (State Aid Rules 8820.9995) • Engineering judgment Design a® rall F Des n: DAN FENCE / RAILING t LIMESTONE RETAINING WALL.(HEIGHT- VARIES) • ` :r f R/W EXISTING ROADWAY `-10' W IDE ASPHALT TRAIL STATION 161+50 STATION 180+50 lvn I V AAA � D —� - � _ � ... iT1�111NG BALL- � .' �•. . ....... i 960. ........... i�.......................: .......:.. ..:::::::::::: .... _--_ .....: ...,.......... ;i A c .IHTCRLACH H BLVD. euR -. ...:.......... . ............ .....:.......... ..........:... .............. .............. ........... ....... i 960. ........... i�.......................: .......:.. ..:::::::::::: .... 70.00' r: c.:....::...... .....: ...,.......... .............. ...:.........:... . .......... �. ' :::::::::�i: - is ............ ............. - ..... ....... .............. �:::::::::::� - .............. ......::::::::::::::... ...::::::::d:... ...........�. Wt; . : _ s.............:...:� .............. ................. .............._"...... 8 8 :: .............. ::......... W .............. ...............:.......... ... ...... :... ............ ........,.ii'i ... - 8 o...................... .......................... ........... g - .....:::: .. .......... .......... i ................. ---- _f \'... .... V. :::::::::::::::::..... ::::::.............:`- .:......� 10.00 ... . ! ............. .....:.... .............. ........ ...... w... .... ..... v- ......... ...................... .............. ...... ..... _ .. .......................... ............ ... ,._.......... C .. ......... .............. .............. ........... ..........._............� 2............. : ....... I. 450 .. ....................� ........,..... - °ilbi:ii!l:::;....... ... �.........� ......... _ .............. _ .......... ... ............................ ....................: ...... ... _ ......... ��: ......... .............. ..:.............. ... ......... ............ .. . ..._�:::::::::� .............. ...... ... ............. . % _ ......... :::::::... ........... ..... . ........... ...... ..... . . .......... ..... .............:..................: . . : ..... : - : . I ................................................. . 27 +00 . . ...............:.........� 228.00 :::::::::::::i 22§ib(siiiii; iii ii29($83: t ::. .. .. . . ....... .'�•°, "K"" irmo-a ... CONMJL[ITIC .CITY Of EDIda 1 CITY OF HOPti INS SHEET -CPW -•--k • ---�—" r "CONS RU:TICN oL�R r[xc lxt[a -i. ®GHOUr, INC. ,INTEfil.9CHEN TRAIL '7F .—y� V lC•-1• , NKk �� §�� NI- rY:OM5i11.0� ai iaM. s [30 CITY OF EaiNo ....... .............. ................... :: ............. ....... ..... .................. .......... .......................... .. ,.. .............. ................ _ i ....... . ":::: I .:...:....... ........... .............. 910. n :::::!::::: ........... .............. ::::::: ..:::::: - . ...::: �:::: a :::::..............: ... ::I ".. �::::::::::::: ....... 94Q.. .............. F :::::::::::::: ,.........,.......... ,......... .............. ....... - - e ....... W............. �.. ..............;,........:: ,....... ........:.. .... ........ .............. .. ....... .......................... ......,........ .............. ........... ..iii ............. g x. :....:...... a ::.:::.:s...... ...................... .............. .............. .. ......... .............. y :::::::::::..... ............. �.' ..... .............. ............. .. W : ... ...................: ............ . .............:::::::::::::...:. 8 ................ .............. .............. .. . - .......... g ..........J.... ...---.._ ................ .. : : :...... .............; .. .... _...: _ ..................... g ........I. :: i w.00':u.t .: \.�: ::...........r.......: ...................: ................ii, �Y. _.......,....: � ....:........ ....... .... ...... - - $ m .............. a ........... �_.. ........ ........ w, s. _ _ . ............. ...v .. ..0 .... ............- . . .... ..........6 .....—.... ...... ; . .. ...... a - _ s.,.... ...... �_ :. ........... • ............. ................. 79 • ............... ............., 21800 :�:::::::: ;::: 219.00 :::g?!�.....i 220.Obiiii iiiiii::':' ...921:.00 -,. :: :: : ... ... t .............. ...............,.......... '"" 1pE[F -�a .... .. uvwoi nrwo-a .. orudco m.' .. ...... ., ... CITY Of EGINa / C ?T'i nF 'HOPF:INS s EET SHEET -CPU - OON6il.T ION v �M iEN ®CONSQLTIiJG �aHOUP�INC. IrdTERIACHEN TF.AIL uv +i rc• � mn. xo e } X ;�: ...�v��N y,viemuii.oro - . J I - - - { 4 ,Iz "® 0 n mZ Z� --- m� r- o c INTERLACNEN BLVD. —� � - � - p r^ a wrw et t 1 -8W ° M •u . -°t+R .......... .......... ............... .............. P ,. ...................... ................. ............... .............. ............... .............. .........H... ... ......... __......... .............. .............. .............. .............. ............., _ ... ... ... ....... ............... 450 : ::::::: .. ...............n ........ ............... ........ F :::: ........... ........... :.::........_.....::.:::::::... .. : .............� .... .... .... 450 _... ........... .............. ^ ........ aY bA ::: _......... ........• .....¢.........•. - :: ::::::::::: ............... ............. " �e[ii 9 - i[[[:: r::: -!l::C �E:E::f EEii AEE::S' .. I::. - - ............... ......... ... � w- .�.°i ..°. .:..... .......... . ..I ... ............... : : : : : :.. ... . . ........... �} -:r : .......... ............::::........ v .............. . ............ ....... �.r. ✓' ^ :.... .............. ............ .............. ............ :......... ......................... ...................... ............. ......:...... ......:.....:: ........:..... .............. ... ... ....... n, _ ............ .......... .............. ': :::::::9gp°1 Y.C. - - .............. .............. �:�::::: .. 8: ............ .............. ....... .......... ................. .............. .............. .............. .. ; ..... ...: .....:.:: .............. ............. ......:........ .. ...................... - ...................... ......................... .............. .............. .............. _ .............. .............. .............: ............................. .... .. .............l ; .. _ .......... .............. 940 .............. ...........:.. .............. ..... ............................... ....................... ....................... .............. ..........,... ..........:... _ .......... ............. i::: -' ........,..... ..............: ........:..... .....:......... ...............I 70 00" 'g ................ .. - ............ . .............. : ::::�::::::::: 7 ........... ��. ............... . ..........,........ ......::�:.......... .. .............. ...:............. :....... .............. ...... ....... 7 _ ....:.......... ...........Pt I;e00..... . .............� 212:.00 .:.........:... 213W0 :......:::::::: ::PI S.00 •'"^••• ^° ,,.� ,.; ;R a, �: R .:..,. o: r,.•.a�� Im -osror on��co e+ CONSULTING CONS SINC CI7Y OF ED AIa / CITY OF HOPyIN° - �SL�NE� PLAN F L IIdTER, J F..i ISHEET CPT OF � e � _. �_ 5_'�. .'.�� ...W..�n 1-a.V �rAYll. a1 —� aI IC• la [b °. b °°°a... GEOUP INC. � o }Yx 130 CITY OF EDINA --I CITY � EaS � EDINA �I X 5.0 YIzC MALL T• V n t- G� V �� c o INTERLACHEN. BLVD. c m -pow . - = r '"'i =Rue a +w as -ww � -�`&•r r-eIR -aua - ..............: . ...- ....................I . ..................... ............. ..........., -.. .... ............... :........ ..:.........:.:::::::::::::: .... . .................... .:........ _... _...............:.........:.... .......... .... .... A::......:......:::::::::::::: .. _ .... .... _ .... ........... ................. ............... :: ` J .. Cti`ti ... _. ............ .........................: .................:.......... ............ ::::: :;:::::s ::.._......_...... �..:... ..... pv:::.._ .. a ............ �........ ": .............. .......... ::::::: ate:::::::::::::: .. . _............ >:::::.. a:::::::: ............. ............... }�y. �:::::::::::: ............... ... ......... .... W 930 . .. :::.. . . .....:........ .. ..... ...... .. .... .. .... ..................... . \..W........ .. .............:. .......... .. ........930 ......................... _ �..... ayl /. p:. g;g : ..................... r .........: ��........... 4. Q .- ::;;...;.... :gam ........ i ...:.......... ..:........... .............. .....:..-- .............. . .................... .......... .............. :::::I::::::::: .....:......... 4 LL .C:::::::.. ............ ... r P...:::...... ....... ......- ......; ........ ......... .............. ............. _.......:..... .........:.... .............. _3. R ........... ........... ......... ....... ............:: :.......... �........ .............. 4 .... .:............ .......... .......... .......... kk 'P:::: ....... .......:...... .............. .........:.... .............. ............ ...............::::: c_ ....... �w ....................... ......I....... ry �........ .... ................ ...... .. ............ ............ .: .............. .......... -. _ .... ......... -.. .............. ... ....... 920 ......... :....l:::' Yw .....:::' .:::::::::: .............. .............. .............. .............. .:::::::......; ::::::::::::::.... .. : ...........:.. .............. ........ice :::.....:........g gg,,��....' :::,:::'.::::::::: - ....... .... :::':::........................ . .... .............. ...................: .............. .............. ............ -. ..... ....................:.... ........... .......... .................; .... ............... - ........ ........................: : sir.::..:.... e.....:.;:::. - ................ ............ ....... ......:.. .......... .... -.... _. ......... ......... .......... ............ ,..a r ....................... -...., .... :::::::::I .....:........ .. -... .. ::�::::::::::: :::::::::..... .. .. -. ........... ................. . .............. :::::I:::::::::::::::::: _ ........... ...... ...... ..... : .............. ..........:.......... ...:.........: 206 +00 ..:: ...... . 1::. ::ar.. :: 9 ......:...... -- r--- �:----- ........... .:.......... -' - ..... --- - -..— n. <rromm• e. ,,,,...,„. [I77 of EDIIra. i [IT "." of HcFRIrs , `fi EET y-y CONsuLTING Cd+STRUT ION PLAN a:pk 8� _ — -- wam•T GROUP, INC. INTE5LAC,HEN TRAIL OF li.yK. -- .t]] •••H]IIN I- — a,YIM\etl l..le ---Y --- f11G• [bY b tag CITY OF EDINA law CITY OF EDINA an —1 .............. .......... .............. .......... .............. ........... .......... .... .......... .......... ................. : ...... : ................ ................. .............. ............... . .............. ............... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................. .............. .... ..... . .............. ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... ... ....... . ..... ........................ . ..... : .................. ............... ....... . . . . . ...... ...... ............... . . . . . . . . . ...... :sue ....... .. .... .................. ............ CITY OF EDNA / CITY CIF HOPKItl S 11111ET 7z� 910 ......... .... ....... ?y CONSULTING RUCTION PLAN C�p ............... . ........ ... IENCI.— . ....... . ..... . ..... GROUP, INC. NTERLACHU4 TRAIL ................. ... .............. . ......... . ...... .......... ... : i i . � � .......... ............ ----- .............. .......... ........ ........ ...... ....... .... ... . ..... . . ............. ... . .............. ............ ... ::: .................... --- ............ . .............. . ...... .. ...................... ............ I ................ . ............... ......... .......... ir, ......... ........ .... ........ .. ::: .............. .............. . ...... ........ ....... ............... . .......................... ......... ..... ........ ......... .... ........ .... ...... .............. . . .............. ............. ........... .............. .............. ............ ...... .......... ....... ...... .......... ............... ......... ............ . . .............. . ........... ............. ............. . .............. ......... .............. . .............. ............. ..... . ..... . ..... .................. ...... I .... :::::;::: : ........ ... : .............. :: . .............. ......... .. ........... . ......... 910 .............. :sue ....... .. .... .................. ............ CITY OF EDNA / CITY CIF HOPKItl S 11111ET 7z� 7:--- ... ........... . .......... . ....... : ... ............ .............. . s � .. ...... . 190-06 . ........ ......... .......... I .... :.:.:. .............. ... .. .. ... t..9.l. �OO ::: . . ... ...... ......... ... ... :sue ....... .. .... I CITY OF EDNA / CITY CIF HOPKItl S 11111ET 7z� 7:--- ?y CONSULTING RUCTION PLAN C�p IENCI.— GROUP, INC. NTERLACHU4 TRAIL Or W- 1 J. -, � �� n i RETAIN[NG.PALL ��-} 6. D' YA %. NT, _ RETAINING PILL -' S.0' YAX. HT. _ - RET ►IN ING ? - �INTERLACHEN BLVD. I.T' NA%. NT. f i -RW E% T GpLIS CIpI�RSE —'T" 'L •s— �.p,�: r– BRING .Pg. Di.E 420 .. .............. :::::::::::::.:::::.::.::: r..... .. , .............. :::::i iiiiii .. - '.. .:......E............1.._...... _. _.. i iiiiiiii .............. iii... ...._.....:.: -: - . -.... i.. -. _ i:iii i::iii..: .... 920 so................._...., ..........,... .- ................ ................. .......... P .............. ..............I ..I:::::::::::. ...... as - . -: _ ..... ...:.......... ....... ............ . .......... _ ............ ......................... ............................... :;:: _...... .............. ...................... .............. ......... .............. .............. ............... ........, ............. . .............. .............. .... ........ .............. .......................... 910 .............. ........... ........... .............. - .....,......... .............. .......... . ..............., ........ .::::::::::... ............... : .......... 91.0 .....:....... . g_ .............. .. .............. . ........ :::- u:::::: r.i ..i ...iii .. .... ... ..- ......:::::::: .......... t:.::::: i:::::::::::::::: ......... .. -.. > .,.......... _. ,.. ........................ ... .. .:.........:............... .............f:- ............... ........... ............... . :::::::::IY�xe00iiiiii :............. _. :....... :...:::::i:::::::::... ........ ...._ ...... :........., ... ._:......_..:::iii[:itiiii ::..: .,............. :: a:::::::: °176.OD :�:::::::::�::: 177,00 :::::::: ..... 6 ::::::::::::::.:.. �::::: 178.00: ... .... .. ......... .... - ii17q+00 ._. o - ' ^"°' °•' "'^• °G C..'h'o4t�::, �:" •' v �sFRt iR[[R -1s mnrnuaam �r�°0mo-°i ,�,.,,,, °,�, orncicR n _ CONS SING CIF OF EDIIIA / CITY OF HOPKINS I SHEET -OPN CDNSIRDCTiW PLAN z._ - -___ CROUP, INC. INTERLACHEN TRAIL OF OXXX. .ltc• 1 co.Y..o law CIY Q,F ED1NA ` | � CONSULTINr Y OF EDILJA CITY OF HOP1,KIN SHEET OCPL | �i m. 7RWTICN PLAN INTER L.ACHEN TRAIL OF / UN CITY OF EDINA on 7�—'SLAKE .. ........ .... ...... ...... .... . . .......... . ....... ... ... . . . ... ..... ... ....... ...... -.1.11.1 ... ....... ....... ..... . ................ . .. . . .............. . ..... ... . ..... ........ ........ .. — ... - ... -! ..... ....... .... ........... ............... ......... ....... ...... ....... .... ..... . ...... .. ............ ..... .. . .......... ............ ; ..... .......... .............. ...... . . ...... . ...... ..... ...... .............. ....... ... .... . ........ ...... ... — ... .... .. ........ . ..... .......... ........... .... .. . ............ . ... ......... ....... ... I .......... .... • ............ ... .......... . ................... ........... . ...................... ......... .............. ............. ............. ...... .......... ............. ..... ... . .... .... ... .............. . .............. . ............... ......... . ............... ............ . ... ..... .. . .......... . ....... .............. .......... 50 ..... .... . . .............. .. .... ........ . . ......... ......... .......... .......... .. .... ... .......... ..... .. ........... :..: ........... ...... . ... ... . ............. . ...... ............. . . ...... ........ .............. ............. .......... ..... ............... . .............. 930 ............ ..... . .............. ... . ... I ......... ................ .......... ad . . . ....... ...... ........ .......... .......... ........ .............. ........ . ....... .............. . .. . . ................... . ............... . .............. . ................ . ................ . ................... ........ .............. . . . . ...... ............. ............. .............. : ...... 930 .......... ....... ...... ......... .. ........... .................... ....... . ........ ... ........ ... . .. ..... ..... ...... ..... ... ........... . . .... -,: ::: ......... ..................... . . ........ :� q ................. ............. ........ ............... ....... ................ .......... . .. ... .... ... ........ . ................ ... ...... ......... ...... .... .. ......... ... .. ........... ........ ...... .............. ................. ........... .............. .......... .............. ............. ........... .......... ...... ............ .............. ..... ... . . . ... ... . .......... ... ...... .... ... ... . .......... ................ ........... . .......... .... ......... ......... .. ... . .............. ..... ...... .............. . ... ........ ...... ... .... .. .::::: ::::. .............. .... . .... ..... .... . . ... .............. ...... I .... ... . ........ : ... ... ... ...... .............. .......... . ......... . ...... ... .... .................... ............ ... ... .... ......... . .................. . ............. . . . ...... ...... ......... :. .... ........... . .. ... ... .. ... ............. .......... . � i .......... ....... . ......... t.. ........... ........... ............. .......... .............. . ............. . .............. .. ...... ............. . ......... ....... .... .. ...... ......... ....... .................... .. . .............. . .......... ......... ... ......... ............ ....... .............. ........ . 15b.00 . . ...... zz"7t ®CONSULTIN c T,� $7RWTjQN PLAN r c ROUP, INC. --I �: CITY OF Ea1N4 06 CITY OF EnINo I cas r CITY OF EaiNn i i i� 7" I /,. � I � � =' g � ,_ ;�' � � �f ti n - O � � \ ' - I �,� .�{ _ O �� - - __.___ _ -_ - ___ -_��_1 ___ __Zm. �.. ;„� a..m - - - ----- - - a� d �.: � EST � I^ I .. tag CITY OF EDINA F-- 0 nz 4� ox N ......... ..... .............. . ........ .............. .. ...... ............ . .............. ... ...... .......... .............. .............. ........ ........ ..... .................... ...................... .... .. ............. .............. .............. ...... .............. .............. .... 930 .............. .............. ........................ : ........ r ................ ..... .. . ..... ... ........... .............. .......... T r.............. ...... .... , ............. .......... ........... .: A 1. ................ ................. .. . ............. ........ .. . .............. ... ... : .............. :::::::: !:::: - ............... .............. . .............. ............ ........ ....... ......... ........... ........ ............. ...... ........ ... . ............... .............. .......................... ........... ............... ............... ........... ................ . .............. ...... :.. ........ ...... ............. . . I .......... a . ............ . .............. . ............... s. ............... . .............. ............. ........... ........... ..... ... ; ::::::::! ...... ........ .............. i ........... .............. .......... .......... ........... ......... ......... ...... .......... ': : ........... .............. . .................. ........... ............ ............... .... :: ::: :::: :::: ...... ..... ..... ... ........ ........................... ......... ......... ......... . ..... ............. : .......... . ........ L ...... ............ — ......... . !:::.. : : ................ ........ .............. ....... .................. ....... .............. ....... ................ ............. ............... .......... 124�00 : .... ...... ....... ............................ . .... ........... . ......... :.:. .............. .............. .............. ......... ... ... .... ...... CONSULTING Ma CITY OF EDIJ.A / CITY OF HOPKINS ISHEET PLUM - CTERLHEN GROUP, INC. I rr AC TR AIL OF if; QZ1 4x Xx °ATV OF EDian r < n W 3 nz W R W Y Z n y_ —CFA1R i -RlA_ E 1 r_ _ �H ° yrmn ot 1 .......... 930 .............. .........�... _ .....:........ ...................... ......................... ............. .............. ....................... . ...................... .............. .............. ............. ......................:..... .- .......... ............ .... .. .. ............. ............ .............. ............... ............... - ...................... . .............. .............. ...................... ......::::::::: .............. ......................... .............. .............. .. i {r--- iiiii.. .... .... ........ 1 .............. ....... .... .................. .........:.... ..... t........ ............ ......... ' ':n::::::: ...... .............. ... ............... I ............. i .....I:::::. ............. .�. ....... .......:...... :�:..;.. .............. .............. .............. .:................... .............. .�.y'... .............. �i ............ �.... ........ .............. .............. ....:......... .................... . .............. ��:::::::::::::: .............. ......................... ..... ............... ......................... "� .............. W ..... ........ 8 ::::::::::::::.. .............. .. .............. .., ..::::::::1 ......................... .... ....:::::.... 920 :::::::::..... 1-- r:..-° ..... _.... _ ...................... .............. .............. ............., .............. .............. ............., .............. .............. .... :::::::::::::: :... ............... .............. 920... .............. B ..................... ........,........... .. .... ... . _ Ixex.Rd:::::: ......................litia ::............. OG :........., 11A•D9 :... I�Y•p9iiiiiiii iii a12G %u�ii iii: iii[iii: iii X21.00 s.............. ...............,......... ';�;.,.....,., CONSULTING H cirr D D n rs F ea+srmn;r arrt PLAN ,, sexctxc[x -,. •-t ®GHOUP� INC. INTEfiL4CHE4 TRAIL o0F }.xx fL IL a0w�. �m 1 ............ ... ...... ............ . . ............ :: ......... .. ......... ........... 01 ............. . ..... ......... .............. ..... .................. Til I . .................... .............. .......................... ................. . . . . . : .......... ............. . ............ . .......... I .... m ................ . .............. . .............. . .............. . ....... .......... . ........ .. . ...... ..... ...... ......... . ............ .............. ... ......... ....... ............ .. . ................ ............... F: ......................... ............... . .............. ........ . ........... — .. a ............ .......... ...... ....... ......... .......... ............... .......... .......... ........... ............. ........... . .......... ................ . .............. .............. . .............. . . ................ ............... .............. ........ .............. ................... ...................... ....................... ............ ........ ............ .......... .............. .. . ..... .... ............. .................. ... .... ......... ................. ....... .............. .............. ....... ...... .................... V=411 ........... CITY OF EDIPJA CITY OF HOPK INS SHEET . .............. I W ............. . ..... ........ ............. -CPC ......... ........... .............. ................ ... .............. . . .......... 1-3 ---- C.7, INC. INTERL4CHEN TRAIL . OF .............. .... ...... . ........... .............. .............. .............. . ........ .......... ......... .............. .................. ...... ......... ........ 920 ................. ....... .............. .............. .............. ............. ........... ::::: ....... ..... ....... .......... d ....... . ......... . . ..... ......... . ............... SO. OD': V; ......... .......... ......... ...... .............. . ............................. ...... ....... ...... is .......... ..... ....... . ........ . ................ ... . .............. .............. ­ws :: , .... - . . ....................... .............. ............... ............ ... ...... ............ . . ............ :: ......... .. ......... ........... ............. . ..... ......... .............. ..... .................. .............. .......................... ................. . . . . . : .......... ............. . ............ . .......... I .... m ................ . .............. . .............. . .............. . ....... .......... . ........ .. . ...... ..... ...... ......... . ............ .............. ... ......... ....... ............ .. . ................ ............... F: ......................... ............... . .............. ........ . ........... — .. a ............ .......... ...... ....... ......... .......... ............... .......... .......... ........... ............. ........... . .......... ................ . .............. .............. . .............. . . ................ ............... .............. ........ .............. ................... ...................... ....................... ............ ........ ............ .......... .............. .. . ..... .... ............. .................. ... .... ......... ................. ....... .............. .............. ....... ...... .................... V=411 ........... CITY OF EDIPJA CITY OF HOPK INS SHEET P— I W CONW�C C0,157MiCTION ILAN -CPC .1K1.11 1-3 ---- C.7, INC. INTERL4CHEN TRAIL . OF l - 2 r N and -s ana -i ane-i nrre -s_ __ drm -c t��,... °o �� 1 ............. ...........::::: m.......... .. �:::: ....,....,..... :........ � :+0.50 %.� ,.... ................... 920 ......,._.._ .................... ._...�......... ...:........... _. .............. ......... ,. ___ : :m:::::: �: _ i 920 ........... .... ... W .............. .............. .. ..... Y.:::: ........... ... :.................. .... ..: .............. .............. .................... .............. .�.�OY w ................... ................... .................. ............ ......................... .............. ............... ... ................ ............... ............ ..... _. .............. ......................... .............. ............... ......yy...... ............... :::::::... k .............. .......... ........ ...... ............._............... ...................... ..............: .............. .... .. N: > ]Y n .............. .............. .... .. ......... ............. i............... .............. ...................... .......... �... .. ...:........ . - 910 .............. :::::,::::::::: ::�::::::::::: �::::::::::: .............. .............. .............. :::::::::::::: .... ..... 910 ..... .............. . 3 :::::::::::. i:02;o0 ............... ...............,.......... ...,.......... .�.........:... IODTOO :.............. lac .O(......1::::::::: :: ,.:, .�u •� e[ x�cytwxav e c-irn s . ^ - ' nN r owuo-bm r CONS ULTIN G _ , � T HOPI ItJS CITY OF E T SHEET � =CFA '7 F ao. scl-na.R.c. o O .T . . . CCaSTctiTl Oh PLAI e � ---• —. ^— . . _ �a HOUPINC, G i . INTERLACHEIJ, TRAIL --- C � L � eo _ . 4 .. ON an CITY OF EDIMA Federal Requirements • Construction plans must match the Federal Funding Application • A Federal Aid Project requires the preparation of a Project Memorandum —also must match the Federal Funding Application • Cultural Resources work is necessary ask�r �J of the Project Memorandum e..���6 • Requires Mn /DOT and SHPO approvals fo� Federal Funding Project Schedule: - Transportation Commission -June —Open House. —July — :Public Hearing - August • Comments /Questions EDINA CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP for INTERLACHEN BOULEVARD /BLAKE ROAD PATHWAY IMPROVEMENT ®� CITY of eDiNA Agenda ` r r, 1. Introductions 2. History of Pathway / Corridor 3. Application -i ` 4. Design — General Guidelines, Design, Video 5. Federal Requirements — Application, Schedules 6. Other options 7. Conclusion ' 0w CITY OF FDINA Project - Studies / Reports: J History J 1972: Bicycle & Commuter Paths Study Edina Junior Federated Women's Club Conservation Committee -1980: City comprehensive plan -.1984: Council Resolution supporting application for Federal Funds for pathway - ,.1985: Council report on unsafe corridor :1997: Hennepin County Bike Plan 1998: Transportation Safety Program � O: CITY OF EDIN• Project History Studies / Reports: 2001: Interlachen Blvd turned back to City 2003: Municipal State Aid Sidewalk Report — missing segments 2003 - August: Resolution Supporting Application for Federal Funds 2004: Funds appropriated for Pathway Project 2004: Municipal State Aid Sidewalk Report — missing segments 2006 — March: 1St Open House e. Project History 2000 Sind, �• _ Hennepin Parks i Project History Edina ivy i Prd"tmn / Transts adon Plan SO CITY OF EDINA Application' 'fj= • Application for Federal Funding made to i the Metropolitan Council in 2003. • Project was selected for funding ($1,000,000) in 2003, for Fiscal Year 2007. The project was selected based on a number of factors. CITY OF EDINA Application Project Selection Based on the following: Purpose Logical Termini System Continuity/Need Resolutions /Letters of Support (Edina, Hopkins, Hennepin County, Three Rivers Park District) (See Copies of Application) an cm OF EDINA Design Design based on: • Mn /DOT Bicycle Facilities Guidelines • State Aid Standards (State Aid Rules i 8820.9995) • Engineering judgment q M1 an CITY OF EDINA Design Design Criteria: • Design Speed: 20 mph • Minimum Width: 8 Feet • Clear Zone: 2 Feet • Vertical Clearance: 10 Feet is CITY OF EDINA Design x isCITY OF [DMA Design r . ➢4 asCITY OF EOINA Design aCITY OF EOINA Design lc ti� isCITY OF EOINA Design ➢5 Ai; CITY OF EDINA a: CITY OF EDINA aier 1 1 i A11CITY OF EDINA i i� ra ➢6 i CRY OF mm" O: CITY OF EDINA I i - s jo: CITY OF EDINA r /� CITY Of EOINA r • Y� 11 d s CITY OF EDINA 6 CITY OF ENNA i i I i 1 I d �8 CITY OF MINA Q: CITY OF EDINA f CITY OF EDINA ➢9 CITY Of EDINA CITY OF EDINA 1 r i s � ; CITY OF EDINA all ➢10 CITY OF EMMA CITY OF KDIKA CITY OF MINA 10 CITY OF EDINA CITY OF EDINA -- -------- ➢13 CITY GI ®INA Corridor Video M: CITY OF ®INA Federal Requirements • Construction plans must match the Federal Funding Application • A Federal Aid Project requires the preparation of a Project Memorandum — also must match the Federal Funding Application • Cultural Resources work is necessary as part of the Project Memorandum • Requires Mn/DOT and SHPO approvals for Federal Funding QS CITY OR EDINA Alternatives • Continue with design • Explore possibilities of on road bike lanes with sidewalks • Explore construction on alternate corridor(s) • Cease design (Do nothing alternative) ➢14 t� CITY OF MINA Conclusion • Project Schedule`: /Transportation Commission — July ✓ Open House — July `'t ✓ Public Hearing - August • Comments / Questions ➢15' tion iorudj-, N'l w RAW Publtc7onekloll Hr. rl SWINGS;. f k tion iorudj-, N'l w RAW Publtc7onekloll Hr. rl !.l %Ti LTA 6'0101 ITAWO,. • Edina Transportation Commission • Adjacent Neighborhood Representatives — St. Louis Park Minikanda Vista & Browndale — Minneapolis Fulton • Business Representatives — 44th and France — 50th and France — Vernon and lnterlachen • City Staff — Edina, St. Louis Park and Minneapolis • Mn /DOT and Hennepin County 1,4mare • Decide what information we need to make decisions and recommendations • Gather the data • Prioritize the issues • Research potential alternative solutions • Communicate broadly and regularly • Public hearings — After data collected and analyzed — After potential alternatives evaluated • Avoid further inflaming neighborhood animosities so we can focus on identifying win -win improvements Mrs • During peak travel times, vehicular traffic volumes on residential streets in Northeast Edina has exceeded levels perceived to be appropriate by neighborhood residents. • In addition to the number of vehicles during these times, driver behavior (speeding, disregard for stop signs, etc.) raises concerns regarding the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists and is not in keeping with the character of a residential neighborhood. • High Levels of traffic on arterial streets has also raised concerns for adjacent commercial areas - congestion will discourage stops in the commercial area. Dilestic • Does congestion on the regional roadway system and Focal arterials cause through traffic to divert through this area? If yes, how can this diversion be minimized? • Can residential street volumes be reduced by more efficient use of other travel modes (bus, bicycles, walking)? • Can pedestrian /bicycle paths be made more attractive and safe? • Can the local roadways be improved to facilitate improved traffic flow and safety? • How can driver behavior in the neighborhood be improved? • How can the character of roadways better match the character of the neighborhoods? How can the roadways and traffic /parking patterns better support commercial areas? 0 SAC Member Survey • Business / Property Owner Survey 5 a 3. ,.o � o -2 �U 0 SAC Member Survey • Business / Property Owner Survey 1. W 50 40 30 20 to 0 Speed Profiles for TH 100 Southbound - November 17, 2M TN IOD SB THIDOSS TH 100 SS THTOOSS THIDOSS TH 100 SS TH 100 SS TH 100 S8 Northolt-39A NamnoF2711, ban IR-3ft W-5ft bl..10011W .,.v mme." owwtPmoa Wn+amP. WW 50th dum np SWIM onrxlp Location it 3 +wn Speed Profiles for T14 100 Northbound - November 17, 2005 so 4-UM 30 ......... . .. 2 . .............. ............ a 0 0 4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 THIOONB THIODNO THIODN8 THIOOWB THIOONB THIOONB THlWNB THIWNS THIWKB W—semm ban 5ft bh-5m nom of bown Ift— TH 7 bmn *,A of;- noM 4391 wj 60th OW&Hwp and EXD*WWOM E.WS;or M cfll r h4n"W" 304 ES 064MV E=mfaw m-P WO 30M IWVI and 4391 Location 1. W 50 40 30 20 to 0 Speed Profiles for TH 100 Southbound - November 17, 2M TN IOD SB THIDOSS TH 100 SS THTOOSS THIDOSS TH 100 SS TH 100 SS TH 100 S8 Northolt-39A NamnoF2711, ban IR-3ft W-5ft bl..10011W .,.v mme." owwtPmoa Wn+amP. WW 50th dum np SWIM onrxlp Location it 3 +wn Blvd i 8� ar a' w .o v v 3 a e • 34% of traffic diverts through neighborhood • 66% of traffic have destinations in the study area or exit at other locations � s , 38th St ' a LO LL dq:nd:. — 1 lOO �MO ! 3 s + ,• 3 ;R / rt -qtr ✓�_j 10", � - Cm ��m, 3 s Interlach n Blvd `- !��� s'bthSt t. 14 1�fesj, j r _ 54th 5t I i �.__.. • 4 of traffic diverts through neighborhood • 58% of traffic have destinations.in the study area or exit at other locations Blvd i d a • 13% of traffic diverts through neighborhood • 87% of traffic have destinations in the study area or exit at other locations i 4 - - E 4 O� 39th St F jf �5 V Y—^ 33 �° i - .3 tea.. 40th S TM d 100' Mot in sideRoadi l.. 4916 �t I f�� d j o:: --f / 3 c� °` u u a i Intqrlachn Blvd Spth_St Y 20 t +21,"Vehid�e_s]� � f " , do CC `i C CrI t,; i -' (I S4tfi StP { {f 3 ... • 23% of traffic diverts through neighborhood • 77% of traffic have destinations in the study area or exit at other locations D 1 € ob 3 5th i St In i y 3 S Q 30% of total traffic entering t g the stud q9 4 nd" " d area diverts : gy i 100 ��t ' th rou h i Mod i side . oad' 1 g 6 % Cr-A ,--� neighborhood 4% {�4% BO 19% , % ' 70 %Q of total traffic off --- � hav desti nano ns 0 0; o e In riach nBvd �, ( ` . �CL° inthe study area, -T -4 % A6 or exit at other locations im 44th west of France Am MSA 2005 28 30 44th east of Brookside MSA 2005 32 32 Maple north of 50th May 2004 30 30 Arden north of Country Club SRF 2005 30 31 Bruce north of Country Club SRF 2005 30 30 Casco north of Country Club SRF 2005 26 26 Drexel north of Country Club SRF 2005 29 28 Wooddale north of Country Club SRF 2005 30 30 Edina north of Country Club SRF 2005 33 33 Moorland north of Country Club SRF 2005 28 27 Browndale north of Country Club SRF 2005 28 26 Sunnyside west of Wooddale SRF 2005 29 31 Sunnyside east of Townes SRF 2005 35 35 Grimes south of 44th Edina 2005 28 32 Grimes north of Morningside Edina 2005 30 30 Grimes north of 42nd Edina 2005 31 31 Morningside west of France Edina 2005 30 30 42nd east of Grimes Edina 2005 28 28 42nd west of Grimes Edina 2005 28 28 Kipling south of 40th Edina 2005 29 29 40th east of Monterey Edina 2005 30 30 • _Reviewed data for 2001, 2002 ,and 2004 (valid data not available for 2003) • Reviewed intersections and segments; crash and severity rates • 50th Street/France Avenue has a high number of crashes • Fatality at 50th Street/wooddale Avenue 2002 • France Avenue segment rate slightly higher than average • Five pedestrian /bicycle related crashes in study area tl( fE� v • 30 percent of the evening peak hour traffic in the study area neighborhoods is "diverting through" because it is 30 percent faster than taking 50thStreet or France Avenue • Do what we can to attract diverted traffic to those intended routes • Make the remaining traffic behavior in the neighborhoods more "civil" • Understand pros and cons for win -win solutions , z rPliminary Fvqltjqtion Criteria R • 2.6 Ability to reduce diversion of thru- traffic to residential streets • 3.0 Improves capacity /operation of arterial or collector streets • 5.0 Reduces vehicular speeds on residential streets • 5.8 Increases driver understanding of appropriate thru - traffic routes • 5.8 Provides appropriate balance of adverse effects to local residents • 6.2 Minimizes adverse effects to local residents • 6.3 Improves pedestrian conditions /safety • 6.9 Improves vehicular safety • 7.0 Improves match of land use /traffic characteristics • 7.7 Improves compliance with vehicular traffic regulations • 9.3 Facilitates /encourages use of modes other than cars y � vi i dr Consideratio ntlal Alternatives for • Carrots- Encourage use`of collectors and arterials — Improve travel time and traffic flow - Improve convenience • Sticks — Discourage use of residential streets for through traffic — Increase travel time — Decrease convenience • Improvements to TH 100 SISIO • France Avenue Improvements • Intersection improvements — 50t" Street and France Avenue — 44th StreeUSunnyside Road and France Avenue • Modify. Sunnvside Road/44thStreet intersections at France Avenue • Deploy traffic calming. techniques — Use to balance distribution of thru traffic — Use to direct thru traffic to a specific route • Speed Enforcement Sales and Demolition Acquisitionlnfo for 5 21kSchaefer, x Road rr fi N, ., Address Sale Date Sale Price Year Built. Sq Ftg Lot Size #Garage Remarks 5021 Schaefer Rd 1967 2,928 27,419 2 6801 Dakota Trail 9/1/04 $970,000 1958 2,232 33,292 2 Older sale, 7312 Claredon Dr 8/1105 $899,900 1966 3,236 23,187 2 -Superior-condition' 6328 Westwood Ct 8/15/05 $748,000 1953 2,379 26,567 2 Same neighborhood 5209 Doncaster Way 7/25/05:.. $840,000 1958 2,782 25,437 2 Tuck -under garage 5304 Evanswood La 9/1/04 $774,400 1968 2,290 15,590 2 Same neighborhood;older sale 5209 Ridge Rd Jun -04 $569,000 ** ** 24,127 ** Removed tennis court 5020 Oak Bend Lane Mar -02 $1;075,000 ** * 37,097 ** Lot behind youFs'-): 6612 Parkwood Rd Jan -05 $1,000,930 ** ** 29,824 ** i On a pond j 6505 Parkwood Rd Oct -05 $1,000,000 1948 2;204. 41,231 3 ( House demolished 'after sale 5504 Schaefer Rd Apr-05 $915,000 1948 . 2,472 .37,274 3 House demolished-after,sale, City of Edina YResidential PID: 30 -117 -21-41 -0004 Property Type: R - Residential Field Card Property Address: 5021 Schaefer Rd Zoning: R -1 Printed: ' 03/22/2006 Lot / Block: 027/000 Dwelling Type: Single Family Assessment Year: 2006 Addition: Auditor'S Subdivision No. 325 Owner(s): Franz Metzger Version: 2 District: 34 Model: 101 - 002 -040 Neighborhood: xterior l 0000 ool� st Baths (# /Quality) Ord Floor otal Rooms Dimensions nd I Zoning: Area Rating: R -1 Partial Const ( %): Pool 1 Area: Spa: / Interior: _ Length Widt Sq Ft Very Good Model: 101- 002 -040 Quality: Dlx: 1 / Fair Trim: Site Rating: Good Dwelling Type: Single Family Pool 2 Area: Full: 1 / Average Floor: Bedrooms: 4 0 0 0 Land Quality: Contamination: Adjacent Property: Equal Quality: 3/4: / Avg. Clear. Height: B 4 Family: 2 0 0 0 0 0 Flood Plain Map Ref: View: Arch. /Appeal: Equal Average and Amenities -} 1/2: 1 / Average st Room Count I # of Fireplaces: Fplc. Quality: Living: 1 0 0 0 0 PUD Ref: Quality: A07 Dining: 1 0 0 0 Allowable Units: Shape: L- Shaped Bedrooms: 4 rd Baths (# /Quality) Kitchen: 1 0 0 0 Excess Land (SgFt): Style: One Level/Rambler Baths: 3 Spa: / Other: 3 0 0 0 Zoning Variance: N Construction: Wood Frame Family: I Dlx: / Total: 12 Frontage: Exterior Walls: Wood Living: 1 Full: / Left Side: Exterior Trim: Stone Pasement -- -- -- -� Dining: 1 Kitchen: 1 3/4; / ast Sale Rear Side: Right Side: Roof Type: Roof Cover: Gable Wood Shakes Area (SgFt): Type: 2,928 Regular Other: 1/2: / rd Room Count Date: 10/01/1974 Effective Width: 105 Window Type 1: Casement Finished ( %): 80 Total Rooms: 8 Bedrooms: Price: Code: $133,520 Effective Depth: 260 Window Type 2: Quality: Average Pad Floor Baths: \ % Desc: 11 Property Area (SgFt): 27,419 Air Conditioning: Yes # of Fireplaces: I Interior: Other: Other Acreage: 0.63 Dormer Length: Fplc. Quality: Average Trim: Total Rooms: t Inspection Park: Dormer Quality: Avg. Clear. Height: Floor: zi�] Appraiser ID: BKM Park Quality: # Patio Doors: 4 Elec. Svc: Standard Avg. Clear. Height: °tals� Date: 06/28/2002 On Lake: exterior 2 Htg. Svc: Forced air, gas fired # of Fireplaces: es. Cond: Fair eason: Conversion Lake Quality: — arage #1 W.O. Type: Fplc. Quality: Int. Layout: Standard Result: Interior On River: River Placement: W.O. Quality: Q ty Pad Baths (# /Quality) Manual Assess: N Quality: Attached Actual Age: 1967 urrent Inspection Landscape Quality: # of Cars: 2 Effective Age: 1967 Floor Area: 624 asement Baths ( # /Qual.) ! Dix: Renovated Age: Appraiser ID: Condition: Average Spa: / Full: / Functional %: Exterior Walls: #2 a ara g Placement: Wood -�- y Dix: Full: 3/4: / / 1 / Average 3/4: / 1/2 : / --1 nd Room Count Economic %: , uildi ag Areas Appraisal Date: Reason: [tributes u� Unfin. 1 st GBA: # of Cars: 1/2: / Bedrooms: Unfin. 2nd GBA: Result: Floor Area: asement Room Count I Baths: Unfin. 3rd GBA: Condition: Exterior Walls: Bedrooms: Other: Total Rooms: Unfin. GBA: Left Tag: Yes / No Paved Street -orch Baths: Family. I 1 1st Floor Area: 2,928 2nd Floor Area: tat Value Glazed Area: Kitchen: 3rd Floor Area: Value: Quality: Other: 3 Total GBA: 2,928 Desc: Screened Area: Total Rooms: 4 Quality Open Area: 104 st Floor omments fluences Quality: Average Kitchen Rating: Standard -6102 MF FR-PANEL,VAULTED, FULL HGT STONE FP.MBR SHR LEAKS INTO MAIN BR. BSMT HAS atio Interior: Sheetrock DEN;EXER RM,OFFICE. PROP HAS DEF MAINT,ALSO NEEDS LANDSCAPING,REGRADE RETAINING Trim: Hardwood WALL RPR,DRVWY Patio 1 Area: Floor: Wood Quality: Avg. Clear. Height: Patio 2 Area: # of Fireplaces: 1 Quality: Fplc. Quality: Very Good eck � Deck 1 Area: 554 Quality: Average Deck 2 Area: Quality: Property 0 House# Street game Una ' 1 Photo(s) on file 1 ScetchQes) on fie Mach Val Tot MktValu Tax Capj Today's date! 04/03/2006 Release: 7.02.95 Logged on uSel': L.LOPEZ � 30.117.21 -41 •t04 Addres 9021 - Single PD Parcel Search - - Clear 1 Print 262,200; - View Photos 0 Y fAssesskm - Ltz Local) Parcel SWux ACTNE t Parcel Administration Parcel Information Assessor Comments Parcel Divisiordng Temporary PIE? Updat Project Update %3 Taxpayer Inquiry EI Vallues Administration Values Information Heronepin County Trar Horrnestead Update Honsestead RoElover .SSN Futwe to Curren,+ JOH Update Sales Administration Sates Information j Saps R atios Cornparables Informati Property Characteristics Land Residential j Commercial f Industrii -- Muki-Farrily Field Card Print � I =- CAMA - CAMA Inquiry Special Assessments Search Master Information Comments — Mass Add 1' - \ Mass Comments Updc Mass Payoff Number Conversion > RM Property ID House# Street Name Una 74p Code (+4) 30. 117 -21-41 •(1004 . Address 5021 Schaefer Rd R - _ . _ 55436 f— Frontage: �Left SklleL RRe-arr-Sii -d�e: Riightt SkL-:� Eff. Width Elf. Depth Property Area: Acreage: 0 r, l"' - :_ i�_ -- ,. 1" ' 105 26"0 LL' 27419 0.63 Zoning: R 1 Prim./Seo. CD: Exempt CD. School Dist: 0270 Watershed: Ol Year E1t& 1867 Value Informelion by Year 1 rr c 1 :h Year Ver' # Sub 4, LandVak el SldgValue� Mach Val Tot MktValu Tax Capj Hmstd; Midyr,� ReIH P!T �:0 P/C k 2 1 494,100 262,200; 0 75fi,300' 0 Y N N R 100 N 2005 2 1 41i,t300; 245.900 0 657,700 6,971' Y N N R 100 N 20194 1 1 411,88 220,500 0 632.300; 6,2136 Y N N R 100 N 2003 1 1 411,8M 190 000 0 561,GW 5,304' Y N N R 100 N : Lot: 027 , Mock. IWO Addition Auditors Subdivision Na. 325 1 rr c 1 :h Property tD House# Street Name Urd, - Today's date: 04JfXiQODS Retesse 1,02.18 Logged an user: t10PEZ 1 Photo(s) on file 1 Sketch(es) on fie - 'Parcel Information -- 3a -- 1i 17- 41.00 1 Address:. Single PID Parcel. Search Clear --t Print View Photo (Assesslina - Liz Local) Parcel Status AG7N@ Parcel Administration {w - 'Parcel Information -- Assessor Comments J Print Parse) f3ivisioninp ; Property ID House# Street lame Unit Zip Code (+4) r Temporary PIDUpdati Project Update %i Taxpayer Inquiry I 30.117.21- 4140004 = Address:1 Schaefer Rd Values Administration Values Information 1 Ctrrent Owner Record(s) Hennepin County Trar Last Name First Name MI ; Owner Taxpayer Resident ~Homestead Rollover Metzger Franz Y ' Y Y SSN Future to Current'! TOH Update ( S ales Administration I= '. @� Sates Information Sates Ratios Frontage: Left Side: �--�-------- t", 1`'__ Rear Side: Right Side: �--� -� �-- 1"., Eff. Width 105 Eff. Depth 260 Property Area: Acreage - _, .__ - : -` -:_ =: 1" 121119 Comparables Informatil Zonwv: R 1 .:..; :- Property Characteristics Land I Prrm./Seo CD: f Exempt CD: School Dist: 0270 Watershed 01 Year Bud - 1967 Residential Vakx Information byYear. Commercial f Industria -, MudtiFamrly i Year Ver' # Sub j' LandValuej BId9Vatue1 Mach Val Tot MktVAO, Tax Capl Hmstdj M*r.1 ReIH j P/T I %Q P/C _ 2002 i 1 2001_ 320= 182.200. 0 502,200 0 Y N N R 100 N Y Fie Field Card Print = C4MA 1_____1 _- __- 320.000;__.__150.x:_ _ _ _._0 470700' 0i Y N N R 100 N CAMA Inquiry I 2000 1 _1 1 _ 215.000 171300 0. 39 -- R 100 Special Assessments 1 1 -1 215 000 158,7001 p ��r00 0 Y _ � - N R 100 .. N � s earth j - Master Information Lot: 027 Block: 000 Addition; Auditor's Subdivision Na 32.5 _ u — - - - - - -. Comments S 106 FT Mass Add - Maas Comments Up& Mass Payoff Number Conversion Property 0 House# Slreef Name Unit 1 Photo(s) on He Last Name Today's date: 041=006 4 30-117-21-41 -OW4 Andress Metzger 7 1 Sketch(es) on fie Y Y Rekese. 1.02.15 Logged an user LLOPE7 Singe PD - ----- Parcel Search Clear Eft. Width- Print jq View'Photos 105 Zoning: JR-1 (Assessina - Uz Lovez) Parcel Status: ACTIVE Parcel Administration 1A Parcel information Assessor Comments Parcel Divisioning Temporary PID Updat Proiect Update ZS .Taxpayer Inquiry �j Values Administration Vabjes Information Hennepin County Trar, 'Homestead Update Homestead Rollover S S N Future to Cunent TOH Update S ales Administration N4 Safes information Safes R akios, Comparables Informatil Property Characteristics Land Residential Commercial / lndustr4 Multi-Family Field Card Print LAMA LAMA Inquiry 7 Special Assessments Search Master Information N Comments' Mass Add Mass Comments Upde' Mass Payoff Number Conversion III 1 1 > Print Property ID House# Street Name Unit Zip Code (+4) 30-117.21-41-0004 Address: 1 Schaefer Rd 554-36,. 1 Current Owner'Record(s) Year= very # Subil; Land VaWj BldgValuel MachVal* Tot MktVak4 Tax Capj Hmstdj MWyr, Last Name First Name Ml :'OwMjaxpayer Resident. Metzger Franz Y Y Y ........... Frontage: Left Side: Real Si&, ------------------- ------------------- A ight Sid-- Eft. Width- 10 77 jq 10 105 Zoning: JR-1 1997 1 1 165,0w Prim,/SecCD: f7 Exempt CD: School Dist: 0_270 Vail w Information by Yaw Elf. Depth- Property Area: Acreage: 1..260 1, 127419— Watershed: fDl Ye&Bu* f1967 __� Year= very # Subil; Land VaWj BldgValuel MachVal* Tot MktVak4 Tax Capj Hmstdj MWyr, RelH 1 PIT j ywv, j P/C L-J! 199B i i 165,0OD: 181,100, Oi 346,100. 0 Y N N R 100 N 1997 1 1 165,0w 174,400 339 0, Y N N R 100 N -1996. 1150400 170,200 0 320,200 0: Y N N R 100 N 1995, 1 1 150,000I 160 900 O 0! Y N N R 100 N -w Lot: 02-7-7 Block 1000 Additim Au ditwS Subdivision Na 325 J iS 105 FT City of Edina PID: 30- 117 -21-41 -0004 Residential Field Card Property Address: 5021 Schaefer Rd •inted: 03/22/2006 Lot / Block: 027/000 ssessment Year: 2006 Addition: Auditors Subdivision No. 325 ersion: 2 District: 34 odel: 101 - 002 -040 Neighborhood: 0000 Property Type: R - Residential Zoning: R -I Dwelling Type: Single Family Owner(s): Franz Metzger 18 5 WD OK 7 18 4' 12 [366] 12 leck 22 , 64j. 46-. 55` 18.8 FR'(MAIN)' 34 26 ,VD,OK , [104] .:4 .26 T 21 24 4 ::>1S FR ©R .[104], 1S,FRGk R. 2fi' {624] :45 =LF:1128:STN' x /1-7 /0 Co t R. M. La FOND & ASSOCIATES, INC. REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS - CONSULTANTS rue No. April 14, 2006 Mr. Franz J. Metzger 5021 Schaefer Road Edina, MN 55436 -1142 File Number: 306 -04801 Dear Mr. Metzger, METZGER In accordance with your request, I have personally inspected and appraised the real property at: 5021 Schaefer Road Edina, MN 55436 -1142 Ibe Impose ofthis is to develop an opmnn ofthe mmkd value ofthe subject , as improved. The property r>,g is appraised are the fee simple interest in the site and improvements. In my opinion, the estimated market value of the property as of April '1, 2006 is: $595,000 Five Hundred Ninety-Five Thousand Dollars The attached report contains the description, analysis and supportive data for the conclusions, final estimate of value, descriptive photographs, limiting conditions and appropriate certifications. Respectfully Submitted, Robert M. La Fond, IFAS Certified General Real Property Appraiser MN Lic. #4000658 RMUms NOTE: The signatures in this report are electronically produced and security code protected. ooia uuniap Ave., snoreview, MN 5514) -5535 (651) 783 -1944 Fax: (651) 783 -1748 ROBERT M. La FOND S ASSOCIATES, INC. )ascription UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT 1721 -41 or m I/A Mr. R.E. 1 METZGER -0- °- -� ....navrv� rcuap Cpnna MN 55438 Appraiser Robert M. La Fond IFAS -1142 Address 5619 Dunla P Ave. Shoreview MN 55126 -5635 Location Urban X Suburban Rural Predominant Single family housing Present land use; Land use change Built up X Over 75% 25.75% Under 25% occupancy PRICE AGE Growth rate Rapid X Stable Slow X Owner s (�) ty„1 One family 85% X Not likely ❑ Likely Property values X Increasing Stable D�mlo 195 Low NeW 2 4 family 5% In process Declining Tenant 1 Mil�ngn Mu i fw* 5% To: Demand /supply Shortage X tnbalanoe Ogg X yarant(0696) 729? Commerdal 5% Macke time X Under 3 moa 3 6 nnos. Over 6 mos. v.c�nr °,,, sx Note: Race and the racial composition of the neighborhood are not appraisal factors. Neighborhood boundaries.and characteristics: The subject nei hborhood is bounded on the N hy Interlachen Blvd. on the S b Highway 62 on the E b France Ave. on the W by Highway 169' Factors that affect the marketability of the properties in the neighborhood (proximity to employment and amenities, employment stability, appeal to market, etc.): The subject is located In the NW' sector of Edina a South teq metro suburb Po ulation: 47 225 n 3% increase since 1990 . Immediate area consists of good to custom quality homes In close roxi nity to all the usual nei hborhood services and amenities. Fray access via Hlahwav 169 about 1/2 mile west and Highway 100, about 1/2 mile Pact saner Winn —, L._.- Market conditions in the subject neighborhood (Including support for the above conclusions related to the trend of property values, demand/supply, and marketing time such as data on competitive properties for sale In the neighborhood, description of the prevalence of sales and financing concessions, etc.): Local market conditions constitute a stable supply/demand with Ical m 3rketing times from 30 tO 60 days. Financing is readiiv available to qualified buvers and ryrrronflu at re Project Information for PUDs (if applicable) - - Is the developer /builder in control of the Home KITCHEN E91; Owners' Approximate total number of units In the subject project N/A Association (HOA)7 TTYES NO Approximate total number of Describe common elements and recreational facilities: units for sale in the subject project N/A The sub'ect Is not Dart of an association. Dimensions 105 x 260.56 Refrigerator Site area 27358 Sq.Ft. +1- Topography Gently rolling Comer Lot Yes No Specific zoning classification and description R -1 Sln le FamlyiResidence size Meets requirements Zoning comjPub'l Legal (G'andfathered use) Illegal No zoning Highest Shape Rectangular Drainage &b Improved: X Present use use IaM Appears adequate Utilities Public Other Off -site Improvements Type Public View Residential -Good Private Electricity 200 Am . C/B Street Bituminous Landscaping Mature -Good X Gas Curb /gutter Conprete Driveway surface Bituminous Water X Sidewalk None Apparent easements None a arent Sanitary se Street lights Men;ury Vapor X FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area Yes X No Storm sewe Alle None FEMA Zone C Map Date 5/1 /80 FEMA Ma No. 270160 Comments (apparent adverse easements, encroachments, special assessments, slide areas, illegal )cal interior or legal nonconforming lot with pod mature landsca in and front access drive. zoning, use, etc.): The subject is a ionldentiat time of inspection.. No apparent adverse conditions were observed at GENERAL DESCRIPTION EXTERIOR DESCRIPTION FOUNDATION Built-In No. of Units One Foundation C/B Slab No BASEMENT SULATION No. of Stories One Exterior Walls Wood -Stone Crawl Area Sq.Ft. 2928 of Cncid X❑ TR Carport Carpora Type (Dot. /Aft.) Detached Roof Surface Cedar Shakes Basement Full % Finished 90% ping �Cncld Design (Style) Rambler Gutters & Dwnspis. Aluminum Su Pu No Calling Various ags X Existing/Proposed EAstin Window Type Casements Dampness None noted S. Panel Floor Condition of the improvements, depreciation (physical, functional, and properly maintained dwellina that nmiante fl..e— Age (Yrs.) 39 Years StormiScreens Thermo Yes Settlement None not Effective a (Yrs.) 30 Years Manufactured Floor W None Outside Entry Yes u„�,,,,,, ❑ - House No Infestation None noted NWIM INTERIOR Materiale/Condltlon HEATING KITCHEN E91; TTIC Ba s 2 928 care Feet of ss Living Area CAR STORAGE: Floors W/W- Oak- V-Good Type 2 -FWA Refrigerator AMENITIES Walls nel -Good Fuel Gas Range/Oven atrs FtrePlace(s) #2 None TrimlFlnish od CorditUnknOWn Disposal op Stair Patio Gara9eX # of cars Bath Floor Tile -Good COOLING E Dishwasher 17NOne Deck Wood X Attached Two Bath Wainscot Tile -Good Central Yes FaNHood uttle X porch Detached Doors ore -Good Other E.A.P. Microwave wr Fence Wood X Built-In CondlgonUnknown Wash er ated nished Pool Carport Carpora Additional features (special energy efficient items, etc.): See Attached Addendum Bitum. and external), repairs needed, quality of construction remodeling /additions, etc.: A well built i-f-A— Condition of the improvements, depreciation (physical, functional, and properly maintained dwellina that nmiante fl..e— Adverse environmental conditions (such as, but not limited to, hazardous wastes, toxic substances, immediate vicinity of the subject property: No adverse environmental conditions were not subject or surrounding ro ertie . Althou h due to Its age there —gy have been s� nde Mac Farm m &W PAGE I OF 2 Pmd=d wane Acl.dewe, mazu.UV ww.ede�b.mm s present In the improvements, on the site, or in the F=w Mae Fam 1004 6-03 ROBERT M. La FOND & ASSOCIATES, INC. Valuation section UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPeRT METWER - ESTIMATED SITE VALUE; , , , , , , , , ; , , , , , , , , , , , ; , • • _ $ 320,000 +ESTIMATED REPRODUCTION COST -MEW OF IMPROVEMENTS: Dwelling 2,928 Sq. Ft. ® $ 132.00 = $ 386,496 Bsmt. Fin: 2600 Sq. Ft. 0 $ 48.00 = 124,800 A/C F Ice A I's Decks etc. = 22,000 GaragaiCarpo t 624 Sq. Ft. ® $ 24.00 = 14,976 - Total Estimated Cost New ,,, , , , , , , , ,, , , = $ 548,272 Less Physical Functional External Est. Remaining Econ. Life: 25 Depredation $280,00(1 I = $ 280,000 - - -- -- - - -. -. rue no. 308-04oul Comments on Cost Approach (such as, source of cost estimate, site value, square foot calculation and for HUD, VA and FmHA, the estimated remaining economic I'de of the property): See attached building Ian sketch, Physical depreciation is calculated usina the effective age/economic life method. No significant functional or external .obsolescence was noted. Land/improvement ratio Is for the nei hborhood. Remainin economic life is estimated at: 25 ears. Depreciated Value of Improvements ........... I ....... = $ 268,272 "As4s "Value of Site Improvements , , , , , , , , , , , ,, , , , , , , = $ 10 000 INDICATED VALUE BY COST APPROACH • • • • • • • • ... = 598. 300 ITEM I SUBJECT 5021 Schaefer Road Address Edina 55436 Proximity to Subject Sales Price $ NIA PrioelGross Liv. Area $ 0.00 Data and/or Inspection Verification Sources Viewed: 4/1/06 VALUEADASTMENTS DESCRIPTION Sales or Financing Concessions , Date otSale/Time Location Edina COMPARABLE NO.1 5717 Kemrich Drive Edina 55439 133 -D1 Approx. 1/2 mile �S ix YN $ 550 000 $ 206.07 al p ` MLS Listing #3076839 Court House Records DESCRIPTION + - s Conv, No Pts. 1011 Days . Closed: 1/3106 ; Edina COMPARABLE NO. Z 7015 Tupa Drive Edina 55439 133 -D1 ADprox. 1/2 mile ! N r„ $ 620.0 00 $ 244.67 0 �� MLS Listing 03033777 Court House Records DESCRIPTION +(-�sAonww Conv, No Pts. a s Mkt. Closed: 11/30/05 ; Edina COMPARABLE NO.3 6440 Indian Hills Pass Edina 55439 119 -C4 AmDrox. 1/4 mile $ 555 000 $ 253.66 0 MLS Listing 03064264 Court House Records DESCRIPTION + - s Conv, No Pts. , 15 Days Mkt. Closed: 8/8!05 ; Edina ' LeasaholdIF99%mis Site view Design and Appeal Fee Simple 27358 S .Ft. +\- Resid. -Good Rambler Fee Sim le Irre . -Good ; Resid. -Good Rambler Fee Simple I Irr . -Good ; Resid. -Good Rambler ------ Fee Simple 30928 .Ft. +k- ; -8,000 Resid. -Good ' Rambler otCorsttrdlorr Age Condition Above Grade Room Count - Gross Uvi Area Basement 8Falbhed Rooms Below tirade " Functional Utility HeatinglCgollm Enemy Efedrint Items Gera e/C - Porch, Patio, Deck, Flreplace(sl etc. Fence Pool, etc. Built -ins Net Ad'. total Adjusted Sales Prloa of Com arablea, Comments on Sales Comparison Good A:39/Eff: 30 Average TOM ' Oft ' BdM Good ; A:36/Eff:25 -4,000, Good -5,000 Tom ' B*me ' Beft ; 9� 4� 2.70' -2,500 2,669 Sq.Ft. 4,700 Full, No Walkout ; 2,000 80% Finished 4.000 Good GFWA C/A ; 1,000 Standard 2 Car Attached Decks ; 2 Fireplaces In- Ground S rklr ; -2500 DW D MW 2 300 GrO th�a 7e% �Y wG c e(.�. 0.4°rb 547 700 �N�t subject property's compatibility to the neighborhood, Good ; A:35 /Eff:20 -6.000 Good -5,000 Tdd ' B6ma ' aloe ; 2,000 7� 3� 1.7.5' -1,000 2 534 S .Ft. 7,100 Full, Walkout ; 85% Finished 4.000 Good GFWA C/A ; 1.0 00 Standard 2 C Att.Htd Drive --4,0-00 D /P, 4Ssn Porch ; -5,000 3 Fireplaces -1,500 S klr.Sec.HCA, c -5 000 RHO DW D MW ; -1 000 + X S 14 400 *1dt a �(ros9 r< etc. ): See Attached Addendum Good ' A:35/Eff:20 -6,000 Avera ae Tom; e6. ' � ; 2,000 71 3� 1.70' 1,500 - 2,188 .Ft. 13,300 Full, Walkout ; 80% Finished 4,000 Good ; GFWA C/A ; 1 OOp Standard ' 3 Car Tuck nder -4 000 Decks, Patio ; -1,000 2 Fireplaces None 1,000 DW Ds ; 1,000 X + ' $ 4 800 , c 7ti% .'. 559 800 8� 4• 2.00 2 928 Sq.Ft. Full, Walkout 90% Finished Good GFWA CA EAP Standard 2 Car Attached Decks 2 Fire laces Fence RHO D/W t ­ r �„ �a 2N �, �' .b � k (including the ITEM SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO. 1 ate, Price and Data *NA *NA ource for pior sales COMPARABLE NO.2 COMPARABLE NO.3 *NA *NA ► of Court Hse. Rec. Court House Records Court House Records Court House Records nalysis of any current agreement of sale, option, or listing of the subject property and analysis of any prior sales of subject and mmparabies within one year of the data of appraisal: Properties in this area en an Increasing resale value according to MLS statistical data. *No Prior listing or sales of the sub ithin the Past three ears or the com arables within one ear. [wralsal DICATED VALUE BY SALES COMPARISON APPROACH , , , , .................. ............................._$ 595,000 DICATED VALUE BY INCOME APPROACH lo Estimated Market Rent $ /Mo. x Gross Rent ler /A $ A is appraisal Is made X "as Is" sub]W to the repa#s, alterations, Inspections or conditions Iced below Por ond�sot'Apprr�: This is considered to be a complete appraisal in summa form as defined b the Appraisal Standards Board of the Foundation and meets U.S.P.A.P. appraisal guidelines. Final Reconciliation: Most emphasis is laced on the Sales Comparison Approach to value. The Cost Approach was iven su ortive consideration. The Income GRM)'ADDroach was not considered lainna hnrnaa zhr....,� .11u __6 A__ :____ - __. _ _ The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value of the real property that Is the subject of this report, based on the above conditions and the osrb7ication, omftent and limiting conditions, and market value definition that are stated In the attached Freddie Mac Fbrrn 4391Fannis Mae Form 10048 (Revised 6/93 ). I (WE) ESTIMATE THE MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, OF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS REPORT, ASOF April 1, 2006 (WHICH 13 THE DATE OF INSPECTION AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS REPORT) TO BE $ 595,000 APPRAISE SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (ONLY IF REQUIRED): Si nature Signature ❑Did ❑Did Not Name Robert M. La Fond, 4FAS Name Inspect Property Date Report Signed April 13, 2006 Date Report Signed State Certification # State MN State Certification # Stata c ram To m t.;ertmea general Real Property PAGE 2 OF 2 FaMe ue, F e& Ma „e 1ae4 sm Appraiser P uftACI soft. e,8002 e.erV*wwmkvbwm La Fond Appraisals, Inc. - ROBERT M. La FOND & ASSOCIATES, INC. METZGI =R 3unelsnu�sl V.lusflnn QaHlwn UNIFORM RIPSIbIRNTIAL APP12A111ceI 1000AQT ___ -- ___ - -_- - PMUW Uft Acs $*am, wo.xw.ern rwA*xb. n - - - - - -- - ITEM SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO.4 - -- - - — _ _ COMPARABLE NO.5 _ rim no. 306 -04cu7 COMPARABLE NO.6 5021 Schaefer Road Address Edina 55436 6113 Saxony Road Edina 55436 6140 Arctic Way Edina 55436 6016 Idykvood Drive Edina 55436 Pro)dmity to Subject i 119 -D3 Approx. 1/4 mile 119 -C4 Approx. 1/4 mile 119 -D3 Approx. 1/4 mile Sales Price $ N/A 1$ 579.500 s 620,000 Is 694.803 PrioalGross Liv. Area $ 0.000 $ 270.54 0 $ 274.34 O I - $ 251.28 dl Data and/or Verification Sources Inspection Viewed: 4/1/06 MLS Listing #2348096 Court House Records MLS Listing 93109872 Court House Records MLS Listing #3095073 Court House Records VALLEADJUSTME fTS Sales or Financing Concessions DESCRIPTION N/A 1 DESCRIPTION + - Ea Conv, No Pts. 205 Days Mkt. DESCRIPTION + - = Conv, No Pis. ; 32 Days Mkt. DESCRIPTION + - :Atj Conv, No Pts. ' 15 Da vs Mkt. Date ofSalemme N/A Closed: 7/1/05 Closed: 2/15/06 Closed:1/17/06 Location Edina Edina Edina Edina ' LawshpldfasSimb Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Slm le Fee Sim le site 27358 S .Ft. +1- Irr .-Good 1 Irre : Good 20038 S .Ft. 5.000 view Resid. -Good Resid -Good Resid: Good Resid: Good ' Design al Rambler Rambler Rambler Rambler QuAyefcangruction Good Good Good Good ; Age A:39 /Eff: 30 A:47 /Eff:35 ' 5 000 A:38/Eff:25 -4,000 A:43Eff:30 ' Condition Averacie Good -5,000 Good -5.000 Good -5,000 • • Above Grade Room Count Gross Living Area Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade Functional Utility Tow ' Bbna ' Soft Tow ' mm ' sego i 7: 3: 1.70' 2,142 S .Ft. Full, Walkout 80% Finished Good 2,000 1,500 14.100 4,000 Taw ' eamm ' Banes i 7 3• 2 260 S .Ft. Full, Walkout 90% Finished Good 2,000 -1,000 12,000 Tow ' BBma ' eatnv i 2,000 6� 2.7.5' -2,500 2,765 S .Ft. 2,900 Full, Walkout 50% Finished 8 000 Good ; 8 4: 2.00 2,928 Sq.R. Full, Walkout 90% Finished Good Heating/Cooling Heating/Cooling BMW Efcientltemss GFWA CA EAP Standard GFWA CA EAP Standard GFWA CA Standard 1.000 GFWA C/A 1,000 Standard ' G elc 2 Car Attached 2 Car Attached 2 Car Attached l 2 Car Attached Porch, Patio, Deck, Decks Patio 2,000 Deck, Patio Patio 2,000 Frre la s etc. 2 Fire laces 2 Fir laces 2 Fireplaces 2 Fireplaces Fence Pool etc. Fence None 1,000 In- Ground S rklr -2,500 In-Gr. S rklr Sec. -3 500 Built -ins RHO DM/ DW DSP. 500 DW Dp MW RHO D/W MW -500 Net Ad j. (total) X + ' g 25 100 X + ' s 2,500 JXJ + ' $ 9.400 Adjusted Sales Price Gross: 6.1 % Gross: 4.4'0 E Gross: 4�7% of Comparable Net: 4.3% s 604 600 Net: 0.4% $ 622,500 Net: 1.4% $ 704,203 Comments on Sales Comparison (including the subject property's compatibility to the neighborhood, etc. ) Comp. #4: Newer effective a e' better condition u dated a 3 bedrooms 1 -3/4 baths' less so-ft.; less basement finish; no deck: no fence, built -ins. Comp. #5: newer effective ' better condition u dated • 3 bedrooms 1- 3/4 -1/2 baths; lest s .ft., no elect. air urifrerjn roundsprinkler system. Coro #6: smaller lot: newer effective age (updated); 3 bedrooms 2- 314 -1/2 bath: less s .ft.• less basement finish: no elec. air purifier: no deck; in-ground s rinkler stem• more built -ins. ITEM SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO.4 COMPARABLE NO.5 COMPARABLE N0.6 Date, Price and Data *NA *NA *NA *NA Source for prior sales wftyearotappraW Court Hse. Rec. Court House Records Court House Records Court House Records Analysis of any current agreement of sale, option, or fisting of the subject property and analysis of any prior sales of subject and compaTeft wither one year of the date appm ; See previous page. PMUW Uft Acs $*am, wo.xw.ern rwA*xb. n Lender. Mr. Fnznz j. Metzger State: MN Comments on Sales COMParlson THE COMPARABLE SALES USED IN THIS REPORT ARE SELECTED BASED ON A COMPREHENSIVE SUBJECT MARKET AND NEARBY COMPETING MARKETS. HOMES MOST SIMILAR TO THE SUBJECT, AND CONSIDERED TO BE THE BEST INDICATORS OF THE SUBJECTS MARKET VALUE, ARE CHOSEN FOR STUDY OF THE COMPARISON TO THE SUBJECT WITH ADJUSTMENTS MADE TO ACCOUNT FOR ANY DIFFERENCES. T ADJUSTMENTS MADE ARE THOSE WHICH A PRUDENT BUYER WOULD CONSIDER, AND WHILE OTHER DIFFERENCES MAY EXIST, FURTHER ADJUSTMENTS ARE NOT NECESSARY. ADJUSTMENTS ptigpE IN HE COMPARISON APPROACH ARE BASED ON MARKET EXTRACTION, " ADJUSTMENTS ACCOUNT FOR DIFFERENCES IN LOT SIZES, TOPOGRAPHY, VIEW AMENITIES, N THE SALES ADVERSE/POSITIVE INFLUENCES. ADJUSTMENTS REGARDING "DESIGN AND gppRME. SITE AND "VIEW" DIFFERENCES IN MARKETABILJTY BETWEEN VARYING TYPES OF HOME DESIGN WITHIN TME UNT FOR THE WITH THE SUBJECT. ADJUSTMENTS FOR "QUALITY AND CONSTRUCTION" ACCOUNT FOR DIFFER .CONSTRUCTION FEATURES B ��' COMPARED MARKET VALUE. ADJUSTMENTS MAY ALSO BE MADE FOR "AGE", WHICH IS BASED O DIFFERENCES IN EN THE COMPARABLES AND THE SUBJECT, AND THE RESULTING EFFECTS IN RATHER THAN ACTUAL AGE. THE COMPARABLE& "CONDITION" IS ALSO CONSIDERED AND MAY g FOR TO ACCOUNT FOR DIFFERENCES WHEN COMPARED WITH THE SUBJECT. ADDITIONAL EFFECTIVE AGE BE MADE TO ACCOUNT FOR DIFFERENCES IN ROOM COUNT, BEDROOMS, ABOVE-GRADE BATHS E ADJUSTED DIFFERENCES IN GROSS LIVING AREA (GLA) ARE ADJUSTED AT THE RATE OF $18.00 PER SQ�USTMET. MAY ADDITIONAL ADJUSTMENTS MAY BE MADE TO ALL OF THE COMPARABLES TO ACCOUNT FOR DIFFERENCES ETC AMENITIES. ALL THREE COMPARABLES ARE EFFECTIVE INDICATORS OF THE SUBJECTS FAIR MARKET E FOOT. IN COMP. NEWER EFFECTIVE AGE; BETTER CONDITION; .2 -3/4 BATHS; LESS SQ.FI ,; LESS VALUE. ELEC. AIR PURIFIER; EXTENSIVE DECK, PATIO, GAZEBO; NO. FENCE; IN- GROUND SPRINKLER SYSTEM. BASEMENT FINISH; NO COMP. #2: NEWER EFFECTIVE AGE; BETTER CONDITION (UPDATED); 3 BEDROOMS, 1_3/4 -1/2 ggTH SQ.FT.; LESS BASEMENT FINISH; NO ELECTRONIC AIR PURIFIER; 2 CAR ATTACHED DRIVEWAY; 4 SEASON PORCH; 3 FIREPLACES; IN- GROUND SPRINKLER SYSTEM, SECURITY SYSTEM, S; LESS ACCESSIBLE; MORE BUILT-INS. GARAGE WITH HEATED ' �M, HANDICAP COMP. #3: LARGER LOT WITH EXTENSIVE LANDSCAPING AND KEYSTONE TERRACING; NEWER E FFECTIVE AGE; NO ELEC. AIR PURIFIER; 3 CAR TUCKUNDER GARAGE; EXTENSIVE DECK, PATIO; NO FENCE; FEWE SEE ADDITIONAL MARKET DATA ATTACHED. R BUILT-INS. COMP. #4: NEWER EFFECTIVE AGE; BETTER CONDITION BUILT-INS. BATHS; LESS SQ.FT.; (UPDATED); 3 BEDROOMS, BUI LESS BASEMENT FINISH; NO DECK; NO,FENCE; FEWER COMP. #5: NEWER EFFECTIVE AGE; . FT. ; NO. ELECT�E7}IR PURIFIO ( BATHS; LESS SQ (UPDATED); BEDROOMS, ER; IN SPRINKLER SYSTEM. COMP. #6: SMALLER LOT; NEWER.EFFECTIVE.AGE (UPDATE .MORE BEDROOMS 2- ,. NO ELEC. AIR PURIFIER; NO DECK; BATH; LESS SO-FT.; LESS BASEMENT FINISH; IN- GROUND SPRINKLER SYSTEM; MORE BUILLT -INS. Adder Page 1 of I ppp- •i'�i 147' J r� � P ♦; A Z 4 UUMYAKABLL YKU]rhKI Y Y11UIU AlJLLN1)U1V1 Borrower: 'N/A File No.: 306 -04801 Property Address: 5021 Schaefer Road CaseNo.: METZGER City: Edina State: MN Zip: 55436 -1142 Len r. Franz e er COMPARABLE SALE #1 5717 Kemrich Drive Edina 55439 Sale Date: Closed: 1/3/06 Sale Price: $ 550,000 COMPARABLE SALE #2 7015 Tupa Drive Edina 55439 Sale Date: Closed: 11 /30/05 Sale Price: $ 620,000 COMPARABLE SALE #3 6440 Indian Hills Pass Edina 55439 Sale Date: Closed: 818/05 Sale Price: s 555,000 •~4 ;„ _ t 1 COMPARABLE SALE #1 5717 Kemrich Drive Edina 55439 Sale Date: Closed: 1/3/06 Sale Price: $ 550,000 COMPARABLE SALE #2 7015 Tupa Drive Edina 55439 Sale Date: Closed: 11 /30/05 Sale Price: $ 620,000 COMPARABLE SALE #3 6440 Indian Hills Pass Edina 55439 Sale Date: Closed: 818/05 Sale Price: s 555,000 I:ViVIrAKAl3LE YKVYISKI Y VHV 1 V AIME1NOU1V1 Borrower: N/A File No.: 306 -04801 Property Address 5021 Schaefer Road Case No.: METZGER City Edina State: MN zip: 55436 -1142 Lender: Mr. Franz 0. Metzger COMPARABLE SALE #4 6113 Saxony Road Edina 55436 Sale Date: Closed: 7/1/05 Sale Price: $ 579,500 COMPARABLE SALE #5 6140 Arctic Way Edina 55436 Sale Date: Closed: 2/15/06 Sale Price: $ 620,000 COMPARABLE SALE #6 6016 Idylwood Drive Edina 55436 Sale Date: Closed:/ /17/06 Sale Price:$ 694,803 LOCATION MAP Borrower: Prom Address: 5021 Schaefer Road case No • METZGER city: Edina state: MN zip: 55436 -1142 5619 Dunlap Ave., Shoreview, MN 55126 -5635 (651) 783 -1944 Fax: (651) 783 -1748 FLOORPLAN PLAT MAP Borrower: NIA File No.: 306 - 04801 Property Address: 5021 Schaefer Road case No METZGER city: Edina State: MN Zip 55436 -1142 Lender: Mr. Frang i. Metzger V.1 /2 SYEO1 /4 SEC.30 T.117 R.21 • I 1 143m, �13a0 ey MfRR01•� �� .,r. �' p r � f 'z-L 1 a I ` OAKS ...,. - • r —ir i WOODS - to:� HARCILD MVO= F-. NO 325 `° /((z -- l i ! • y I 7 -- - fi ... riiwa w.rrtr• � rr.r. N. SE IN SEC 30 T. 117R21 S' vwim sleu,]i affix Prepared'-? Original base data supplier Loo F..= jsM'Ip S�SiE!'J E:EY: lg ua er Lion 5619 Dunlap Ave., Shoreview, MN 55126 -5635 (651) 783 -1944 Fax: (651) 783 -1748 METZGER File No. 306 -04801 DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE: The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: (1) buyer and seller are typically motivated; (2) both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what he considers his own best interest; (3) a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; (4) payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and (5) the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions' granted by anyone associated with the sale. 'Adjustments to the comparables must be made for special or creative financing or sales concessions. No adjustments are necessary for those costs which are normally paid by sellers as a result of tradition or law in a market area; these costs are readily identifiable since the seller pays these costs in virtually all sales transactions. Special or creative financing adjustments can be made to the comparable property by comparisons to financing terms offered by a third party institutional lender that is not already involved in the property or transaction. Any adjustment should not be calculated on a mechanical dollar for dollar cost of the financing or concession but the dollar amount of any adjustment should approximate the markers reaction to the financing or concessions based on the Appraiser's judgment. STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS AND APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: The appraiser's certification that appears in the appraisal report is subject to the following conditions: 1. The appraiser will not be responsible for matters of a legal nature that affect either the property being appraised or the title to it. The appraiser assumes that the title is good and marketable and, therefore, will not render any opinions about the title. The property is appraised on the basis of it being under responsible ownership. 2. The appraiser has provided a sketch In the appraisal report to show approximate dimensions of the Improvements and the sketch Is included only to assist the reader of the report in visualizing the property and understanding the appraiser's determination of its size. 3. The appraiser has examined the available flood maps that are provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (or other data sources) and has noted in the appraisal report whether the subject site is located in an identified Special Flood Hazard Area. Because the appraiser is not a surveyor, he or she makes no guarantees, express or implied, regarding this determination. 4. The appraiser will not give testimony or appear in court because he or she made an appraisal of the property in question, unless specific arrangements to do so have been made beforehand. 5. The appraiser has estimated the value of the land in the cost approach at its highest and best use and the improvements at their contributory value. These separate valuations of the land and improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid 0 they are so used. 6. The appraiser has noted in the appraisal report any adverse conditions (such as, needed repairs, depreciation, the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, etc. ) observed during the inspection of the subject property or that he or she became aware of during the normal research involved in performing the appraisal. Unless otherwise stated in the appraisal report, the appraiser has no knowledge of any hidden or unapparent conditions of the property or adverse environmental conditions (including the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, etc. ) that would make the property more or less valuable, and has assumed that there are no such conditions and makes no guarantees or warranties, express or implied, regarding the condition of the property. The appraiser will not be responsible for any such conditions that do exist or for any engineering or testing that might be required to discover whether such conditions exist. Because the appraiser is not an expert in the field of environmental hazards, the appraisal report must not be considered as an environmental assessment of the property. 7. The appraiser obtained the information, estimates, and opinions that were expressed In the appraisal report from sources that he or she considers to be reliable and believes them to be true and correct. The appraiser does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of such items that were furnished by other panties. 8. The appraiser will not disclose the contents of the appraisal report except as provided for In the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. 9. The appraiser has based his or her appraisal report and valuation conclusion for an appraisal that Is subject to satisfactory completion, repairs, or alterations on the assumption that completion of the improvements will be performed in a workmanlike manner. 10. The appraiser must provide his or her prior written consent before the lender /client specified in the appraisal report can distribute the appraisal report (including conclusions about the property value, the appraiser's identity and professional designations, and references to any professional appraisal organizations or the firm with which the appraiser Is associated ) to anyone other than the borrower; the mortgagee or its successors and assigns; the mortgage insurer; consultants; professional appraisal organizations; any state or federally approved financial institution; or any department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States or any state or the District of Columbia; except that the lender /client may distribute the property description section of the report only to data collection or reporting service(s) without having to obtain the appraiser's prior written consent. The appraiser's written consent and approval must also be obtained before the appraisal can be conveyed by anyone to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media. Freddie Mac Form 439 6-93 Page 1 of 2 Fannie Mae Form 1004B 6-93 APPRAISERS CERTIFICATION: The Appraiser certifies and agrees that: METZGER File No. 306 -04801 1. I have researched the subject market area and have selected a minimum of three recent sales of properties most similar and proximate to the subject property for consideration In the sales comparison analysis and have made a dollar adjustment when appropriate to reflect the market reaction to those items of significant variation. If a significant item in a comparable property is superior to, or more favorable than, the subject property, I have made a negative adjustment to reduce the adjusted sales price of the comparable and, if a significant Item in a comparable property Is inferior to, or less favorable than the subject property, I have made a positive adjustment to increase the adjusted sales price of the comparable. 2. 1 have taken into consideration the factors that have an impact on value In my development of the estimate of market value in the appraisal report. I have not knowingly withheld any significant Information from the appraisal report and I believe, to the best of my knowledge, that all statements and information in the appraisal report are true and correct. 3. 1 stated in the appraisal report only my own personal, unbiased, and professional analysis, opinions, and conclusions, which are subject only to the contingent and limiting conditions specified in this torn. 4. 1 have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject to this report, and I have no present or prospective personal interest or bias with respect to the participants in the transaction. I did not base, either partially or completely, my analysis and /or the estimate of market value In the appraisal report on the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin of either the prospective owners or occupants of the subject property or of the present owners or occupants of the properties in the vicinity of the subject property. 5. 1 have no present or contemplated future interest in the subject property, and neither my current or future employment nor my compensation for performing this appraisal is contingent on the appraised value of the property. 6. 1 was not required to report a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client or any related party, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a specific result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event in order to receive my compensation and /or employment for performing the appraisal. I did not base the appraisal report on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the need to approve a specific mortgage loan. 7. 1 performed this appraisal in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were adopted and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and that were in place as of the effective date of this appraisal, with the exception of the departure provision of those Standards, which does not apply. I acknowledge that an estimate of a reasonable time for exposure in the open market is a condition in the definition of market value and the estimate I developed Is consistent with the marketing time noted in the neighborhood section of this report, unless I have otherwise stated in the reconciliation section. 8. 1 have personally inspected the interior and exterior areas of the subject property and the exterior of all properties listed as comparables In the appraisal report. I further certify that I have noted any apparent or known adverse conditions in the subject improvements, on the subject site, or on any site within the immediate vicinity of the subject property of which I am aware and have made adjustments for these adverse conditions In my analysis of the property value to the extent that I had market evidence to support them. 1 have also commented about the effect of the adverse conditions on the marketability of the subject property. 9. 1 personally prepared all conclusions and opinions about the real estate that were set forth in the appraisal report. If I rolled on significant professional assistance from any individual or individuals in the performance of the appraisal or the preparation of the appraisal report, I have named such Indlvldual(s) and disclosed the specific tasks performed by them in the reconciliation section of this appraisal report. I certify that any individual so named is qualified to perform the tasks. I have not authorized anyone to make a change to any item in the report; therefore, if an unauthorized change is made to the appraisal report, I will take no responsibility for it. SUPERVISORY APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION: if a supervisory appraiser signed the appraisal report, he or she certifies and agrees that: I directly supervise the appraiser who. prepared the appraisal report, have reviewed the appraisal report, agree with. the statements and conclusions of the appraiser, agree to be bound by the appraiser's certifications numbered 4 through 7 above, and am taking full responsibility for the appraisal and the appraisal report. ADDRESS OF PROPERTY APPRAISED: 5021 Schaefer Road, Edina MN 55436 -1142 APPRAISER: SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (only If required) Signature: C4 Name: Robert M, La Fond, I AS Date Signed: April 13, 2006 State Certification #: or State License #: 4000658 State: MN Expiration Date of Certification or License: 8/31/07 Certified General Real Property Appraiser Signature: Name: Date Signed: State Certification #: or State License #: State: Expiration Date of Certification or License: ❑ Dld ❑ Did Not Inspect Property Freddie Mae Form 439 6-93 Page 2 of 2 Fannie Mae Form 10048 6.93 QUALIFICATIONS OF APPRAISER Property Address: 5021 Schaefer Road case No: METZGER city: Edina State: MN Zip: 55436 -1142 Attire in Heal asu a orokering and appraising since 1947, acing as salesman. sales manager, appraiser and consuttsm. Owner and principal broker of Robert M. La Fond 8 Associates, Inc. FORMAL EDUCATION• Graduate of SL Thomas Military Academy, attended St. Thomas University, University of Minn. (Architectural Engineenng), Tulane- Penssools University (Business Law), Nazareth Hall Seminary. SPEClALl21t.0 TRAINING: Completed numerous appraisal dowses and seminars tncdudi ft negtdrad courses by the Appraisal Ins*", and the Ns�o W Assodadort d Independent Fee Appraisers, some d which are- Rawl EsL-ft Apprai�2t1 Prtndples. 88sic Valuation PFOCS MIS. Residential Valuation. Coign Theory 8 TWW*ples A $ S. Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation, Valuation Analysis and Report Writing, Standards of Pr011e56ipreal Practice, Elowanic Sp WW -Sheet Courses. Business and Going Concern Valuation, Motel Valuation, Appraising Residential Condomfniums, Real Estate Feasibility Studies. Appraisal of Partial Accluils0ons, Envkorhrnontal Site Assessments. FMA Appirligsaft Wdhin Now HUD Gl ldeitrres, Highest and Beat Use Analysis. Under a pmgrwn of continuing education, negularly.aftend seminars rela&q to the appraisal of real estate interests, such as U.S.PAP, annual update, etc CONTINUING EDUCATION CERTIFICATION, The National Association of independent Fee Appraisers has a mandatory Program of cmtinuing education for designated rreernbers Those who meet the minimum standards of the program are considered to have been recertified l attend the necessary courses to meet the annual recertification requirements.. APPRAISAL EXP ERIENCE: As an independent fee apprgiW, have made appraisal on all types of residential cornrnercial and industrial prcpertiee as well as spedel purpose- apprahw is as: ti►ee -share units, mdbnV tower9. racquet ball chuffs, auto dealerships, offioelindustriat condominium, banks. bowling alloys, conw$ rounds, parking W, churches, Car taarsbers. horse . boarding fapGties. number yards, nursing homes, schools, truck terminals, cause. drive -iris, petroleum tank fames, fast -food and other restaurants, day care oeritars, hospitals, medicafldentsi office buildings. scenic easements, avgation easermerus, p0eJate'easements, povmr transmission kris easements, feasbilfty Sludi", buggy valilsaw t wwlpis, ow- Court appointed commissioner in condemnation proceedings for Ramsey County. Expert witness test6nony in hearings and litigations under eminent domain, tax abatement, dissolution, corporate mergers and litigation, avigation easements, transmission and pitteline sitinQs, etc. Lechm and Insfluctor for aural and real estate courses sponsaed by the Greaser SL Paul Area AssocWhon of Realtors. Post Chairman of the Education Committee, Minnesota Sh to approved real esh to appraisal =Kwses at St `Thomas University. American Real Estate Schools. Real Estate Education Corporstion, Tonskemper School od Rent Estate. Normandale Community Coilape. Pine Technical institute, and inatnretor for various other courses and seminars PROFESSIONALMEMBERSHIPS: Greater St. Paul Area Assododon of Realtor; (President -1985): Minnesota Assocoticin Of Reek=- National Assodadon Of Realtors, National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers -IFAS designate since 1890. (Past Pfesident of Metro Chapter 1996- 1997) Designated member of A,ppraiser's Adviso r Boars. Stage of of Department of Commerce PARTIAL LIST OF CLIENTS: U-S. Dept. of interior. Irsamal Revenue SeryXis. U.S. t?apC of .lu6tics, U.& Dept. of Htwsuhg ants Urbane DevolopfreAt; Vaterane AUminiisbaiion, Mhmssota Wpertr and of Administration, Ramsey Coiuhty Lana Cornmissianer. City of St. Peal, City of Inver Grove tieighltil, Chicago Couoly, AT.. & T.. American National Bengt, Firm National Bank, U.S. Bank, St. Anthorr/ Park Bank. FBS Mortgage, Twin City Federal S & L. Northern States Power Co., Muttual Serves Insurance Co„ DoWe Corporation, 3M Cwpomtion. Target Stores, Prudential Life Ins. Co_, Horace Mann trite Ins_ Co„ American Can Co. Rack island R.it.. Gulf Oa Corp...Standard on Co.. Reynolds Metals Co., Burkngtnn Northern R:R, Wrtgage Guarantee Insurance Co., Corporafa Maven, Caldwell "Banker Relocatim Management Services, MeirrElLyinch Retortion. $stW Hornes Relocation, Better Homes 8 Gardens Ran, Wakfhert Relocation, Travelers Relocation. Conservators Plus, ClWmExec Relocaifon Systems, Resolubion Trig Corp., Fillet National Bank of the North, First Baitiit Shomvkw, Hornequity, Discover Mortgage, American Horan Einanoe, Burnet Home Loam, Colsew Finance. Loan Co., Firstar Home MlodMa, Countrywide Mortgage Co., First Commercial Bank., Full Spectrum Mortgage,. Monti LyrK* Dean Waaf. Wdlennium Mor%age, Midwest Banters Trust, Now Cary M*rWage. Remington Fit Senftees, Regents Mortgage, Unded Fancily Mortgage, Vk" Mortgage Services, nun"Ka c aittomeys and prnrate indntiduals. A more complete fist is available upon specific rmquest, Department of Commerce Licensing Division Telephone: (651) 2915 -63t9 E -mail address. licensing.commerc state.mri, is W&bsite address: commerce.state.mn us I Certified General Real Property Appraiser License Legal Name: ROBERT M LAFOND Acdress: 5619 DUNLAP AVE SHOREVIEW, i4,'iN 55126 -5635 License laentifration Number. AP- 4000658 Lscensa Expiration gate 8/31/2007 Continuing Education: 30 credits Cue by incense expiration date. A parson licensed in thLfi. category can perfwrn apprasais ref rode *ally- re:atsd transactions A person licensed in th* catenary may appraise all types of real property 5619 Dunlap Ave., Shoreview, MN 55126 -5635 (651) 783 -1944 Fax (651) 783 -1748 State of Minnesota S, Clepartment of Ccmmerce 85 - 7th Mace East SI Paul, MN 55103 -3165 Department of Commerce Licensing Division Telephone: (651) 2915 -63t9 E -mail address. licensing.commerc state.mri, is W&bsite address: commerce.state.mn us I Certified General Real Property Appraiser License Legal Name: ROBERT M LAFOND Acdress: 5619 DUNLAP AVE SHOREVIEW, i4,'iN 55126 -5635 License laentifration Number. AP- 4000658 Lscensa Expiration gate 8/31/2007 Continuing Education: 30 credits Cue by incense expiration date. A parson licensed in thLfi. category can perfwrn apprasais ref rode *ally- re:atsd transactions A person licensed in th* catenary may appraise all types of real property 5619 Dunlap Ave., Shoreview, MN 55126 -5635 (651) 783 -1944 Fax (651) 783 -1748 0 C�,sc::, +k- 3 �k� . c(-/ 7/0 L,2 6 alb A S) Hennepin County Property Map Pri Hennepin County Property Map 4/1 7 / () Co rty Full Display, Single Family Residential, MLS #: 2066676 6001 Walnut Drive , Edina, Minnesota :us: Sold List Price: $289,900 Sold Price R Wei C More photos are available for this property, S_uPplements are available for this property, GEOVISTA Neighborhood Tour (Click icon to add to Watched Listings) Total Bed /Bath: 3/ 3 Garage: 2 Year Built: 1955 $284,900 Original List Price: $289,900 1t'CM'0 t Biscayne Blvd MapPoint` Walnut Ridge Park 6001 Walnut - :Ise �� y Edina Arctic / k. oo, i 212 - > S2 [n 15 >GUS 6litroiort.'urp c>_ + }U4NStliEQ,�iWfsrCDT,htC. Map Page: 119 Map Coord: C3 Directions: Vernon Avenue to Walnut Drive North to Home MLS Area: 385 - Edina Style: (SF) Three Level Split Const Status: Previously Owned Foundation Size: 1,646 AbvGrdFinSgFt: 1,646 BelGrdFinSgFt: 579 Total Fin SgFt: 2,225 Acres: 0.260 Lot Size: 107x125x90 List Date: 08/19/2002 Received By MLS: 08/19/2002 Off Market Date: 08/28/2002 Selling Agent Date Closed: 10/2512002 Selling Office General Property Information Legal Description: Lot 6 Walnut Ridge County: Hennepin School District: 270 - Hopkins, 952 - 988 -4000 Complex /Dev /Sub: Restrictions /Covts: Lot Description: Tree Coverage - Medium TAX INFORMATION Property ID: H3111721340012 Tax Year: 2002 Tax Amt: $1,850 Assess Bal: $ Tax w /assess: $1,850 Assess Pend: No Homestead: Yes Days On Market: 17 Ted L Westall Realty Center, Inc. Common Wall: No Association Fee: $ Assoc Fee Frequency: N/A Assoc Fee Includes: N/A Road Frontage: Zoning: Residential - Single Accessibility: None Remarks Agent Remarks: This is an impeccably clean and well cared for home. Three large bedrooms up & three bathrooms w /much updating. Lots of fresh paint both inside & out. Huge kitchen both formal & informal dining, two fireplaces, lage sun porch, huge 31 x 22 patio. Public Remarks: This is a wonderful location for golf, shopping, biking, schools, walking trails & just about anything else you could want. Impeccably clean & well cared for. Master BA, two fpic,hdwd flors, new appliances in kitchen, formal & informal dining. See supp.. Structure Information Iperty Full Display, Single Family Residential, MLS #: 2035591 F 6016 Walnut Drive, Edina, Minnesota Status: Sold List Price: $334,900 Sold Price: $334,900 Original List Price: $324,900 1'1VIC unoios are avauauie for this prol2e[ty Map Page: 119 Map Coord: C4 GEOVISTA Neighborhood Tour Directions: Crosstown to Gleason -N to Vernon -W to (Click icon to add to Watched Listings) Walnut Right to home on Left Total Bed /Bath: 3/ 3 Garage: 2 Year Built: 1954 pint' t MLS Area: 385 - Edina Style: (SF) One Story Const Status: Previously Owned Foundation Size: 1,260 AbvGrdFinSgFt: 1,260 BelGrdFinSgFt: 1,260 Total Fin SgFt: 2,520 Acres: 0 Lot Size: 86x135x100xi35 List Date: 05/10/2002 Received By MLS: 05/10/2002 Off Market Date: 05/24/2002 Selling Agent: Date Closed: 06/09/2002 Selling Office: TAX INFORMATION Property ID: H31 11721340017 Tax Year: 2002 Tax Amt: $1,819 Assess Bal: $ Tax w /assess: $1,819 Assess Pend: No Homestead: Yes Days On Market: 15 Christine Gabrielson Edina Realty, Inc General Property Information Legal Description: Lot it Walnut Ridge County: Hennepin School District: 270 - Hopkins, Complex /Dev /Sub: Restrictions /Covts: Common Wall: No Lot Description: City Bus (w /in 6 blks), Tree Coverage - Medium Association Fee: Assoc Fee Includes: $ Assoc Fee Frequency: Other None Road Frontage: City Zoning: Residential - Single Accessibility: None R e31101 S Agent Remarks: Magnificent walkout rambler w /lovely landscaping -Great decking for entertaining, new Anderson windows, gourmet chef kitchen, sauna w /shower, cedar lined closet, bar, security system, exposed wood firs! Playground can stay- fenced bkyd. This is a must see! Public Remarks: Magnificent walkout rambler w /lovely landscaping -Great decking for entertaining, new Anderson windows, gourmet chef kitchen, sauna w /shower, cedar lined closet, bar, security system, exposed wood firs! Playground can stay- fenced bkyd. This is a must see! f P-_'�_ 4/I _� /DLL rty Full Display, Single Family Residential, MLS #: 1562995 5929 Walnut Drive, Edina, Lus: Sold List Price: $249,900 Sold Price: $249,900 Original List Price: $249,900 Field *My i appoint' 6r-, , a ' . + ' Ridge Park; J 5929 Walnut General Property Information Legal Description: LOT 1 BLK 2 WALNUT RIDGE 1ST ADDN County: Hennepin School District: 270 - Hopkins, 952 - 988 -4000 Complex /Dev /Sub: Common Wall: No Restrictions /Covts: Lot Description: Association Fee: $ Assoc Fee Frequency: Assoc Fee Includes: Road Frontage: Zoning: Accessibility: Pasture Acres: .00 Tillable Acres: .00 Wooded Acres: .00 Remarks Agent Remarks: WALK -OUT RAMBLER, CONVENIENTLY LOCATED, LARGE ROOMS, 2 FIREPLACES, BIG EAT -IN KITCHEN, BUILT -IN CHINA CABINET IN FORMAL DINING ROOM. QUIET NON - THROUGH NEIGHBORHOOD Public Remarks: Map Page: 119 Map Coord: C3 Directions: GEOVISTA Neighborhood Tour VERNON WEST TO WALNUT - NORTH TO ^ (Click icon to add to Watched Listings) HOME Total Bed /Bath: 4/ 3 Garage: 2 Year Built: 1957 TAX INFORMATION MLS Area: 385 - Edina Property ID: H3111721310011 Style: (SF) One Story Tax Year: 2000 Const Status: Previously Owned Tax Amt: $2,441 Foundation Size: 1,744 Assess Bal: $ AbvGrdFinSgFt: 1,744 Tax w /assess: $2,441 BelGrdFinSgFt: 1,035 Assess Pend: Unknown Total Fin SgFt: 2,779 Homestead: Yes Acres: 0 Lot Size: W 90X141X90X139 List Date: 03/05/2001 Received By MLS: 03 /05/2001 Days On Market: 19 Off Market Date: 03/11/2001 Selling Agent: Elizabeth L Cole Date Closed: 05/30/2001 Selling Office: Edina Realty, Inc General Property Information Legal Description: LOT 1 BLK 2 WALNUT RIDGE 1ST ADDN County: Hennepin School District: 270 - Hopkins, 952 - 988 -4000 Complex /Dev /Sub: Common Wall: No Restrictions /Covts: Lot Description: Association Fee: $ Assoc Fee Frequency: Assoc Fee Includes: Road Frontage: Zoning: Accessibility: Pasture Acres: .00 Tillable Acres: .00 Wooded Acres: .00 Remarks Agent Remarks: WALK -OUT RAMBLER, CONVENIENTLY LOCATED, LARGE ROOMS, 2 FIREPLACES, BIG EAT -IN KITCHEN, BUILT -IN CHINA CABINET IN FORMAL DINING ROOM. QUIET NON - THROUGH NEIGHBORHOOD Public Remarks: Property Full Display, Single Family Residential, MLS #: 1516827 r 5944 Walnut Drive , Edina, Status: Sold List Price: $224,900 Sold Price: $211,000 Original List Price: �j feed' /iG. _ /rA, GEOVISTA Neighborhood Tour Ij (Click icon to add to Watched Listings) Total Bed /Bath: 4/ 2 Garage: Year Built: 1955 MLS Area: 385 - Edina Style: (SF) One Story Const Status: Previously Owned Foundation Size: 1,260 AbvGrdFinSgFt: 1,260 BelGrdFinSgFt: 642 Total Fin SgFt: 1,902 Acres: Kitchen Main Bathrooms Lot Size: City Sewer - Connected Fire #: / 10 List Date: 07/21/2000 Received By MLS: 07/21/2000 Off Market Date: 08/29/2000 Selling Agent: Date Closed: 09/20/2000 Selling Office: •' Mal►s6aCpp�2QP t411 Q 4 iiUTOnc Map Page: Map Coord: C4 Directions: TAX INFORMATION Property ID: H311172.1310027 Tax Year: 2000 Tax Amt: Assess Bal: Tax w /assess: Assess Pend: No Homestead: No Days On Market: 41 Roma J Brown Prudential Metrowide Realty /� �� ✓�� �/ General Property Information Legal Description: County: Hennepin School District: 270 - Hopkins, 952 - 988 -4000 Complex /Dev /Sub: Common Wall: No Restrictions /Covts: Lot Description: Association Fee: Assoc Fee Frequency: Assoc Fee Includes: Road Frontage: Zoning: Accessibility: / d d- Remarks Public Remarks: Structure Information Room Level Dimen Other Rooms Level Dimen Heat: Forced Air Living Rm Main Amusement Room Lower Fuel: Oil Dining Rm Air Cond: None Family Rm _ _ Water: City Water - Connected Kitchen Main Bathrooms Sewer: City Sewer - Connected MATRIX C"Q Pagel of 3 Welcome Tanya Lehr J►'J' �./ Monday, April 17, 2006 Home 1Searchl My Matrix I Finance I Roster I Tax I Open House' History f Home Base Help I Logout I Single - Family I General I Detail I Address I MLS# I Today's New Listings I Create Your Own Search Result 1 of 1. Checked 0 . Check all 1. Previous I Next 1 [1] 1 Bottom Property Full Display, Single Family Residential, MLS #: 3125505 F- 6566 France Avenue S #209, Edina, MN 55435 -1723 Status: Active List Price: $375,000 Original List Price: $375,000 More photos are available for this rroperty• GE_OVISTA Neighborhood Tour A (Click icon to add to Watched Listings) Total Bed /Bath: 2/ 3 Garage: 2 Year Built: 1976 MLS Area: Style: Const Status: Foundation Size AbvGrdFinSgFt: BelGrdFinSgFt: Total Fin SgFt: Acres: Lot Size: List Date: 12/0 385 - Edina (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels) Previously Owned 1 1,920 1,920 0 CONDO 7/2005 Received By MLS: 12/07/2005 Days On Market: 132 CDOM 17 g MapPo W x _ 62 - 6566 France �a Edina W 66th St 53 +� C. Southdale } L Shopping Center o v C 02005MiomsoR Cop 02004NAV7EQ ,and /orGDT,Inc. � Map Page: 120 Map Coord: A4 Directions: 62 CROSSTOWN TO FRANCE AVE, SOUTH 1.5 BLOCKS, CORNER OF 66TH & FRANCE AVE 1(;l (Click icon for Google Map) TAX INFORMATION Property ID: 3002824140023 Tax Year: 2005 Tax Amt: $2,733 Assess Bal: $ Tax w /assess: $2,733 Assess Pend: Unknown Homestead: Yes General Property Information Legal Description: CONDO NO 0079 POINT OF FRANCE CONDO LOT BLK APT NO 209 County: Hennepin School District: 280 - Richfield, 612- 798 -6000 Complex /Dev /Sub: POINT OF FRANCE Common Wall: Yes Restrictions /Covts: Pets Not Allowed, Seniors - 55+ Lot Description: City Bus (w /in 6 bilks) Association Fee: $855 Assoc Fee Frequency: Monthly Assoc Fee Includes: Air Conditioning, Building Exterior, Cable TV, Hazard Insurance, Heating, Outside Maintenance, Professional Management, Sanitation, Security Staff, Shared Amenities, Snow /Lawn Care, Water /Sewer Road Frontage: City Zoning: Residential- Single Accessibility: None http: // matrix. northstarmis. com /Matrix/display.aspx ?c= AAEAAAD* * * * *AQAAAAAAAAARAQAAAEOAAA... 4/17/0( MATRIX k;�— "�6— Page 2 of 3 Remarks Agent Remarks: ESTATE -1920 SQ FT + 3 DECKS SQ FT. ORIGINALLY A 3 BR NOW 2 BR W/ FAMILY RM OFF LIVING RM, 2.5 BATHS, LAUNDRY IN UNIT. ONLY 24 HR SECURITY IN EDINA, 4 GUEST SUITES. 2 HEATED GARAGE STALLS, SOUTH & EAST VIEWS. PLEASE PLAN FOR 1 HR TO VIEW WITH ALL AMENITIES Public Remarks: ESTATE -1920 SQ FT + 3 DECKS SQ FT. ORIGINALLY A 3 BR NOW 2 BR W/ FAMILY RM OFF LIVING RM, 2.5 BATHS, LAUNDRY IN UNIT. ONLY 24 HR SECURITY IN EDINA, 4 GUEST SUITES. 2 HEATED GARAGE STALLS, SOUTH & EAST VIEWS. PLEASE PLAN FOR 1 HR TO VIEW WITH ALL AMENITIES Structure Information Room Level Dimen Other Rooms Level Dimen Heat: Forced Air Living Rm Main 19X14 Fuel: Natural Gas Dining Rm Main 13X12 Air Cond: Central Family Rm Main 16X12 Water: City Water - Connected Kitchen Main 17X9 Bathrooms Sewer: City Sewer - Connected Bedroom 1 Main 17X14 Total: 3 3/4: 1 1/4: 0 Garage: 2 Bedroom 2 Main 16X12 Full: 1 1/2: 1 Oth Prkg: Bedroom 3 Pool: Heated, Indoor, Shared Bedroom 4 Bath Description: 3/4 Master, Main Floor 1/2 Bath, Main Floor Full Bath Dining Room Desc: Eat In Kitchen, Living /Dining Room Family Room Char: Family Room Fireplaces: 0 Fireplace Characteristics: Appliances: Dishwasher, Dryer, Range, Refrigerator, Washer Basement: None Exterior: Stucco Roof: Age 8 Years or Less, Flat Amenities - Shared: 24 Hour Guard, Car Wash, Concrete Floors & Walls, Elevator(s), Fire Sprinkler System, Hot Tub, Lawn Sprinkler, Sauna, Security Building, Tennis Courts Amenities -Unit: Balcony, Exercise Room, Hot Tub, In- Ground Sprinkler, Local Area Network, Sauna, Washer /Dryer Hookup Parking Char: Assigned, Driveway - Concrete, Garage Door Opener, Heated Garage, Underground Garage Shared Rooms: Club House, Exercise Room, Guest Suite Special Search: All Living Facilities on One Level, Main Floor Bedroom, Main Floor Laundry Financial Cooperating Broker Compensation Buyer Broker Comp: 3.25% Sub -Agent Comp: 3.25% Facilitator Comp: 3.25% Variable Rate: N List Type: Exclusive Right To Sell Sellers Terms: Cash, Conventional Existing Financing: Free and Clear Agent is Owner ?: No Contact Information Listing Agent: Lowell R Johnson 952 - 927 -1629 Listing Office: Edina Reams, Inc. Appointments: 952 - 927 -1133 Office Phone: 952- 927 -1100 MLS #: 3125505 Address: 6566 France Avenue S #209, Edina, MN 55435 Previous 1 Next 1 (11 1 Top Change display to I Property Full Search selected for Change to 1 � - per page. Search Time: 0.28s Search Criteria: List Number is 3125505 http:// matrix. northstarmis. com IMatrixldisplay.aspx ?c= AAEAAAD* * * * *AQ QAAAEOAAA... 4/17/06 DisplayPopup MLS # 1 ❑ ® 1524950 2 J L 1524950 3 ❑ CO 1524950 4 ❑ LI 3125875 5 ❑ 3 3125875 6 ❑ LI U25875 7 ❑ 3176577 8 J L 3176577 I SO Address Municipality Field Date Stamp Old Value New Value Property Type 6566 France Avenue S #501 Edina Status 8/24/2000 12:00 AM incom ACT Single Family 6566 France Avenue S #501 Edina Status 8/24/2000 12:00 AM ACT PEND Single Family 6566 France Avenue S #501 Edina Status 8/24/2000 12:00 AM PEND CLOSD Single Family 6566 France Avenue S #501 Edina Status 12/8/2005 3:48 PM INCOM ACT Single Family 6566 France Avenue S #501 Edina ListPrice 12/8/2005 3:48 PM 250000.00 Single Family 6566 France Avenue S #501 Edina Status 3/30/2006 12:07 PM ACT CANCL Single Family 6566 France Avenue S #501 Edina Status 4/3/2006 4:53 PM INCOM ACT Single Family 6566 France Avenue S #501 Edina ListPrice 4/3/2006 4:53 PM 229000.00 Single Family PC, � ct�- 2 f �z http:// matrix.northstarmis.com/ Matrix / Public /DisplayITQPopup.aspx ?iid =71 & did = 558 &params = 4483 %20SDMwMDI4MjQxNDAwNTE) Page 1 of 1 4/17/06 DisplayPopup 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MLS # j 3077044 3077044 3077044 r 3 3077044 3 3087770 jJ 3087770 ❑ Iii 3087770 CJ LI 3087770 ❑ `+ 3161522 CJ L3 3161522 Address 6566 France Avenue S #1107 6566 France Avenue S #1107 6566 France Avenue S #1107 6566 France Avenue S #1107 6566 France Avenue S #1107 6566 France Avenue S #1107 6566 France Avenue S #1107 6566 France Avenue S #1107 6566 France Avenue S #1107 6566 France Avenue S #1107 Municipality Edina Edina Edina Edina Edina Edina Edina Edina Edina Edina Field Status ListPrice ListPrice Status Status ListPrice ListPrice Status Status ListPrice Date Stamp Old Value 8/10/2005 10:00 PM INCOM 8/10/2005 10:00 PM Single Family 8/24/2005 10:11 AM 325000.00 9/2/2005 11:26 AM ACT 9/2/2005 2:23 PM INCOM 9/2/2005 2:23 PM Single Family 9/29/2005 2:07 PM 299000.00 12/11/2005 12:16 AM ACT 3/6/2006 3:57 PM INCOM 3/6/2006 3:57 PM 294900.00 New Value Property Type ACT Single Family 325000.00 Single Family 299900.00 Single Family CANCL Single Family ACT Single Family 299000.00 Single Family 287900.00 Single Family EXP Single Family ACT Single Family 294900.00 Single Family Page 1 of 1 http: / /matrix.northstarmis.com/ Matrix / Public lDisplayITQPopup.aspx ?iid =71 & did = 558 &params = 4483 %20SDMwMDI4Mj QxNDAxmik) 4/17/06 MATRIX: / j7j-_? T .W.� Home Search, My Matrix I Finance I Roster I Tax I Open House I History I Home Base I Help I Logout Single - Family I General I Detail I Address I MLS# I Today's New Listings I Create Your Own Search Results 1 -6 of 6. Checked 0 . Check all 6. Previous I Pvext 1 [1] 1 Bottom I Property Full display F Check Page F 41 ' IGI 6566 France Avenue S #501, Edina, MN 55435 -1766 Pagel of 3 Welcome Tanya Lehr Monday, April 17, 2006 x List #: 3176577 Status: Active Map Page /Coord:120 /A4 List Price: $229,000 List Date: 04/03/2006 County: Hennepin Style: (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels) Area: 385 -Edina Bedrooms: 2 Total Baths: 2 Garage: 1 Total Fin SgFt: 1,509 Listing Agent: Lowell R Johnson 612- 578 -3949 Listing Office: Edina Realty, Inc. Appt Phone: 952 - 927 -1133 Acres: 0 Yr Blt: 1976 Directions: Hwy 62 Crosstown To France Ave, South One Block Agent Remarks: EASY TO SHOW! r� f r� 22-q l, 2 IGI 6566 France Avenue S #307, Edina, MN 55435 -1727 List #: 3135293 Status: Active Map Page /Coord:120 /A4 List Price: $250,000 List Date: 01/11/2006 County: Hennepin Style: (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels) Area: 385 - Edina Bedrooms: 2 Total Baths: 2 Garage: 1 Total Fin SgFt: 1,694 Listing Agent: Angela Larson 651 -2Q3 -1708 Listing Office: Keller Williams Integrity RE Appt Phone: 651 -203 -1750 Acres: 0 Yr Blt: 1976 Directions: France Avenue, South Of 62 (Crosstown) Agent Remarks: AGENT IS RELATED TO SELLER. F- Ai IGI 6566 France Avenue S #911, Edina, MN 55435 -1739 List #: 3170467 Status: Active Map Page /Coord:999 /A1 List Price: $260,000 List Date: 03/23/2006 County: Hennepin Style: (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels) Area: 385 - Edina Bedrooms: 2 Total Baths: 2 Garage: 1 Total Fin SgFt: 1,509 == Listing Agent: Tanya M. Lehr 952- 374 -6357 Listing Office: Bjorklund Realty, Inc. Appt Phone: 866 - 275 -6321 Acres: 0 Yr Blt: 1976 Directions: Crosstown To France Ave South To Property Agent Remarks: Point of France is Edina's finest luxury high- rise. East /Southwest panoramic view, sun -lit, great amenities. Tastefully redecorated. Eat -in- Kitchen. Assoc. fee includes everything except electricity & phone. 24 hr security. Quick closing possible. 6566 France Avenue S #1107, Edina, MN 55435 -1718 List #: 3161522 Status: Active Map Page /Coord:120 /A4 List Price: $294,900 List Date: 03/06/2006 County: Hennepin Style: (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels) Area: 385 - Edina Bedrooms: 2 Total Baths: 2 Garage: 1 Total Fin SgFt: 1,694 /-1 /_ve http: // matrix. northstannls. com /Matrixldisplay.aspx ?c= AAEAAAD* * * * *AQAAAAAAAAARAQAAAEOAAA... 4/17/06 MATRIX. b Page 2 of 3 F "M i r— hl� =i Listing Agent: Susan G meters 612- 987 -6544 Listing Office: Coldwell_Banker Burnet Appt Phone: 952 - 474 -2525 Acres: 1.000 Yr Bit: 1975 Directions: Northwest Corner Of 66th And France. Agent Remarks: Elegant Point Of France at its best! Pristine and stately! This is the cream of the crop! Stunning city views from this perfect 2 bedroom, 2 bath nest on the eleventh floor. New kitchen floor and appliances. Newly decorated master bath and dressing room. 6566 France Avenue S #209, Edina, MN 55435 -1723 List #: 3125505 Status: Active Map Page /Coord:120 /A4 List Price: $375,000 List Date: 12/07/2005 County: Hennepin Style: (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels) Area: 385 - Edina Bedrooms: 2 Total Baths: 3 Garage: 2 Total Fin SgFt: 1,920 Listing Agent: Lowell R Johnson 952 - 927 -1629 Listing Office: Edina Realty, Inc. Appt Phone: 952 - 927 -1133 Acres: 0 Yr Bit: 1976 t Directions: 62 Crosstown To France Ave, South 1.5 Blocks, Corner Of 66th & France Ave Agent Remarks: ESTATE -1920 SQ FT + 3 DECKS SQ FT. ORIGINALLY A 3 BR NOW 2 BR W/ FAMILY RM OFF LIVING - RM, 2.5 BATHS, LAUNDRY IN UNIT. ONLY 24 HR SECURITY IN EDINA, 4 GUEST SUITES. 2 HEATED GARAGE STALLS, SOUTH & EAST VIEWS. PLEASE PLAN FOR 1 HR TO VIEW WITH ALL AMENITIES G1 6566 France Avenue S #1211, Edina, MN 55435 -1744 List #: 3159527 Status: Active Map Page /Coord:120 /A4 List Price: $550,000 List Date: 03/02/2006 County: Hennepin Style: (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels) Area: 385 -Edina Bedrooms: 3 Total Baths: 4 Garage: 2 Total Fin SgFt: 3,370 Listing Agent: James N Fogel 612 - 889 -2000 Listing Office: Coldwell Banker Burnet Appt Phone: 952 - 924 -6262 Acres: 0 Yr Bit: 1975 Directions: Corner Of France & 66th Agent Remarks: F Check Page Previous I Next 1 [1] 1 Top I Property Full display FJarro: Reports Cf -1A Change display to I Property Short Search selected for Change to F0 Eper page. Search Time: 0.27s Search Criteria: House Number is 6566 Street Name is like 'france *' Area is '385 - Edina' Status is 'Active' Ordered by Status, Area, List Price `ldp http: // matrix. northstarmis. com IMatrixldisplay.aspx ?c = AAEAAAD * * * * *AQAAAAA - AAARAQAAAEOAAA... 4/17/06 MATRIX . �� Page 1 of 2 Welcome Tanya Lehr Monday, April 17, 2006 Home ISearchl My Matrix I Finance I Roster I Tax I Open House I History I Home Base Help Logout , Single- Family I General I Detail I Address I MLS# I Today's New Listings I Create Your Own Search Narrowed Original results I Back to Original results Results 1 -5 of S. Checked 5 . Un -check all 5. Previous I Next 1 [1] 1 Bottom I Property Full display (✓ Check Page p- 4� !i IGI 6566 France Avenue S #501, Edina, MN 55435 -1723 List #: 3125875 Status: Cancelled Map Page /Coord:120/ A4 List Price: $250,000 List Date: 12/08/2005 Off Mkt Date:03 /30/2006 Date Closed: County: Hennepin Style: (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels) Area: 385 - Edina Bedrooms: 2 Total Baths: 2 Garage: 1 Total Fin SgFt: 1,509 Listing Agent: Tracey C Baker 952 - 212 -9662 Listing Office: The Realty House Appt Phone: 952- 844 -1510 Acres: 0 Yr Blt: 1976 Directions: Crosstown (62) To France Ave- South To Property Agent Remarks: OWNER HAS MADE MANY UPDATES- COMP. REMODELED MSTR BA W /ROOM & BOARD TOUCHES. SHOWER W /JETTED BODY SPRAY & CUST. BENCH. NEW CARPET & PAINT THRU -OUT. ALL NEW STAINLESS APPLS, INCL. TOP OF THE LINE FRONT -LOAD W &D. HEATED PARKING ,24 HOUR SEC & MUCH MORE. _f IGI 6566 France Avenue S #1107, Edina, Minnesota 55435 _ List #: 3077044 Status: Cancelled Map Page /Coord:120/ .� A4 List Price: $299,900 List Date: 08/10/2005 TITT W; r WM 46 Off Mkt Date:09 /02/2005 Date Closed: i✓ County: Hennepin Style: (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels) Area: 385 - Edina k.... Bedrooms: 2 Total Baths: 2 Garage: 1 Total Fin SgFt: 1,694 Listing Agent: Mary Jane Meehan 612 - 386 -7715 Listing Office: Twin City Homes /GMAC Real Esta - Appt Phone: 866 -275 -6321 Acres: 0 Yr Blt: 1975 +. Directions: North West Corner Of 66th And France Agent Remarks: All showings must be coordinated with security. Call appt number for instructions. No lock box. This is a 55+ building however there ratio of 55+ to younger �• °� owners is low enough that a buyer need not be over 55 currently. No children allowed. A J 0 © 6566 France Avenue S #707, Edina, Minnesota 55435 List #: 3105139 Status: Cancelled Map Page /Coord:120/ A4 List Price: $349,900 List Date: 10/10/2005 Off Mkt Date: 11 /22/2005 Date Closed: County: Hennepin Style: (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels; Area: 385 - Edina Bedrooms: 2 Total Baths: 2 Garage: 2 Total Fin SgFt: 1,680 Listing Agent: Marylou A Terwilliger 952- 946 -1683 Listing Office: Coldwell Banker_Burnet Appt Phone: 952- 885 -6280 Acres: 0 Yr Blt: 1976 Directions: Crosstown #62 To France Ave S 1.5 Blks To Point Of France Agent Remarks: Premier Edina location!Luxury bldg.Terrific amenities.Walking distance to shopping & restaurants.Wonderful views.Assoc.fee includes everything except phone & elec.24 hour security staff -on sight mgmt! http: / /matrix.northstarmis. com /Matrix /display.aspx ?c= AAEAAAD * * * * * AQAAAAAAAAARAQAAAEOAAA... 4/17/06 MATRIX. P_ F Care free living at its finest!2BR -2BA spacious rms ^J006566 France Avenue S #403, Edina, Minnesota List #: 2218551 Status: Cancelled Map Page /Coord:120/ A4 List Price: $360,000 List Date: 12/20/2003 Off Mkt Date:03 /10/2004 Date Closed: County: Hennepin Style: (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels) Area: 385 - Edina i� Bedrooms: 3 Total Baths: 3 Garage: 1 Total Fin SgFt: 1,920 Listing Agent: Lowell R Johnson 612 578 3949 Listing Office: Edina Realty, Inc Appt Phone: 952 - 927 -1133 Acres: 0 Yr Bit: 1976 Directions: 62 (Crosstown) To France Ave, South 1.5 Blocks Across From Southdale Agent Remarks: 6% —4 0 P 6566 France Ave S , Edina, Minnesota 55435 List #: 3112711 Status: Cancelled Map Page /Coord:120/ A4 List Price: $429,900 List Date: 10/28/2005 Off Mkt Date:12 /16/2005 Date Closed: County: Hennepin Style: (CC) High Rise (4+ Levels) Area: 385 -Edina Bedrooms: 3 Total Baths: 3 Garage: 2 Total Fin SgFt: 1,920 Listing Agent: Shelly A. DelTerzo 952- 484 -2375 Listing Office: Guardian Real Estate Sery LLC Appt Phone: 866- 275 -6321 Acres: 0 Yr Blt: 1976 Directions: Crosstown To France Ave South 1.5 Blocks Agent Remarks: This stunning 3 bdrm, 3 bath condo inlcudes 3 decks, 2 heated garage stalls, 24 hour security and much more. Completely renovated condo includes a beautiful kitchen and stainless steel appliances. Age restrictions F Check Page Previous I Next 1 [1] 1 Top I Property Full display Change display to Property Short Search selected for Change to 25 - per page. Search Time: 0.22s Search Criteria: This search was narrowed to a specific set of listings. Ordered by Status, Area, List Price All information contained herein is for the exclusive use of authorized MLS subscribers; Copyright (c) 2006 Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota, Inc. All Rights Reserved. mivo Wt For help or to submit suggestions, email matrixhelp @northstarmis.com or call 651 - 251 -5456. er � Tarasoft MATRIX v1.5. Copyright @ 2006 Tarasoft Corporation. Page 2 of 2 http: // matrix. northstannls. com IMatrixldisplay.aspx ?c= AAEAAAD* * * * *AQAAAAAAAAARAQAAAEOAAA... 4/17/06 C'OL.� to f Koh S N b•,'•• v 1-4 P p Y- op /s ej vg v�t��on off' 14 p gg 1- -grr' Fye yh Y:e �jeexPsv 1�/ N r p �- 7 Y e u p op ; n � _ The 4 re yj Y ep % S e 17 ���y y "d rem l of C�� �4 �y7 �D1i5P J y1�4 o�`p� �oyliJ��'a trey P Vf y q % �ic h t 5 x f� Sad v, e- w;j Y;w �,e r -- 15j 2 1-10. h a P;s e r f 0 rA p � eY rgle GYir Noise �Y owe Hy IDa s hav5e �O Se %I , i4/! Fek I P y,oVe5�2� o n P.4 4 ,.ve pl.rH]L C) r le ral�n dGY A t400eo' 5p,f oo� �h ��i�g 1x 4 f y <-lr 12) tls ovY /,d oY Z- r- e o q Pee7 g le � f e hje xv From:SAWHORSE IHC 763 533 0352 04/12/2006 14:42 #500 P.002/013 4740 42nd Avenue North ® Robbinsdale, MN 55422 -1828 ® Phone 763.533.0352 ® Fax 763.5J3.2666 www.sawhor-qeusa.eom From:SAWHORSE INC i 763 533 0352 04/12/2006 14:43 9500 P.003/013 SH1122LPr 1 Contract Proposal - Steinkamp, Don & Barbara Client Steinkamp, Don & Barbara Date 04/1212006 Expires 4/34/2066 Address 4912 Payton Court fl?esigmer Bill Chenvert ti Edina, MN 55435 (r r :l -t } Phone (952).927-9263 Sawhorse is a fullyiinsured and;licensed contractor, Minnesota license #23 2. Client work & other excluded itemse listed of the end of the proposal. Italicized, non - numbered sections provide information to help you understand how Sawhorse conducts business as well as assist you in understanding typical remodeling processes and choices. Proposal: Plana .1 Projects A) General B) Windows & Patio Door C) Lower Level Remodel D) Main Level E) Upper Level F) Client Items A) General SAMORSE GENERAL Ff �. Page 1 of 12 1 z V6 ej&,K-� 4- (� kz& 4// ( -� / o ((�q / , Request Reduction in Appraised Value - April 173, 2006 5828 Dewey Hill Road Taxable Market Value • Year 2005 $311,900 • Year 2006 $358,600 • Year 2007 $386,800...a two year increase of $75,000! The valuations were made at a time when housing prices were going up. The housing market has cooled & flattened out. Our home is not worth more >than $350,000. n Hardship for Selling the Property 1. This is a one -of -a -kind smaller colonial in the Fjeldheim Addition 2. Located on a busy thru- street, no parking on our side of road 3. Narrow lot 80 x 1401 with 4 bedrooms built in 1966 4. Unfinished, wet basement with water problems (see photos) 5. _Original kitchen appliances (photos) 6.. Deteriorating chimney (photos) 7.'Concrete patio & garage floor are in poor condition 8. Located on busy "Thru Street" - the main entry to Braemar Park 9. In 2005 the city re- striped the street with a new configuration. This created a. dangerous condition for us. We are unable to access our mailbox without risking life and limb from the traffic driving west on Dewey Hill Road. The roadway west is only 13 feet wide in front of our house (photos) Comparable Home Comparison 4720 W 70th Street 5828 Dewey Hill Rd MLS 3168736, list date 03/20/2006 occupied since 1983 by same owner .26 Acre lot .26 Acre 0 square feet 2,252 square feet 5 Bedrooms /3 Baths 4 Bedrooms /3 Baths r Finished basement w/Egress Windows Unfinished wet basement Asking Price $389,500 5828 Dewey Hill Road 1960- 70's era Dishwasher and Kitchen appliances — Harvest Mold color Original kitchen cabinets and counters Wet, Unfinished Basement East Wall 3 c'f /-S- Original s North Wall Northwest Corner of Basement permanently wet 1�4�- /-S- Northwest s Deteriorating Chimney- West View East View of Chimney -5 0-f /-5- Facing East on Dewey Hill Road The red line is the former "Center Line ". Notice how far to the left the new yellow line is painted. This was never like this until September 2005. (, e-r /S This car passes within 2 to 3 feet of my lawn and mailbox. I have almost been hit twice by cars passing and observing the traffic lane. This is a hazardous contition. -7 Of / -5 llbox. CONCLUSIONS: The value of my home has been negatively impacted by the new traffic pattern. The home has always been the smallest and least expensive house of its kind on the street. There is no parking on my side of the street. It is a difficult house to sell because of its singular location, high traffic pattern and one of a kind status per numerous real estate agents. There have not been any improvements to the home. Many others in the neighborhood have added 3 season porches, extra bedrooms, baths, finished basements with egress, etc. The basement continues to be unfinished and wet. We are the same homeowners living in the house since 1983. On a personal note, I am not a CEO, Rock Star or Warren Buffet. I am a State government employee and only had a 2% increase in salary the past year. The assessor's $75,000 increase in valuation from 2005 to 2007 is unrealistic and greedy. gqis Saturday March 25, 2006 Edina Assessors Otiice City of Edina 4801 West 5011' Street Edina, MN 55424 71.394 Hennepin County '1006 Property Tax Statement Property ID Number 08- 116 -21, 24 0006 Gentlemen, This is an appeal and objection. The estimated market value and taxable market value for our home is incorrect. We would like a hearing. In 1005 you indicate an estimated market value for our home as $311,900, and for 2006 $361,500 respectively. This is an increase is $49,600 and is unreasonably high for one year. For 2007 taxes you give an estimated market value of $386,800 — for a: whopping total of $74,900 from 200.5! These numbers do not reflect the value of our h' ome. We object to these increases and appeal the valuation. Several negative detriments occurred in 2005. The street we live on has always, been an exceptionally busy road, with traffic going to Braemar Park. This past year the city painted the road stripping 4 feet closer to our side of the street to create parking for homes on the other side of the street: We have asked City Hall on 2 occasions to have the stripe moved closer to the center of the road as it was before or at least be painted further away from our mailbox: Cars no drive within 2 -3 feet of our lawn and it has become terribly hazardous to walkarid gather mail from the curbside mailbox. This has diminished the value and safety of our home for visitor"§ and us. Furthermore the basement of our home is unfinished. There have been no new improvements to our home. Many others on our street have many new improveients such as room additions and patios, etc. - We would like you to reconsider the valuation and adjust the proposed property taxes downward to reflect the changes. Thank you. 1 look forward to hearing from you. at,Ger�'tGC�C Marshall Silberstein 5828 Dewey Hill Road Edina, MN 55439 952 =941 -9344 City of Edina, Minnesota 4801 West 50th Street ■ Edina, MN 55424 -1394 ■ (952) 826 -0365 ■ FAX: (952) 826 -0389 ■ TTY: (952) 826 -0379 2006 Notice of Valuation and Classification For taxes payable in 2007 — This is NOT a bill Property Identification Number: 08- 116 -21 -24 -0006 Property Location: 5828 Dewey Hill Rd Marshall Silberstein Deborah Silberstein 5828 Dewey Hill Rd Edina MN 55439 -1807 The values indicated are for the January 2, 2006 Assessment for taxes payable in 2007. The prior year data has been included for comparison purposes. 2005 for 2006 Taxes Prone y ssificatio RESIDENTIAL 2006 for 2007 Taxes RESIDENTIAL j®b 00q 3 I 1 ) HOMESTEAD HOMESTEAD . V Estimate t Value $361,500 $386,800 Limited Market Value: $358,600 Value of New Improvements: This Old House Exclusion: Taxable Market Value: $358,600 $386,800 Est. Market Value Deferred: Appealing the Value or Classification of our Pro Appeal Option 1 — Call Local Assessor If you believe the 2006 estimated market value and /or classification of this property has been determined incorrectiy, you nave ine right to make an appeal. Inquiries concerning valuation or property class should first be directed to your Assessor's Office. This is an important first step of the appeals process. Many times questions and concerns can be addressed informally, prior to the Local Board meetings. You should contact the Edina Assessor's Office at (952) 826 -0365. Appeal Option 2 — Boards of Appeal and Equalization Step #1 - City of Edina Board -of Appeal and Equalization If you believe your value or classification is incorrect, you may bring your case to the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization. You may appear in person, by letter, or be represented by an authorized agent. Please call your Assessor's Office first, an appointment may be necessary. It is required that you first attend the Local Board prior to attending the County Board of Appeal. The Board convenes at 5:30 PM, on Monday, April 17, 2006, in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, MN 55424. If you wish to make an appeal before the Local Board, an application is Step #2'- Hennepin County Board of Appeal and Equalization The County Board of Appeal and Equalization begins on June 19, 2006, at the Hennepin County Government Center, 300 South Sixth St., Minneapolis, MN 55487. Application is required no later than June 7, 2006. To appear before the Coun Board you must have appeared before the City of Edina Board of Appeal and Equalization. Phone: (612) 348 -7050. [TTY (612) 348 -3461 Teletype] I ADDeal Option 3 — Minnesota Tax Court For information on the I ax court, contact: Minnesota Tax Court, 25 Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Room 245, St. Paul, MN 55115 Phone: 651 - 296 -2806 [TTY Relay (800) 627 -3529 Teletype] Web site: www.taxcourt.state.mn.us Small Claims. Division You may take your case directly to the Small Claims Division of Tax Court if: • The assessor's estimated market value of your property is less than $300,000; or • The entire parcel is classified as a residential homestead (1a or.1b) and the parcel contains no more than one dwelling unit; or • The entire property is classified as an agricultural homestead (2a or 1 b); or • You are appealing the denial of a current year application for homestead classification of your property. Regular. Division • Regardless of your property type or the nature of your claim, you always have the option to file directly with the Regular Division of Tax Court. • You have until April 30, 2007, to file an appeal with the Small Claims Division or the Regular Division of Tax Court for your 2006 valuation and classification. /avf /-s- Home J� My Matrix I Finance l Roster f Tax I Open House I History I Home Base I Help ! Logout Result 1 of 3. Checked 0 . Check all 3. Previous I Next 1 [1] 2 3 1 Bottom I Single Line display Property Full Display, Single Family Residential, MLS #: 3168736 r. 4720 W 70th Street , Edina, MN 55435 -4060 Status: Active List Price: $389,500 Supplements are available for this property. GEOVISTA Neighborhood Tour A (Click Icon to add to Watched Listings) Total Bed /Bath: 5/ 3 Garage: 2 Year Built: 1965 MLS Area: 385 - Edina Style: (SF) Two Stories Const Status: Previously Owned Foundation Size: 1,160 AbvGrdFinSgFt: 2,320 BeIGrdFinSgFt: Yes Total Fin SgFt: 2:804 Acres Lot Size: 90X130X90X129 List Date: 03/20/2006 Received By MLS: 03/20/2006 �ooe immroRCroQ�ooax _av�g.eoOforGDi.�11C. �. Map Page: 133 Map Coord: El Directions: FROM HIGHWAY 100 EAST ON 70TH STREET TO HOME © (Click Icon for Google Map) TAX INFORMATION Property ID: 3002824330046 Tax Year: 2005 Tax Amt: $4,009 Assess Bal: $ Tax w /assess: $4,009 Assess Pend: No Homestead: Yes Days On Market: 7 CDOM General Property Information Legal Description: WOODHILL EDINA LOT 020 BLOCK 006 County: Hennepin School District: 273 - Edina, 952 - 848 -3900 Complex /Dev /Sub: Common Wall: No Lot Description: City Bus (w /in 6 bilks), Tree Coverage - Light Road Frontage: City Zoning: Residential - Single Accessibility: None Remarks Agent Remarks: THE NEW BUYER WILL ENJOY THE NEWER MECHANICALS, FENCED REAR YARD WITH ABUNDANT TREES, THE SPACE IS ABSOLUTELY GREAT FOR A GROWING FAMILY. HARDWOOD FLOORS, FENCED YARD, A/C & EATING AREA IN KITCH N. 5 BRS ON ONE LEVEL! OPEN SUNDAY 3/26/06 1PM -3PM. Public Remarks: A WONDERFUL FAMILY HOME.THE GENEROUS ROOM SIZES AWAIT YOUR DECORATING TOUCH. THIS HOME SMILES AT YOU AS YOU ENTER THIS GREAT 2 STY COLONIAL.SPACE IS ABUNDANT W /AN AM RM, FAMILY RM, AN EATING AREA IN THE KIT & MORE! 5 BRS . ON 1 LVL. OPEN SUN 3/26 1PM -3PM Forced Air Natural Gas Central City Water -Connected City Sewer - Connected 2 Structure Information Room Level Dimen Living Rm Main 18X13 Dining Rm Main, 13X10 Family Rm Main 19X11 Kitchen Main 13X10 Bedroom 1 Upper _-17X13 Bedroom 2 Upper 11X11 'Bedroom 3 Upper 10X10 Bedroom 4 Upper 12X10 Other Rooms Level Amusement Room Lower Fifth (5th) Bedroom Upper Informal Dining RoomMain Patio. Main Bathrooms Total: 3 3/4: 1 1/4:0 1 Dimen Heat: 28X10 Fuel: 12X12 Air Cond: 10X8 Water: 15X12 Sewer: Appliances: Garage: Oth'Prkg: Basement: Pool: Financial Cooperating Broker Compensation Buyer Broker Comp: 2.7% Sub -Agent Comp: 2.7% Facilitator Comp: 2.7% Variable Rate: N List Type: Exclusive Right To Sell Sellers Terms: Cash, Conventional Existing Financing: Free and Clear Agent Is Owner ?: No Contact Information Listing Agent: Michael A Williams 952- 927 -1652 Appointments: 952 - 927 -1133 Listing Office: Edina Realty, Inc. Office Phone: 952- 927 -1100 MLS #:. 3168736 Address: 4720 W 70th Street, Edina, MN 55435 Previous I Next 1 [1] 2 3 1 jqp I Single Line display Change display to Property Full — _ Search selected for Change to 1 per page. Search Time: 0.09s Search Criteria: Status is 'Active'- House Number is 4720 Ordered by Status, Area, List Price All information contained herein is for the exclusive use of authorized M LS. subscribers; Copyright (c) 2006 Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Full. 1 1/2. . Bath Description: 3/4 Master, Main Floor 1/2 Bath, Upper Level Bath Dining Room Desc: Separate /Formal Dining. Room Family Room Char: Family Room, Main Level Fireplaces: 2 Fireplace Characteristics: Amusement Room, Living Room, Wood Burning Appliances: Air -To -Air Exchanger, Cooktop, Dishwasher, Disposal, Dryer, Exhaust Fan /Hood, Range, Refrigerator, Washer; Water Softener - Owned Basement: Egress Windows, Finished (Livable), Full Exterior: Brick /Stone, Metal /Vinyl Fencing: Chain Link Roof: Asphalt. Shingles Amenities -Unit: Hardwood Floors, Natural Woodwork, Patio, Washer /Dryer Hookup Parking Char: Attached Garage Special Search: 4 SR on One Level Financial Cooperating Broker Compensation Buyer Broker Comp: 2.7% Sub -Agent Comp: 2.7% Facilitator Comp: 2.7% Variable Rate: N List Type: Exclusive Right To Sell Sellers Terms: Cash, Conventional Existing Financing: Free and Clear Agent Is Owner ?: No Contact Information Listing Agent: Michael A Williams 952- 927 -1652 Appointments: 952 - 927 -1133 Listing Office: Edina Realty, Inc. Office Phone: 952- 927 -1100 MLS #:. 3168736 Address: 4720 W 70th Street, Edina, MN 55435 Previous I Next 1 [1] 2 3 1 jqp I Single Line display Change display to Property Full — _ Search selected for Change to 1 per page. Search Time: 0.09s Search Criteria: Status is 'Active'- House Number is 4720 Ordered by Status, Area, List Price All information contained herein is for the exclusive use of authorized M LS. subscribers; Copyright (c) 2006 Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 5224 70TH STREET WEST Edina Exceptional Walkout Overlooking 9 Mile Creek! Beautifully maintained 4 Bedroom home on a fantastic lot on 9 Mile Creek. Hardwood floors, 3 Bedrooms on Main level, Walkout lower level, 2 fireplaces and totally ready to enjoy. Main floor family room and kitchen overlook the beautiful back yard and Creek. Inviting Foyer, Plantation shutter, informal dining area. Hardwood floors in Living room and 3 bedrooms A Great Edina Home with so much potential for backyard decks, gardens, and landscaping Edina Schools, Convenient to shopping and entertainment, and easy access to anywhere in the City Offered at $324,900 1-3 r-�- IS- The bc,5t Value in E_dina! Original owners occupied from 1963 to 2005— Meticulously maintained! ➢ 3 5edrooms on main level Master bedroom witk 1/2 Bath ➢ Open Boor plan and great natural light D [-ntryway closet & ceramic the foyer D hardwood floors under carpet in Living Koom and all 3 bedrooms on main level D Plantation Shutters D Large amusement room and large game room in lower level Newer roof 2000) ➢ Newer Fumace and A/C ( 1999) ➢ 200 Amp E-lectrical Service 4t6 bedroom and 3/4 Lath in lower level Newer water softener (2003) ➢ Spotless and ready to enjoy Spacious walkout with room to grow. Add a large deck to enjoy this Increclikle lot. MAIN LEVEL Living Room 15 x 13 Family Room 12 x 11 Kitchen 12 x 10 Informal Dining 10 x 8 Bedroom 1 13 x 12 Bedroom 2 12 x 10 Bedroom 3 11 x 10 Full Bath Huge backyard on ,9 Mile Creels LOWER LEVEL Bedroom 4 Amusement Room Game Room Patio 3/4 Bath E)rick fireplace for living room & family room PROPERTY INFORMATION 12 x 11 Year Built 1963 31 x 12 2005 Homestead Taxes $ 15 x 13 Sq. Ft. (approx.) 2382 Lot Size 75 x 65 2 car attached garage Central Air ® Q Information deemed reliable but not guaranteed. The above is subject to verification by the S324,900 0 buyerlbuyer's a ent. �� .�. t 5u ,ement to 5 224 70th 5tre,et West PP ➢ GreatFdina Home ➢ 3 Eedrooms on Main level ➢ New from windows in Iliving rooma and master bedroom. ➢ Master bedroom with 1/2 Bath ➢ Open floor Plan and great natural light ➢ E_ntryway foyer closet & ceramic the ➢ Main floor family room overlooks backyard ➢ Oversized 2 cargarage with opener. ➢ brick fireplace ➢ Hardwood floors under carpet in Living }Zoom anti all 3 bedrooms on main level ➢ Plantation Shutters i Infonnal dining area overlooks 6ack yard ➢ Large amusement room and large game room in lower level ➢ Newer roof 2000) ➢ -Newer F.urnace and A/C 1999) ➢ 206 Amp Electrical Service ➢ 4th bedroom and 3/4 bath in lower level ➢ Newer water,softener 2003) ➢ 5potless andleady to enjoy ➢ Great cur6 appeal ➢ Concrete Patio Attached 2 cargarage imagine a large deck off the kitchen /dining area.that opens up to this 6eautiful 6ack yard. Add steps down to a stone patio & hot tu6. An instant retreat! Jim Grand6ois • Realtor • 612- 229 -5415 • wwwjimCjranJ6ois.com r'mfcss¢+ml. kr..ults. /5 15 Q�C6 MATRIX 'T L i vrah - U n:k -T --- — --- ---- _.._�_ Home Searchk y Matrix Finance Roster ITax f Open House f History Home Base f Help Logout Single - Family I General ( Detail I Address I MLS # I Today's New Listings I Create Your Own Search Page 1 of 1 Welcome Robert Leibman Monday, April 17, 2006 Results 1 -11 of 11. Checked 0.. Check all 11. �(�, v..� �V i4c' Previous I Next 1 [1] 1 Bottom List # Status Street Address Area Municipality Price DOM Style Bds Bth TFSF 1 M © 3176577 Active 6566 France Avenue S #501 385 Edina $229,000 15 HGHRS 2 2 1,509 2 oft M Q 3135293 Active 6566 France Avenue S #307 385 Edina $250,000 97 HGHRS 2 2 1,6J 3 r ®3170467 Active 6566 France Avenue S #911 385 Edina $260,000 26 HGHRS 2 2 1,509 4 f-! (ft 00 M Q 3161522 Active 6566 France Avenue S #1107 385 Edina $294,900 43 HGHRS 2 2 1,694 5 f- A CJ 0 0 3125505 Active 6566 France Avenue S #209 385 Edina $375,000 132 HGHRS 2 3 1,920 6 f- 4b Q0 0 © 3159527 Active 6566 France Avenue S #1211 385 Edina $550,000 47 HGHRS 3 4 3,370 7 r 6% l j M Q 2375168 Sold 6566 France Avenue S #602 385 Edina $168,000 29 HGHRS 1 1 1,155 8 f-. A CA M a 3005367 Sold 6566 France Avenue S #806 385 Edina $270,000 11 HGHRS 2 2 1,694 9 f7 6% 3, M © 3065983 Sold 6566 France Avenue S #503 385 Edina $350,000 10 HGHRS 2 3 1,920 10 (- b% 60M ❑G 2358923 Sold 6566 France Avenue S #309 385 Edina $375,000 108 HGHRS 2 3 1,920 11 [j 0 3037695 Sold 6566 France Avenue 5 #110 385 Edina $379,000 4 HGHRS 2 3 1,920 Previous I Next 1 [1] 1 ToQ `Marrow, t5lsc�rtl -.__.. Reports GINA j . fmaii„ dap '' Change` display to Single Line► Search selected for Change to 25 r' per page. Search Time: 0.11s http: // matrix.northstarmis.com/ Matrix / display. aspx? c= AAEAAAD* * * * * AQAAAAAAAAARAQAAAEOAAAAGAgAAAAQ30I ... 4/17/06 ^•� ' Y 1'� ':��.` 1 ` i � 1 ��4( y, -O � ai ` �� ' +� ,t !', .i� . i �. �� � t� fit n �. m ; N7 I �Mlwr , • -tip" 4or mop- 47 Jbll� 4 Lf :Ir w_ , � r -1 iii . ft.,p '' 5 -A /V f VO4 L-VAP yy ro OA) X- _ 7 P1 a 43)q NSo 'l� � NW �'� 4rBRM/se� i OF4 t 4 V - i r � _'�� 1 �� � � � �Ir : �'a 5. =� w .i i A a �- ''''�wr _tip, �! ` _ ; :�♦ .� ..g ��- rs ; Yb, � _ i a � MR E %C% Eli V "IE D MAR 31 2004 Z i C 4 Y S.s — - r I ti i r" s C-AA&+�- a4 Rs� -e�Q 4-/ 17/ d !o April 17, 2006 To: City of Edina Aft: Board of Adjustment From:Patrick Fleetham Re: 4300 Branson, PID 07- 028 - 24-43-0111 I thank you for the opportunity to be heard this day. I wish to question the land valuation and the building(s) valuation for the above mentioned property. I regret my appearance here today; I wish assessor Rick Nelson and myself could have reconciled the difference in the valuations. I thank you for your consideration in this matter, Patrick Fleetham 4300 Branson Street Edina, MN 55424 4300 Branson, Edina Page 2 Land Valuation: I requested Mr. Rick Nelson to review the land valuations on my particular block. It was surprising to discover the land valuation is roughly the same for 92% of the parcels for my 4200 thru 4411 Branson Street. I have attached a summary of these valuations. Please note the following: 1 Bold faced type highlights the same land valuation for roughly 92% of the properties 2 Please note in the last column the lot square footage for this properties. You will note the specific lots range in size from a low of 5,775. square feet to the largest at 11,619 square feet. Yet there is not any consideration in the valuation of these lots due to significant differences in sizes. I contend there should be variation in these valuation due to the desirability of each lot, as well. The following items would seem natural for such valuation: 1 Lot square footage 2 Elevation 3 Placement on the block, i.e. a comer lot vs. a mid -block site (Although a case can be made there are additional elements, these would be a the most immediately discemable.) I would contend my lot is the least valuable in the block for the following reasons: 1 my lot is the lowest in elevation in the block. The eastern & western part of Branson Street is higher than my property. All water drains to the lowest point which is my property. 2 1 have attached copies of the following items: Property at 4306 Branson St. please note higher elevation Property at 4314 Branson St. please note higher elevation Property at 4400 Branson St please note higher elevation Property at 4410 Branson St please note higher elevation Property at 4411 Branson St. please note higher elevation Photos of 4300 Branson Street (Fleetham property) Property at 4300 Branson please note severe drop off in elevation Approximately 4' retain wall on the western edge of my property Retaining wall on northern edge of property which collapsed under last weeks heavy rain Please note extensive moss vegetation. It is difficult to grow grass due to the moss which results from excessive water from adjacent properties. 4300 Branson Street Buildings valuation: I wish to question the valuation of the assessment for my buildings vs. two other properties on the block. Year built Garage condition Basement quality Kitchen rating 1 st Bath Res. Condition Layout # bedrooms Effective age: 4212 Branson 1918 Average Average Standard Very good Fair Standard Two 1970 Bldg. valuation, 06 $79,100.00 4300 Branson 1913 Sub - standard NONE Sub - standard Sub - standard Fair Non - Standard One 1950 $74,100.00 4314 Branson 1906 Average NONE Standard Average Average Standard One 1950 $58,400 It is my contention my valuation should approach the valuation of 4314 Branson for the following reason: 4314 Branson Street property rates Standard & Average in all of the above categories, mine results in three Sub - standards, one Fair condition and one Non- standard. The 4314 buildings are superior to mine, yet mine is assessed at approximately 27% higher in valuation. Please also, note the garage structure which is newer and has a roll up door. Mine still have the original barn doors and the floor is dirt with cement tile. 4212 _S3 Branson Street is rated at a figure $5,000.00 higher than 4300 Branson. There are considerable differences and the 4300 Branson should be worth significantly less due to the following major differences: 1 The property is rated better 2 This building has two bedrooms 3 This property has a1994 addition, a 280 sq. ft addition in the rear of the structure. 4 This property has a newer garage with a roll up door and cement floor. 5 This property has a rating of an effective age of 1970; 4300 Branson is 1950 I would contend: My property is worth considerably less than its assessed value when compared with these properties and given its sub - standard condition. From a direct comparison 4300 Branson should approach the valuation of the $58,400 figure of 4314 Branson Street structures. To: Rick Nelson City Assess. P. Fleetham 4300 Branson St 12- Apr -06 Address Yr. built 2006 land valuation 2007 land valuation lot sq. ft. 4200 Branson 1924 165,100 210,200 6791 4202 Branson 1926 165,100 206,300 7086 4204 Branson 1965 165,100 206,300 6015 4206 Branson 1918 165,100 206,300 8356 4208 Branson 1915 165,100 206,300 7085 4210 Branson 1919 165,100 206,300 7221 4212 Branson 1918 165,100 206,300 7064 4214 Branson 1926 165,100 206,300 7011 4300 Branson 1913 165,100 206,300 8750 Fleetham Property 4302 Branson 1937 165,100 206,300 9353 4304 Branson 1916 165,100 206,300 8061 4306 Branson 2002 165,100 206,300 8390 4308 Branson 1918 165,100 206,300 7759 4310 Branson 1920 165,100 206,300 9590 4312 Branson 1932 165,100 206,300 9266 4314 Branson 1906 164,400 205,500 9398 4316 Branson 1924 165,100 206,300 9448 4400 Branson 1922 165,100 206,300 10,884 4402 Branson 1926 165,100 206,300 10,351 4402 Branson 1926 165,100 206,300 10,925 4406 Branson 1973 165,100 206,300 10,551 4408 Branson 1935 165,100 206,300 11,619 4410 Branson 1939 197,300 206,300 11,532 4411 Branson 1939 165,100 206,300 5,775 Info Source Hennepin County Tax Web Database Residential Field Card 'rinted: 04/17/2006 ►ssessment Year. 2006 fersion: 2 4odel: 005.001 -440 Zoning: R -1 Area Rating: Very Good Site Rating Good Land Quality: 0000 Contamination: Equal Flood Plain Map Ref: Average PUD Ref: B03 Allowable Units: Square Excess Land (SgFt): 1 12 Zoning Variance: N Frontage: 50 Left Side: Total Rooms: Rear Side: ,Gable Right Side: Shingles Effective Width: 50 Effective Depth: 140 Property Area (SgFt): 7,064 Acreage: # of Fireplaces: Park: Fplc. Quality: Park Quality: t On Lake: Functional %: Lake Quality: Economic %: On River: River Quality: Landscape Quality: Average bate Curbs Gas Gutter Paved Street Sewer Available Sidewalk Water Available Property Address: 4212 Branson St Lot / Block: 008/000 Addition: Riley'S Subdivision District: 01 Neighborhood: 0000 Partial Const (%): Detached Model: 005 -001 -440 Dwelling Type: Single Family Adjacent Property: Equal View: Equal ArchJAppeal: Average Quality: B03 Shape: Square Style: 1 12 Construction: Wood Frame Exterior Walls: Wood Exterior Trim: Total Rooms: Roof Type: ,Gable Roof Cover. Shingles Window Type 1: Double Hung Window Type 2: Floor: Air Conditioning: Yes Dormer Length: # of Fireplaces: Dormer Quality: Fplc. Quality: # Patio Doors: t Placement: Detached # of Cars: - 1 Floor Area: 216 Condition: Average Exterior Walls: Wood Fplc. Quality: / Placement: Bedrooms: # of Cars: Standard Floor Area: W.O. Type: Condition: W.O. Quality: Exterior Walls: Other. oc �� Total Rooms: Glazed Area 80 Quality: Average Screened Area: Trim: Quality: Floor: Open Area: Avg. Clear. Height Quality: # of Fireplaces: Patio 1 Area Fplc. Quality: Quality: Renovated Age: Patio 2 Area: Functional %: Quality: Economic %: Deck 1 Area: Quality: Deck 2 Area: Quality: Pool I Area Quality: Pool 2 Area Quality: Area (SgFt): 640 Type: Regular Finished (%): 50 Quality: Average # of Fireplaces: / Fplc. Quality: / Avg. Clear. Height Bedrooms: Elec. Svc: Standard Htg. Svc: Forced air, gas fired W.O. Type: I W.O. Quality: / ..�,...� . Jr- Zoning- Dwelling Type: Owner(s): Spa / Dix: / Full: 1 / Very Good 3/4: / 12: / Bedrooms: Baths: 1 Family: Living: 1 Dining I Kitchen: I Other. Total Rooms: 3 Interior. Plaster Spa / Dix: / Full: / 3/4: / l2: / � ■ ■ss Bedrooms: / Baths: / Family: I Kitchen: / Other. 2 Total Rooms: 1 Kitchen Rating Standard Interior. Plaster Trim: Hardwood Floor: Wood Avg. Clear. Height N # of Fireplaces: 1918 Fplc. Quality: 1970 ..�,...� . Jr- Zoning- Dwelling Type: Owner(s): Spa / Dix: / Full: 1 / Very Good 3/4: / 12: / Bedrooms: Baths: 1 Family: Living: 1 Dining I Kitchen: I Other. Total Rooms: 3 Interior. Plaster Trim: Painted Floor. Wood Avg. Clear. Height # of Fireplaces: # of Fireplaces: Fplc. Quality: Fplc. Quality: Spa: / Dlx: / Full: / 3/4: / 12: / Bedrooms: 2 Baths: Baths: Other: Other. Total Rooms: 2 Tagged 82005 - no C/B. R -I Single Family Alex Missaghi Interior. 0 0 Trim: 0 0 Floor. 0 0 Avg. Clear. Height 0 0 # of Fireplaces: 0 0 Fplc. Quality: 0 0 Spa: / Dix: / Full: / 3/4: / 12: / Bedrooms: Baths: Other. Total Rooms: Res. Cond: Fair Int. Layout Standard Manual Assess: N Actual Age: 1918 Effective Age: 1970 Renovated Age: Functional %: Economic %: Unfin. Ist GBA: Unfin. 2nd GBA: Unfin. 3rd GBA: Unfin. GBA: 1st Floor Area 2nd Floor Area: 3rd Floor Area: Total GBA: 1,250 Bedrooms: 2 Baths: 1 Family: 1 Living: I Dining 1 Kitchen: 1 Other: 0 Total: 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Appraiser ID: Appraisal Date: Reason: Result Left Tag: Yes/ No Value: Desc: Date: 07/062005 Price.. $310,000 Code: 16 Desc: Conventional Appraiser ID: RCN Appraisal Date: 08/012005 Reason: Quintile Review Result Exterior Appraiser ID: Appraisal Date: Reason: Result Left Tag: Yes/ No Value: Desc: Residential Field Card Tinted: 04/17/2006 \ssessment Year: 2006 ✓ersion: 2 dodel: 005- 001 -440 Property Address: Lot / Block: Addition: District: Neighborhood: 4212 Branson St 008/000 Riley'S Subdivision 01 0000 - - 7 -..j - j M -. Zoning: Dwelling Type: Owner(s): Single Family Alex Missaghi 1994 1S FR 14 [280] 20 IS FR 6 [72] 12 1S B A FR (MAIN) [528] 24 22 1S FR (80] 8 10 10 1S FR EP [80] 4- Iry01Cnlns r1U: U /- VLO- A'"J -uvr, r1upcity aypc: u - ulolu Residential Field Card Property Address: 4314 Branson St Zoning: R -1 inted: 04/17/2006 Lot / Block: 0271000 Dwelling Type: Single Family sessment Year: 2006 Addition: Grimes Homestead Owner(s): Harold L Schwartz :rslon: 2 District: 01 Roof Type: Dorothy V Schwartz, odel: 005 -001 -350 Neighborhood: 0000 Double Hung Window Type 2: Zoning: Area Rating: Site Rating: Land Quality: Contamination: Flood Plain Map Ref: PUD Ref: Allowable Units: Excess Land (SgFt): Zoning Variance: Frontage: Left Side: Rear Side: Right Side: Effective Width: Effective Depth: Property Area (SgFt): Acreage: Park: Park Quality: On Lake: Lake Quality: On River: River Quality: Landscape Quality: Curbs Gas Gutter Paved Street Sewer Available Sidewalk Water Available R -1 Very Good Good l] 50 185 9,398 Average t ne ue AIA. sac ?. •Y t '. FW T:} 'I� Infinca$n'r:.a�M��ka ZMENNIM Partial Const ( %): ' s, Model: 005 -001 -350 Dwelling Type: Single Family Adjacent Property: Equal View: Equal Arch. /Appeal: Average Quality: B04 Shape: Square Style: One Level/Rambler Construction: Wood Frame Exterior.•Walls: Stucco erior Trim: 0 Roof Type: Gable Roof Cover: Shingles Window Type 1: Double Hung Window Type 2: 0 Air Conditioning: No Dormer Length: 0 Dormer Quality: Total: 4 # Patio Doors: Placement. Detached # of Cars: I Floor Area: 352 Condition: Average Exterior Walls: Wood Placement: # of Cars: Floor Area: Condition: Exterior Walls: Glazed Area Quality: Screened Area: Quality: . Open Area: Quality: Patio I Area: Quality: Patio 2 Area: Quality: Deck 1 Area: Quality: Deck 2 Area: Quality: Pool 1 Area Quality: Pool 2 Area: Quality: adAme�iiti ,.,e, Area (SgFt): Type: Slab Finished (%): Quality: # of Fireplaces: Fplc. Quality: Avg Clear. Height: Elec. Svc: Standard Htg. Svc: Forced air, gas fired W.O. Type: W.O. Quality: Spa Dix: Full: 3/4: 1/2: Bedrooms: Baths: Family: Kitchen: Other. Total Rooms: Kitchen Rating: Standard Interior. Sheetrock Trim- Painted Floor: Carpet Avg. Clear. Height: # of Fireplaces: Fplc. Quality: attBa �s� ,•bQus , � ' Spa / Dix: / Full: 1 / Average 3/4: / 1/2: / i8�mW ` X.s813,ji Bedrooms: 1 Baths: 1 Family: Living: 1 Dining: Kitchen: l Other: 1 Total Rooms: 4 Interior: Trim: Floor: Avg, Clear. Height: # of Fireplaces: Fplc. Quality. end B (# Q rual fy) Spa: / Dix: / Full: ! 3/4: / 1/2: / Bedrooms: Baths: Other: Total Rooms: Interior: Trim: Floor: Avg. Clear. Height: # of Fireplaces: Fplc. Quality: Spa: / Dix: / Full: / 3/4: / 1/2: l rd RoAyr`1C M Bedrooms- Baths: Other: Total Rooms: Res. Cond: Average Int. Layout: Standard Manual Assess: N Actual Age: 1906 Effective Age: 1950 Renovated Age: Functional %: Economic nilding yeas. Unfin. 1st GBA: Unfin. 2nd GBA: Unfin. 3rd GBA: Unfin. GBA: 1st Floor Area 2nd Floor Area. 3rd Floor Area: Total GBA: 779 Dotal Dome r ' s, ime�__ n Code: �0 Bedrooms: 1 0 0 Baths: 1 0 0 0 Family: 0 0 0 0 Living: 1 0 0 0 Dining 0 0 0 0- Kitchen: 1 0 0 0 Other: 1 0 0 0 Total: 4 �' nl ;R- Appraiser • Date: Appraisal gw Mt X % Ai7aRtitiG�.i Date: Code: •: Appraiser u Appraisal D: 09/01/2005 Quintile Result: Exterior �' nl ;R- Appraiser • Date: Appraisal gw Mt X % .-..J, Y. Residential Field Card -anted: 04 /17/2006 rsessment Year: 2006 ersion: 2 .odel: 005.001 -350 Property Address: 4314 Branson St Lot / Block: 027/000 Addition: Grimes Homestead District: 01 Neighborhood: 0000 e ' t y o o p g f, U vV....4 . —. Zoning: Dwelling Type: Owner(s): Single Family Harold L Schwartz Dorothy V Schwartz Residential Field Card ranted: 04/17/2006 ssessment Year: 2006 ersion:. 2 lodel. 005 -001 -420 aA 006/000 Zoning: R -1 Area Rating: Very Good Site Rating: Good Land Quality: Average Contamination: B04 Flood Plain Map Ref: Square PUD Ref: 1 12 Allowable Units: Wood Frame Excess Land (SgFt): Wood Zoning Variance: N Frontage: Gable Left Side: Shingles Rear Side: Double Hung Right Side: Floor: Effective Width: 50 Effective Depth: 148 Property Area (SgFt): 8,750 Acreage: 1 Park: Park Quality: Fs aogls''ME On Lake: Detached Lake Quality: 1 On River: 240 River Quality: Substandard Landscape Quality: Average Curbs Gas Gutter Paved Street Sewer Available Sidewalk Water Available Property Address: 4300 Branson St Lot / Block: 006/000 Addition: Riley S Subdivision District: 01 Neighborhood: 0000 Partial Const ( %): Model: 005 -001 -420 Dwelling Type: Single Family Adjacent Property: Equal View: Equal Arch. /Appeal: Average Quality: B04 Shape: Square Style: 1 12 Construction: Wood Frame Exterior Walls: Wood Exterior Trim: Total Rooms: Roof Type: Gable Roof Cover: Shingles Window Type l: Double Hung Window Type 2: Floor: Air Conditioning: Yes Dormer Length: Dormer Quality: # Patio Doors: 1 r Fs aogls''ME Placement: Detached # of Cars: 1 Floor Area: 240 Condition: Substandard Exterior Walls: Wood Placement: # of Cars: Floor Area: Condition: Exterior Walls: o -'ck , ` RT Glazed Area: 108 Quality: Average Screened Area:. Quality: Open Area: Quality: Patio 1 Area Quality: Patio 2 Area: Quality: Deck y" Deck 1 Area: Quality: Deck 2 Area: Quality: WIA "1T. eft`! Pool 1 Area: Quality: Pool 2 Area: Quality: ,ac .4 nenlsf(..g a Area (SgFt): Type: Crawl Space Finished ( %): Quality: # of Fireplaces: Fplc. Quality: Avg. Clear. Height Elec. Svc: Htg. Svc: Forced air, gas fired W.O. Type: W.O. Quality: emBa�ths Spa: / Dix: / Full: / 3/4: / 12: / a eno ' nN :,� 'iS48AR�1.� Bedrooms: Other: Baths: Total Rooms: Family: Interior: Kitchen: Trim: Other. Floor: Total Rooms: Avg. Clear. Height Kitchen Rating: _..M Substandard Interior: Plaster Trim: Painted Floor: Carpet Avg. Clear. Height # of Fireplaces: Fplc. Quality: Zoning: R -1 Dwelling Type: Single Family Owner(s): Patrick Fleetham Spa: / Dix: / Full: I / Substandard 3/4: / 1/2: / Bedrooms: RCN Baths: I Family: 16 Living: I Dining: 1 Kitchen: 1 Other: I Total Rooms: 4 Interior: Sheetrock Trim: Painted Floor: Carpet Avg. Clear. Height # of Fireplaces: 0 Fplc. Quality: Spa: / Dix: / Full: / 3/4: / 12: / Bedrooms: 1 Baths: Other: Total Rooms: 1 Interior: Trim: Floor. Avg. Clear. Height # of Fireplaces: Fplc. Quality: Spa: Dlx: Full: 3/4: 12: Bedrooms: Baths: Other: Total Rooms: Res. Cond: Fair Int. Layout Non - Standard Manual Assess: N Actual Age: 1913 Effective Age: 1950 Renovated Age: Functional %: Economic %: Unfin. l st GBA: Unfin. 2nd GBA: Unfin. 3rd GBA: Unfin. GBA: 1 st Floor Area: 701 2nd Floor Area' 300 3rd Floor Area: Total GBA: 1,001 Bedrooms: I Baths: 1 Family: 0 Living: 1 Dining: I Kitchen: I Other. I Total: 5 Date: RCN :, alN t0 Code- 16 Desc: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Date: RCN Appraisal Date: i Code- 16 Desc: Conventional -'Appraiser ID: RCN Appraisal Date: 08/012005 Reason: Quintile Review Result Exterior Appraiser ID: Appraisal Date: Reason: Result Left Tag: Yes/ No Value: Desc: KITCHEN HAS NEWER CABS. NEWER FA/AC. eUNEVEN FLOORSISE17LING IN BATHIMUD AREA/GP AREA. YARD IS UNKEPT/OVERGROWN. DIRT DRIVEWAY. Residential Field Card Tinted: 04/17/2006 ssessment Year: 2006 ersion: 2 .odel: 005- 001 -420 Property Address: 4300 Branson St Lot/ Block: 006/000 Addition: Riley'S Subdivision District: 01 Neighborhood: 0000 Zoning: R -1 Dwelling Type: Single Family Owner(s): Patrick Fleetham 17.0' One Story No Basement 5.0 8.0 20.0' Two Story 12.0' over 2.0' No Basement 8.0' One Story No Basement E8,0- Glazed Porch j 18.0' i Sketoh by Apex IVw 14.0' 14.0' Detached Garage 18.0' 3.0' 4.0' 11.0' \ Unfinished over One Story i No Basement 07- 028 -24 -43 -0111 10 t. fA t {{C�,IF , Y t s ` ' l ,° 7 a € s T .t 4/t -7 1Qiv April 17, 2006 Revised from April 11, 2006 letter City of Edina - Assessments 4801 West 501' Street Edina, MN 55424 -1394 To whom it may concern, I would like to challenge the assessment value of $671,600, a 15% increase, for my house located on 5316 Blake Road. I perceive several issues with how you reached this value. They are as follows: 1) My house was built in 1939 and the $15,000 "Value of New Improvements" was not performed in 2005 as indicated in the letter; moreover, past work permits in 2000 and 2002 on our home were not improvements per say, but repair work required for a house of this age and damage from leaking windows and roof. No additional living space has been added since I have owned the property. 2) Houses with similar square footage that are much newer than mine have not been selling in price range you are valuing my home. For example, the Sensor's house across the street on 5308 Evanswood Lane, which is bigger and much newer (built in 1972) than mine went on the market 10 months ago. The homes price has been reduced to $629,000 and no sales offers have been tenured. 3) My houses tax report has a few errors on it, the worst of which calculates our home to have 5 bedrooms, which is inaccurate. Our home has four, three on the 2nd floor on one on the first. 4) I have attached two sales transactions that occurred in our area that reflect the age of our house these sold for 609,000 and 619,000 respectively. Both these homes were in the Edina school district, not the Hopkins school district where mine belongs. 5) In an interview I conducted with David Hackenmuller of Re/Max Realtors a 25 year veteran in this business, he provided me with the following facts of the Twin Cities market: a. 40,000 homes are on the market right now, 33% higher than the past 10 year average. b. The real market value increase in 2004 to 2005 was 5% not the originally thought 10 %. c. The 2006 market place has softened and a 10% pricing decrease is being seen in some municipalities. d. The Kiplinger Report from Nov 2006 stated that the Twin Cities real - estate market was on their Top Ten list of Treacherous Markets - at number 10 - the Twin cities area can expect a larger correction than the rest of the country. 6) The Star and Tribune ran an article for the Twin Cities real - estate market this past Monday (April 10) and quoted many facts from Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors and Re/Max Association Plus of Edina, here are a few points they made: e. New listings up 23.4 %; Pending sales down 10.9 %; and Median Sales Price up 2.7% over the last year ending March 2006. f. Annual Price increase in 2005 was 6% down from 11.8% in 2001, and the prices are expected to fall to a —3% range for the rest of 2006. g. Shipman [a Re/Max Realtor] stated that an Edina couple last fall has lowered their house from $585,000 to $540,000. Thank you for your consideration, and I would like to apologies for the tardiness of this letter. I was out of the country on a business trip to Europe and then a Spring break vacation with my family and did not open the letter until yesterday. APR -14 -2006 03:32P FROM: 763 -694 -1045 TO:99529292239 P.5 4114/2006 Property One Page Report, Single Family Residential, MLS#: 3068314 5419 Abbott place, Edina, MN 65410 TAX INFORMATION 1939 Property ID: H2O62824210102 Tax Year 2008 Tax Amt: $4,890.00 Assess Bal. $0.00 Tax w/asseas: $4,690.00 Assess Pend: Unknown Homestead: Yes Year Built: 1939 Bedrooms: 4 Total Baths: 2 Garage: 1 Status: Sold List Price: $649,900 Sold Price: $609,000 Original List Price: $749,900 Map Page: 1.20 Map Coord: 83 Directions: 60Th To France So, To 64Th, East To Abbott Place LekeANF: LekelWF Name: MLS Area: 386 - Edina Const Status: Previously Owned Style: (SF) Two Stories Fire #: Above Ground Finished SgFt: 1,632 Foundation Size: 966 Acres: 0.67 Below Ground Finished SgFt: 950 Total Finished SgFt: 1982 Lot Size: See lister List Date: 7126106 Received By MLS: 7126105 Days On Market: lee Off Market Date: 0110912006 Date Closed: 2113106 Selling Agent: Kimberly A. Falker Projected Close Date: 2113106 Selling Office: Edina Realty, Inc Legal Description: White Invetltment Cos Hidden Valley White Valley Lot Blk 002 E 27 Ft of..., County: Hennepin School District: 273 - Edina, 952- 648 -3900 Complex/Dev/Sub: Common Wail; No Restrictions/Covts: Lot Description: City Bus 4w /ln 8 blks), True Coverage - Heavy Public Remarks: Brick Colonial on 2 lote,backing to Minnshsho Creek! Three plus bedrooms on upper level with great flow. All the amenities of the era- hardwood floors, 2 fireplaces, bay window and morel &M Lvel Dimon Other Rooms Levu p1taen Living Rm Main 21x15 Amusement Room Lower 2105 Heat: Forced Air Dining Rm Main 11x14 Fuel: Natural Gas Family Rm Main 13x09 Air Cnd: Central ,. Kitchen Main 13x10 Water City Water - Connected Bedroom 1 Upper 1500 - Sewer City Sewer - Connected Bedroom 2 Upper 15x13 Garage Stalls: 1 Bedroom 3 Upper 18x10 Total: 2 : 2 3/4: 114: 0 To Other Parking: Bedroom 4 Upper 11x10 Full: 1 1 1/2: 1 Pool: Bath Description: Main Floor 112 Bath, Upper Level [lath Dining Room Desc: Separate /Formal Dining Room Family Room Char. Lower Level Fireplaces: 2 Fireplace Characteristics: Amusement Room, Living Room Appliances: Dryer, Range, Refrigerator, Washer Basement: Roof: Amenitles =Unit: Parking Char: Shared Rooms: Full Exterior, Brick/Stone, MablMnyl Asphalt Shingles Hardwood Floors, Kitchen Window Attached Garage, Driveway - Asphalt Fencing: Wire Special Search: 4 BR on One Level Buyer Broker Comp: 2.7% Sub -Agent Comp: 2.7% Facilitator Comp: 0% Variable Rate: Y List Type: Exclusive Right ro Sell List Agt is Owner?: No Listing Agent: Karen Daly 952- 924 -6746 Co -List Agent' Listing Office: Edina Realty, Inc Appt Phone: 952- 924.9733 Office Phone: 952. 920.1960 This Report Prepared By: David Hackenmueller 763.591 -6025 Information Deemed Reliable But Not Guaranteed. 0 2006 Regional MLS of Minn., Inc. All Rights Reserved. APR -14 -2006 03:32P FROM: 763 -694 -1045 TO:99529292239 P.4 4/14/2006 Property One Page Report, Single Family Residential, MLS #: 3087620 6420 KELLOGG Avenue, Edina, Minnesota 66424 TAX INFORMATION LWI Status: Sold Property ID: H1902824120060 List Price:. $639,600 Tax Year 2005 Heat: Forced Air Tax Amt: $4,882.00 Sold Price: $619,000 Assess IBal: $0.00 Odglnal List Price: $639,500 ' Tax w/assese: $4,127.00 Assess Pend: No Map Page: 120 Map Coord: A3 Homestead: Yes Directions: Wooddele Ave To 64Th Year Built: 1941 Street East To Kellogg Avenue, South Bedrooms: 3 Total Baths: 2 Lake1WF: Garage: 1 Lake1WF Name: MLS Area: 386 - Edina Const Status: Previously Owned Style: (SF) Two Stories Fire #: Above Ground Finished SgFt: 2,134 Foundation Size: 916 Acres: 0.00 Below Ground Finished SgFt: 198 Total Finished SgFt: 2,330 Lot Size: 80X133.64 List Date: 7122106 Received By MLS: 7122106 Days On Market 28 Off Market Date: 0811812005 Date Closed! 10/28106 Selling Agent: Bob A Lamson Projected Close Date: 10128105 Selling Office: Caldwell Banker Burnet Legal Description: County: Complex/Dev/Sub: Restrictlons/Covts: Public Remarks: Room Will Living Rm Main Dining Rm Main Family Rm Lower Kitchen Main Bedroom 1 Upper Bedroom 2 upper Bedroom 3 UPPer Bedroom 4 Bath Description: Dining Room Desa Fireplaces: 1 Appliances: Basement: Roof: Amenities -Unit: Parking Char! Shared Rooms: LOT 6, BLOCK 10, SOUTH HARRIET PARK Hennepin School District: 273 - Edina, 962. MB -3900 Common Wall: No Lot Description: City Bus (wlin 8 bike), Tree Coverage - Medium PRIME SOUTH HARRIET PARK CENTER HALL 3+ OR COLONIAL COMPLETELY REFRESHED & READY TO MOVE INIREFINISHED HDWD FLRS THRUOUT, NEW ENAMELED WDWK, FRESH PAINTISTAIN EXT,SUNROOM,NEW KIT APPLS,LRG CLOSETS.WALK -THRU MASTER BATH,PAVER DRIVEWAY.GREAT NEIGHBORHOODI Dimon 23X13 12X12 15X12 12X10 15X13 14X12 12X12 Other Roome LWI Qtmen Deck Main 12X8 Heat: Forced Air Office Upper 12X10 Fuel: Natural Gas Sun Room Main 11X10 Air Cnd: Central Water: City Water - Connected Sewer. City Sewer - Connected Bathrooms Garage Stalls: 1 Total: 2 314: 0 114: 0 Other Parking: Full: 1 112: 1 Pool Main Floor 112 Bath, Master Walk -Thru, Upper Level Beth Eat In Kitchen, SeperatelFormal Dining Room Family Room Char: Lower Level Fireplace Characteristics: Living Room, Wood Burning Dishwasher, Disposal, Dryer, Range, Refrigerator, Washer, Water Softener - Rented Finished (Livable), Full Exterior: Wood Asphalt Shingles Fencing: Deck, Hardwood Floors, Kitchen Window, Sunroom Attached Garage, Driveway - Other Surface, No krtarior Access to Dwelling Special Search: 3 OR on One Level Buyer Broker Comp: 2.7% Sub -Agent Comp: 2.7% Facilitator Comp: 2.7% Variable Rate: N List Type: Exclusive Right To Sell List Agt 1s Owner?: No Listing Agent: John C Everett 962 - 927 -1646 Cc -List Agent: Listing Office: Edina Realty. Inc Appt Phone: 9524274133 Office Phone: 962427.1100 This Report Prepared By: David Hackenmuellar 763.591 -6026 Information Deemed Reliable But Not Guaranteed. 02006 Regional MLS of Minn., Inc. AA Rights Reserved. -lome uy�rs, rm, y rive -7 s b d -sea JEFF WHEEM • jwheeler@starffibune.com Three houses in a row sported for -sale signs Wednesday in St Paul's Highland Park area. It's a reflection of the uptick in Twin Cities listings last month ® Numbers for the Twin Cities area confirm what home sellers already knew: It's becoming a buyer's market. By JIM BUCHTA lbuchta@startribune.com The selling spree continues. The number of houses placed on the market in_ the Twin Cities metro area last month smashed re- cords, rising 23 percent compared with the same period last year, according to a report released Wednesday by the Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors. . In fact, it was the eighth con- secutive month of record - setting listing activity m the. I3 -county metro area, giving buyers a seri- ous edge and putting downward pressure on price increases. " I have never seen the market quite like this;' said JoAnne Tor - vick of Edina Realty, who has been in the business close to 30 years. With nearly 11,000 new listings on the market last month — com- pared with about 8,800 in March 2005 — buyers have negotiating power they didn't have last year, and sellers appear to be compro- mising on price like never before. OrvFillllbrandt, a sales agent with Re/Max Associaties Plus in Edina, said he recently had a client trying to buy a new townhouse; but they .couldn't sell their current home. In an attempt, to move things for- ward, the builder offered to reduce the price on the townhouse if the buyer would drop the price on the home by the same amount. PWRO AREA •- Newlistings Pending sales RESIDENTIAL �e ®/® 1® ®/® REAL ESTATE ma8 home buyer -4 HOME SALES FROM Al ' Still, sales agents say the sky is not falling. With mortgage rates still'within 2 percentage points of all-time lows and a " local economy that's the envy of some beleaguered big cit- ies, there still is strong buyer .vJd / F a.a a,►.s 111 control haven't had since at least since 2000, when ` the longest -sus- tained run -up in prices began. The number of home sales closed last month was up 2 percent from a year ago, and agents say that houses that are priced right and in good condi- tion still are selling quickly. With that 'kind of wheeling and dealing happening, the medi- an home sale price in March rose only 2.7 percent over last year, to $225,000. Annual price increas- es peaked at 11.8 percent in 2001; they dipped to 6 percent in 2005. The Minneapolis Area Asso- ciation of Realtors expects price growth to fall to more historically normal levels, in the 2 to 4 percent range, for the rest of the year. Home sales continues: April usual- ly is the biggest sales month A9 ► Median sales price source: Minneapolis AreaAssociation 2.7% of Realtors —CM wnb a- ►.i- ruurlw supply uI houses for sale marketwide, but there's nearly a 12 -month sup- ply of houses priced at more than $1 million. (Those figures are based on how long it would take to sell the current invento- ry of homes on the market.) At the same time, rapid- ly rising inventory levels are masking the net effect of rela- tively strong demand. Pending home sales — an indication of how many home sales will be Shipman said that althougl sellers are having to price thei houses more competitively an( be willing to offer discounts tc buyers, they ll have the same opportunities when they be come buyers. "Sellers need tc . level off their expectations or the sell side, but you'll pay les: on the buy side," he said. For example, Shipman said, he showed one couple house in Edina last fall but thei passed on it at $585,000. Thi: 5828 Dewey Hill Road 1960- 70's era Dishwasher and Kitchen appliances — Harvest Gold color :++ i A l ri w � �, h� � OVI r Original kitchen cabinets and counters Wet, Unfinished Basement East Wall e 'o 1VV1111 VV 4.111 1 V Vl Lll W GJL LU111G1 Ul "a NJ I11G11L PG1111Q11G11LI y W GL Deteriorating Chimney- West View East View of Chimney s Facing East on Dewey Hill Road The red line is the former "Center Line ". Notice how far to the left the new yellow line is painted. This was never like this until September 2005. IRV This car passes within 2 to 3 feet of my lawn and mailbox. I have almost been hit twice by cars passing and observing the traffic lane. This is a hazardous contition. CONCLUSIONS: ilbox. The value of my home has been negatively impacted by the new traffic pattern. The home has always been the smallest and least expensive house of its kind on the street. There is no parking on my side of the street. It is a difficult house to sell because of its singular location, high traffic pattern and one of a kind status per numerous real estate agents. There have not been any improvements to the home. Many others in the neighborhood have added 3 season porches, extra bedrooms, baths, finished basements with egress, etc. The basement continues to be unfinished and wet. We are the same homeowners living in the house since 1983. On a personal note, I am not a CEO, Rock Star or Warren Buffet. I am a State government employee and only had a 2% increase in salary the past year. The assessor's $75,000 increase in valuation from 2005 to 2007 is unrealistic and greedy. W A,41-1- Rte_ 4 /P To: Edina Board of Appeal and Equalization From: Dave & Tami Thompson 5517 Valley Lane, Edina, MN 55439 Date: April 17, 2006 Subject: Appeal of Value of Residence at 5517 Valley Lane Tax History of the Property Tag Year Estimated Market Value Limited Market Value Increase over Prior Year 2000 for 2001 282,100 267,200 2001 for 2002 334,300 289,900 8.5% 2002 for 2003 382,100 318,900 10.0% 2003 for 2004 408,800 357,100 12.0% 2004 for 2005 435,400 410,600 15.0% 2005 for 2006 488,400 472,100 15.0% 2006 for 2007 517,700 t 9.7% Areuments for Reduction in Tax Value: 1) Independent appraisal dated 7/25/05 valued the property at $450,000, which is significantly less than the city valuation. 2) This is only a three bedroom home. It is very difficult to sell three bedroom homes in this neighborhood for more than $425,000. 3) Valley Lane is a thoroughfare road. As traffic in the southwest metro has become more congested in recent years, Valley Lane traffic has become much busier and faster as people use it as an alternative to the 62 Crosstown. This has adversely affected the property values on the street. Homes that have been listed for sale on this corridor have taken much longer to sell. We don't believe that this factor has been adequately considered in the property value. 4) According to an April 12, 2006 article in the StarTribune ......... the median home sale price in March rose only 2.7 percent over last year, to $225,000. Annual price increases peaked at 11.8 percent in 2001; they dipped to 6 percent in 2005;' Other sources indicate that market prices were up much less than these averages for homes above $400,000. Request for Reduction in Tax Value: We request that the board reduce the value of this property to $462,150 for the 2006 tax year payable in 2007. This is calculated by taking the July 2005 appraisal of $450,000 and increasing it by 2.7 %, which is the average rate of valuation increase according to the StarTribune. City of Edina, Minnesota 4801 West 50" Street ■ Edina, MN 55424 -1394 ■`(952) 826 -0365 • FAX: (952) 826 -0389 ■ TTY: (952) 826 -0379 2006 Notice of Valuation and Classification For taxes payable in 2007 — This is NOT-a- bill Property Identification Number: 05- 116 -21 -13 -0057,, Property Location: 5517 Valley La David J Thompson Tami D Thompson 5517 Valley Ln Edina MN 55439 -1238 The values indicated are for the January 2, 2006 Assessment for taxes payable in 2007. The prior year data has been included for comparison purposes. 20 Property Classification: 05 for 2006 Taxes RESIDENTIAL 2006 for 2007 Taxes RESIDENTIAL HOMESTEAD HOMESTEAD Estimated Market Value: $488,400 $517,700 Limited Market Value: $472,100 Value of New Improvements: This Old House Exclusion: Taxable Market Value: $472,100 $517,700 Est. Market Value Deferred: 1 — Call Local Assessor It you believe the 2006 estimated market value and/or classification of this property has been determined incorrectly, you—Ka- ou have the right to make an appeal. Inquiries concerning valuation or property class should first be directed to your Assessor's Office. This is an important first step of the appeals process. Many times questions and concerns can be addressed informally, prior to the Local Board meetings. You should contact the Edina Assessor's Office at (952) 826 -0365. Appeal Option 2 — Boards of Appeal and Equalization _ .,..:. �,,...,. ovaru:vr mppeai ana tauaiizatiott I 7 77777777 f you believe your value or classification is incorrect, you may bring your case to the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization. You may appear in person, by letter, or be represented by an authorized agent. Please call your Assessor's Office first, an appointment may be necessary. It is required that you first attend the Local Board prior to attending the County Board of Appeal. The Board convenes at 5:30 PM, on Monday, April 17, 2006, in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, MN 55424. If you wish to make an appeal before the Local Board.- an application is required no later than Friday, April 7 2006. Step: #2 HenneAin County Boar of iXppeal and' Equalization' The County Board of Appeal and Equalization begins on June 19 2006 at the Hennepin County Government Center, 300 South Sixth St., Minneapolis, MN 55487. Application is required no later than June 7, 2006. To appear before the County Board. _you must have annaarpd hafnro fha r,:.., „s =,, . -- . _ _ _ _. _ __ — .. 348 -7050. ITTY (612) 348 -3461 T on 3 — Minnesota Tax Court ror information on the Tax Court, contact: Minnesota Tax Court, 25 Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Room 245, St. Paul, MN 55115 Phone 651 - 296 -2806 [TTY Relay (800) 627-3529 Teletype] Web site www taxcourt.state.mn.us SMW.1 Claims Division You may take your case directly to the Small Claims Division of Tax Court if: • The assessor's estimated market value of your property is less than $300,000; or • The entire parcel is classified as a residential homestead (1a or 1b) and the parcel contains no more than one dwelling unit; or • The entire property is classified as an agricultural homestead (2a or 1b); or ■ You are appealing the denial of a current year application for homestead classification of your property. Regular Diivision • Regardless of your property type or the nature of your claim, you always have the option to file directly with the Regular Division of Tax Court. ■ You have until April 30, 2007, to file an appeal with the Small Claims Division or the Regular Division of Tax Court for your 2006 valuation and classification. LOCATED AT: 5517 VALLEY LANE EDINA, MN 55439 FOR: JP MORGAN CHASE BANK 7301 OHMS LANE, SUITE 405 EDINA, MN BORROWER: DAVID THOMPSON AS OF: July 25, 2005 BY: STEPHEN K. KLOPP steveklopp -n•uno com ® 812.819 7780 1 (f) 612 - 798 -5182 I FROM: GLEN THORSON JP MORGAN CHASE BANK 7301 OHMS LANE, SUITE 405 EDINA, MN. File Number: D.THOMPSON In accordance with your request, I have personally inspected and appraised the real property at: 5517 VALLEY LANE EDINA, MN 55439 The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value 'of the subject property, as improved. The property rights appraised are the fee simple interest in the site and improvements. In my opinion, the estimated market value of the property as of July 25, 2005 is: $450,000 Four Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars The attached report contains the description, analysis and supportive data for the conclusions, final estimate of value, descriptive photographs, limiting conditions and appropriate certifications. STEPHEN K.KLOPP ((. 0 612 -619 -7760 (1) 612- 798 -51 J FannieMa t Desktop Underwriter Quantitative Analysis Appraisal Report File No.: D.THOMPSON i rna DUMMAKY ANNHAISAL —tP IS INTENDED FOR USE BY THE LENDER/CLIENT FOR A MORTGAGE FINANCE TRANSACTION ONLY. Property Address 5517 VALLEY LANE City EDINA State MN Zip Code 55439 Legal Description LOT 2 BLOCK 4 EDINA VALLEY ESTATES 2ND ADDITION County HENNEPIN Assessors Parcel No. 05- 116 -21 -13 -0057 Tax Year 2005 R.E.Taxos S 4674.95 Special Assessments S N/A Borrower DAVID THOMPSON CumanOwner DAVID THOMPSON Occupant: X Owner I ITenant I Vacant NeiclhborhDod or Project Name EDINA VALLEY ESTATES Pra'ect Type PUD I lCondominium HORS N/A /Mo. Sales Price $ REFINANCE Date of Sale N/A Descri lion/$ amount of loan char estconcessions to be aid b seller N/A Pro d his appraised X Fee Simple Leasehold Ma Reference 119 -D4 Census Tract 239.01 Note: Race and the racial coon asition of the Eel hborhood are not a sisal factors. Location X NUrban' Over 5 % Built up Growth rate Rapid X Suburban Rural 25.75% Under 25% Stable Sknv Property values Increasing X Stable Declining Demand/supply Shortage XQ In balance Over supply Marketn lime X Under 3 rtros. 3 -6 mos. Ova 6 mos. Single family houni iI� j (y s) 250 Law 20 1300 High 60 Predominant PRICE AG ) 200 Low N W 400 High 45 Predominant Neighborhood boundaries THE NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARIES ARE HWY 62 TO THE NORTH HWY 100 TO THE EAST, VALLEY VIEW ROAD TO THE WEST AND 70TH STREET TO THE SOUTH 425 40 300 20 Dimensions 90 X 135 Site area 12,150 Sq.Ft. Shape RECTANGLE Specific zoning classification and description R -1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Zoning compliance XO Legal O Legal nonconforming (Grandlathered use); LJ Illegal, attach description No zoning Highest and best use of subject proper as im roved or as o osed er tans and s - ;fications : X Present use Other use. attach description. Utilities Public Other Public Other Electricity X 100 AMPS Water O Gas X Sanitary sewer X Off- sitelrtproverrients Type Public Private Street ASPHALT X C3 Alley NO El- Are there arry apparent adverse site condi ' s easements, encroachmerxs. special assessments. slide areas, etc.)? I Yes No If Yes, attach description. Source(s) used for physical characteristics of pro Interior and exterior inspection X Exterior inspection from street 0 Previous appraisal Iles X MLS X Assessment and lax records Prior Ins ection Pro owns Other be): No. of Stories 2 Type(Det./AiLl DETACH. Exterior Wags BRK/HRDBD Roof Surface ASPHALT Manufactured Housing Yes X No Does the era conform to the nei hborhood in terms of style, condition. and construction materla k7 X Yes No II No, attach description. Are there any apparent physical deficiencies or conditions that would affect the soundness or structural integrity of the improvements or the livability of the property? Yes X No If Yes, attach description. Are them any apparent adverse environmental conditions (hazardous wastes, toxic substances, etc.) present in the improvements, on the site, or in the immediate vicinity of the subject Yes X No It Yes, atach description. I researched the subject market area for comparable listings and sales that are the most similar and proximate to the subject property. My research revealed a total of 39 sales ranging in sales price from S 282,900 to $ 1,250,000. My research revealed a total of 26 listings ranging in list price from S 285.000 to $ 800.000. The analysis of the cM2rable sales below reflects market reaction to significant variations between the sales and the subject propertv. FEATURE I SUBJECT SALE1 SALE SALE 5517 VALLEY LANE Address EDINA 6533 LIMERICK DRIVE EDINA 6501 CREEK DRIVE EDINA 5616 HILLSIDE COURT EDINA Proximity to Subject 2 BLOCKS 1 BLOCK 4 BLOCKS Sales Price S REFINANCE $ 428,000 $ 440,000 $ 455,000 PdcefGross Liv. Area f 0.000 f 187.230 S 214.010 $ 199.210 Data a Vert. Soros MLS /COUNTY MLS /COUNTY MLS/COUNTY VALUE ADJUSTAENTS Sales or Financing Concessions DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OsM. FHA NO POINTS DESCRIPTION •HS FHA NO POINTS DESCRIPTION •tis FHA NO POINTS Dam of SaleRme N/A 09/15/2004 07/29/2004 10/28/2004 Location SUBURBAN /GD SUBURBAN /GD SUBURBAN /GD ' SUBURBAN /GD ' Site 12150SF /RES 17836SF /RES 11340SF /RES 12798SF /RES View RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL Design (St*) 2 STORY /AVE 2 STORY /AVE 2 STORY /AVE 2 STORY /AVE Actual Age (Yrs.) 1967/38 36 YRS 38 YRS 38 YRS Condition AVE/GD AVE/GD AVE/GD AVE/GD Above Grade . Room Count Gross ' ' Area Tad ee- ; Baths tar emm Baths 9 : 4 : 2.50 -3,000 2.28 S . Ft: -8.950 Tad Bane Baeu 9 4 : 2.50 3,000 2,056 S . Ft: -3,200 Tad Bias Baths 8 L.4 2.50 : .9,000 2 284 So. Ft: -8,900 8 3 : 2.50 1,928 5 . Ft. Basemetand Fnshed Rooms Below Grade FULL BSMT 2RMS NO BATH FULL BSMT 2RMS BATH -0,000 FULL BSMT 2RMS NO BATH FULL BSMT UNFINISHED 5,000 Garage/Ca Garage/Carpon 2 CAR ATTACH. 2 CAR ATTACH. : 2 CAR ATTACH. 2 CAR ATTACH. PORCH DECK 5 000 DECK 5.000 PATIO 6,000 FIREPLACE 2 FIREPLACES -3,000 FIREPLACE 2 FIREPLACES : -3,000 Net Ad . toter X - : $ 12,950 1 1 « X - S 1,200 . 7X- : S 4,900 Adjusted Sates Price of Com arables Gross: 5.4% Net: .9.0% S 415,050 Gross: 2.5% Net: -0.3% S 438,800 Gross: 5.5% Net -1.1% S 450.100 Date of Prior Sales 11/10/2000 09/15/2004 07/29/2004 10/28/2004 Price of Prior Sales I S 369,0001$ 428.0001$ 440 000 S 455,000 Analysis of any current agreement of sale. option, or listing of the subject property and analysis of the prior sales of subject and comparables: THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN LISTED OR SOLD IN THE PAST THIRTY SIX MONTHS. Summary of sales comparison and value conclusion: EQUAL WEIGHT WAS GIVEN TO ALL THREE COMPARABLES. THE VALUE RANGE SUPPORTS THE SUBJECTS ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE. ALL THREE COMPARABLES SOLD OVER SIX MONTHS AGO, DUE TO A LACK OF COMPARABLE SALES IN THIS STABLE NEIGHBORHOOD NO TIME ADJUSTMENT WAS NECESSARY. ALL THREE COMPARABLES WERE SIMILAR IN QUALITY DESIGN LOCATION AND WERE CONSIDERED THE BEST AVAILABLE. This appraisal is made X 'as -is', or U suojoa to completion per plans and specillratio s on the basis of a hypothetical condition that the improvements have been completed, or sub ect to the lollowin re airs, alterations a conditions: BASED ON AN X EXTERIOR INSPECTION FROM THE STREET OR AN LJINTER1ORAND0aERjDRiNsPEcnM I ESTIMATE THE MARKET VALUE. AS DEFINED. OF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUELIECT OF THIS REPORT TO BE S 450,000 , AS OF 07/25/2005 10CH. PAGE t OF 3 Fannie Mae Form 2055 9.96 woes,! coq X1 u&—. raa134,a127 w...u.,e Desktop Underwriter Quantitative Analysis Appraisal Report File No.: D.THOMPSON Project Information for PUDs (if applicable) - -Is the developerlbuilder in control of the Home Owners' Association (HOA)T 0 Yes U No Provide the following information for PUDs only it the developerlbuilder is in control of the HOA and the subject property is an attached dwelling unit: Taal number of phases N/A Total number of units N/A Total number of units sold N/A Total number of units tended N/A Total number of units for sale N/A Data Source(s) N/A Was the project created by the conversion of existing buildings into a PUDT ❑ Yes U No If yes, stale date of conversion: N/A Does the project contain any muid- dwelling units? o Yes ❑ No Data Source N/A Are the common elements completed? ❑ Yes ❑ No If No, describe status of completion: N/A Are any common elements leased to or by the Home Owners' Association? LJ Yes 0 No If yes, attach addendum des=rental d options. Describe common elements and recreational facilities: N/A Project Information for Condominiums (if applicable) - -Is the developerlbuilder in control of the Home Owners' Associa U Yes U No Provide the following information far all Cemdartinium projects: Total number of phases N/A Total number of units N/A Total number of units sold N/A Taal number of units rented N/A Total number of units for sale N/A Data Source(s) N/A Was the project created by the conversion of existing buildings into a condominium? U Yes No If date of corrversiom Project Type: O Primary Residence ❑ Second Home a Recreational ❑ Row or Townhouse Garden ❑ Midrise Highrise Condition of the project, quality of construction, unit mix, etc.: N/A Are the common elements compleledT U Yes U No If No. describe status of completion: N/A Are any common elements leased to or by the Home Owners' Association? U Yes LJ No If yes, attach addendum describing rental terms and options. Describe common elements and recreational facilities N/A PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL: The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value of the real property that is the subject of this report based on a quantitative sales comparison analysis for use in the mortgage finance transaction. DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE: The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: (1) buyer and seller are typically motivated; (2) both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what he considers his own best interest; (3) a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; (4) payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and (5) the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions' granted by anyone associated with the sale. Adjustments to the comparables must be made for special or creative financing or sales concessions. No adjustments are necessary for those costs which are normally paid by sellers as a result of tradition or law in a market area; these costs are readily identifiable since the seller pays these costs in virtually all sales transactions. Special or creative financing adjustments can be made to the comparable property by comparisons to financing terms offered by a third party institutional lender that is not already involved in the property or transaction. Any adjustment should not be calculated on a mechanical dollar for dollar cost of the financing or concession but the dollar amount of any adjustment should approximate the market's reaction to the financing or concessions based on the appraiser's judgment. STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS AND APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: The appraiser's certification that appears in the appraisal report is subject to the following conditions: 1. The appraiser will not be responsible for matters of a legal nature that affect either the property being appraised or the title to it. The appraiser assumes that the title is good and marketable and, therefore, will not render any opinions about the title. The property is appraised on the basis of it being under responsible ownership. 2. The appraiser has provided any required sketch in the appraisal report to show approximate dimensions of the improvements and the sketch is included only to assist the reader of the report in visualizing the property and understanding the appraiser's determination of its size. 3. The appraiser will not give testimony or appear in court because he or she made an appraisal of the property in question, unless specific arrangements to do so have been made beforehand. 4. The appraiser has noted in the appraisal report any adverse conditions (such as, but not limited to, needed repairs, the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, etc.) observed during the inspection of the subject property or that he or she became aware of during the normal research involved in performing the appraisal. Unless otherwise stated in the appraisal report, the appraiser has no knowledge of any hidden or unapparent conditions of the property or adverse environmental conditions (including the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, etc.) that would make the property more or less valuable, and has assumed that there are no such conditions and makes no guarantees or warranties, expressed or implied, regarding the condition of the property. The appraiser will not be responsible for any such conditions that do exist or for any engineering or testing that might be required to discover whether such conditions exist. Because the appraiser is not an expert in the field of environmental hazards, the appraisal report must not be considered as an environmental assessment of the property. 5. The appraiser obtained the information, estimates, and opinions that were expressed in the appraisal report from sources that he or she considers to be reliable and believes them to be true and correct. The appraiser does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of such items that were furnished by other parties. 6. The appraiser will not disclose the contents of the appraisal report except as provided for in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. 7. The appraiser must provide his or her prior written consent before the lender /client specified in the appraisal report can distribute the appraisal report (including conclusions about the property value, the appraiser's identity and professional designations, and references to any professional appraisal organizations or the firm with which the appraiser is associated) to anyone other than the borrower; the mortgagee or its successors and assigns; the mortgage insurer; consultants; professional appraisal organizations; any slate or federally approved financial institution; or any department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States or any state or the District of Columbia; except that the lender /client may distribute the report to data collection or reporting service(s) without having to obtain the appraiser's prior written consent. The appraiser's written consent and approval must also be obtained before the appraisal can be conveyed by anyone to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media. 8. The appraiser has based his or her appraisal report and valuation conclusion for an appraisal that is subject to completion per plans and specifications on the basis of a hypothetical condition that the improvements have been completed. 9. The appraiser has based his or her appraisal report and valuation conclusion for an appraisal that is subject to completion, repairs, or alterations on the assumption that completion of the improvements will be performed in a workmanlike manner. 10CH. PAGE 2 OF 3 Fannie Mae Form 2055 &96 ft 0 w-1" W bled 8W Z..In /u.�[moR Undo 170 — ERTIF rwriter Quantitative Analysis Appraisal RepOft File No.: D.THOMPSON ' ICATION The Appraiser certifies and agrees that. 1. I performed this appraisal by (1) personally inspecting from the street the subject properly and neighborhood and each of the comparable sales (unless I have otherwise indicated in this report that l also inspected the interior of the subject property): (2) collecting, confirming• and analyzing data from reliable public and /or private sources; and (3) reporting the results of my inspection and analysis in this summary appraisal report. I further certify that I have adequate information about the physical characteristics of the subject property and the comparable sales to develop this appraisal. 2. 1 have researched and analyzed the comparable sales and offerings /listings in the subject market area and have reported the comparable sales in this report that are the best available for the subject property. I further certify that adequate comparable market data exists in the general.market area to develop a reliable sales comparison analysis for the subject property. 3. 1 have.taken into consideration the factors that have an impact on value in my development of the estimate of market value in the appraisal report. I further certify that I have noted any apparent or known adverse conditions in the subject improvements, on the subject site, or on any site within the immediate vicinity of the subject property of which I am aware, have considered these adverse conditions in my analysis of the property value. to the extent that I had market evidence to support them, and have commented about the effect of the adverse conditions on the marketability of the subject property. I have not knowingly withheld any significant information from the appraisal report and I believe, to the best of my knowledge, that all statements and information in the appraisal report are true and correct. 4. 1 stated in the appraisal report only my own personal, unbiased, and professional analysis, opinions, and conclusions, which are subject only to the contingent and limiting conditions specified in this form. 5. 1 have no present or prospective interest.in the property that is the subject of this report. and I have no present or prospective personal interest or bias with respect to the participants in the transaction. I did not base, either partially or completely, my analysis and /or the estimate of market value in the appraisal report on the race, color, religion, sex, age, marital status, handicap, familial status• or national origin of either the prospective owners or occupants of the subject property or of the present owners or occupants of the properties in the vicinity of the subject property or on any other basis prohibited by law. 6. 1 have no present or contemplated future interest in the - subject property, and neither my current or future employment nor my compensation for performing this appraisal is contingent on the appraised value of the property. 7. 1 was not required to report a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client or any related party, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a specific result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event in order to receive my compensation and /or employment for performing the appraisal. 1 did not base the appraisal report on a requested minimum valuation• a specific valuation, or the need to approve a specific mortgage loan. 8. 1 estimated the market value of the real property that is the subject of this report based,on the sales comparison approach to value. I further certify that I considered the cost and income approaches to value, but. through mutual agreement with the client, did not develop them, unless I have noted otherwise in this report. 9. 1 performed this appraisal as a limited appraisal, subject to the Departure Provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were adopted and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and that were in the place as of the effective date of the appraisal (unless I have otherwise indicated in this report that the appraisal is a complete appraisal, in which case, the Departure Provision does not apply). 10. 1 acknowledge that an estimate of a reasonable time for exposure in the open market is a condition in the definition of market value. The exposure time associated with the estimate of market value for the subject property is consistent with the marketing time noted in the Neighborhood section of this report. The marketing period concluded for the subject property at the estimated market value is also consistent with the marketing time noted in the Neighborhood section. 11. I personally prepared all conclusions and opinions, about the real estate that were set forth in the appraisal report. I further certify that no one provided significant professional assistance to me in the development of this appraisal. SUPERVISORY APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION: If a supervisory appraiser signed the appraisal report• he or she certified and agrees that; I directly supervise the appraiser who prepared the appraisal report, have examined the appraisal report for compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, agree with the statements and conclusions of the appraiser; agree to be bound by the appraiser's certifications numbered 5 through 7 above, and am taking full responsibility for the appraisal and the appraisal report. APPRAISER: Signature: Name: STE EN Company Name: E Comparry Address: Date of ReporYSignature:07 /25/2005 State Certification A: CERTIFIED GENERAL REAL PROP. or State License t: 4002872 State: MN Expiration Date of Certification or License: 08/31/2008 SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (ONLY IF REQUIRED): Signature: Name: Company Name: _ Company Address: Date of Report/Signature: State Certification M or State License Stale: Expiration Date of Certification or License ADDRESS OF PROPERTY APPRAISED: 5517. VALLEY LANE SUPERVISORY APPRAISER: EDINA MN 55439 SUBJECT PROPERTY Did not inspect subject property APPRAISED VALUE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY S 450,000.. Did inspect exterior of subject property from street EFFECTIVE DATE OF APPRAISAL/INSPECTION 07/25/2005 Did inspect interior and exterior of subject property COMPARABLE SALES LENDER/CLIENT: Did not inspect exterior of comparable sales from street 8 Name: GLENN THORSON Did inspect exterior of comparable sales from street Company Name: JP MORGAN CHASE BANK Comparry Address: 7301 OHMS LANE SUITE 405 MINA MN 10CH. PAGE 7 OF J - - Fannie Mae Form 2055 9.96 Roperlury KA ldlrra It6i1[.�Ill rrr.xsM[an . J Reis Valuation SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTO Annr:mni ine FRONT VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY Appraised Date:July 25, 2005 Appraised Value: $ 450,000 REAR VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY STREET SCENE 10, "t �l�r :t- �i 1.V9�� 3 •••��.l+a�we': Arw.irsvPam: "�' •. Ab \: Vt W .. ` A wrr, a Z O H Q U O J n, ti 4 f Gump 3•, i 341.6 HILLSIDE.COURTNi� ' EDIDII4; MN -5S 434. 6533 LIMERICK DRIVE EDMA, MW-55•43.4 a- s• Data.use sOject.to license: ft 0:2004 beLorme. Street ktias -08 ;A 005: n d0o 1000 vw!lv:+iv:delolme,com MN ('I A - -Ej: Data. Zoom 14, -0 N f0 U? rn r` C 0 n o� 14 N co L ri - � r r °[`.r� f• { {.�i �•• � �� d dip. VALLEY Ey 1 al r ry ; ;m• EDIN/l� MN 'S3 #54: 4541 GREEK DIVE IV ryi• HelgPft Perk Ptor-maile Park . cb � � rn S. t a a - %AYAql n Gump 3•, i 341.6 HILLSIDE.COURTNi� ' EDIDII4; MN -5S 434. 6533 LIMERICK DRIVE EDMA, MW-55•43.4 a- s• Data.use sOject.to license: ft 0:2004 beLorme. Street ktias -08 ;A 005: n d0o 1000 vw!lv:+iv:delolme,com MN ('I A - -Ej: Data. Zoom 14, -0 N f0 U? rn r` C 0 n o� 14 N co T Memo To: Mayor and City Council Members From: Assessing Department Date: April 22, 2005 Re: Additional Information Case #2 Enclosed is additional information delivered April 21, 2005 by the homeowner for Case #2. Please include this information with the Assessor's Narratives for Cases 5 & 6 previously delivered as Case Book additions for the April 25, 2005 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting. Thank you! F Mark Abramovitz 6804 Brook Drive Edina, MN 55439 Via Hand Delivery April 20, 2005 Edina City Council 4801 West 50" Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear City Council Members: REC__... ---I APR 212005 Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you on April 11, 2005. As I indicated during my presentation I would submit to you photos and other pertinent information regarding residential property located on Brook Drive. These homes are also included on the matrix, provided previously. The Assessor's office made available to me a sample of home sales (attached) that were used in determining 2006 property tax valuations. The Council indicated that new home sales are used as a measure to evaluate the market and to assist in determining property valuations. This list contains five homes that were sold in the summer of 2004 at prices approximating the price of my home ($507,000). The increase in the valuation of these five properties between 2004 and 2005 is approximately 6.5 %, which mirrors the increase in valuation of my home and other homes in my neighborhood. However the increase in the proposed valuation between 2005 and 2006 for these five homes is 12 %, similar to other homes in the area, but much less than the proposed increase in valuation for my home, which approximates 20 %. Therefore I believe that the appropriate increase in property tax valuation for my home for 2006 is on the magnitude of 10 to 12 %. Thank you for your consideration. 11,,4 -9 Address PID Square Footage 6804 Brook 05- 116 -21 -44 -0041 1,526 11 2:18 AM Acreage Comments 0.638 LakeShore - rambler w 'i IPA war. -• V • . s� VA Address 6801 Brook x. • i a' mss, li PID 05- 116 -21 -44 -0032 Square Footage 1,996 2:17 AN Acreage 0.9040 L uiaaiJ 1 C 1 ./r/ �'r �� j'� 17 Fj- 45 -•• .1 ���'0 z �'�±`' /�v!�� ' =�^#!1 a+� R a'l�7 '.�: ti3t - /S�� (A,;'� ,.�, IV i rthX y ALU 61 ZoKS PDS EXPANDED ADMIN- INCLUDES MORE RES- CHAR -DTL I774S HOUSE 0 STREET bW48 SALE DATE SALE --------------------------------- 5872 70TH ST W 200408 $451,500 2004 760E dy 2po(, 6221 LBALDER LA 200407 $472-500 6208 200406 $525,000 3 U-0 S "S .1 6213 200406 $671,175 5709 BROOK DR 200408 $493, 000 110 4z3 5 tro �' 4i�f fTO !t.t o 6804 200406 $507,000 6716 CAHIL,L RD 200409 $692,000 6DO4 CHAPEL DR 200310 $381,900 5900 200409 $387,000 6501 CREEK DR 200404 $407,000 6501 200407 $440,000 6509 200312 $390,000 5849 CREEK VALLEY RD 200408 $420,100 6604 GLEASON Rd 200310 $635.520 6604 200404 5649,000 6717 200407 $510,000 1463 Ore Uzq ,ro 4L4 9 2 6624 GLEASON TER 200311 $908,000 — — -- " - "- -- 6621 HILLSIDE LA 200409 $387,500 6620 200408 $595,400 i , s 6801 200406 $639,000 7013 LEE VALLEY C.IR 200407 $675,000 6533 LIMERICK DR 200409 $418,000 6523 200407 $409,000 i 6504 200405 6409 LIMERICK. LA 200407 $38T,900 5512 14CGUIRE RD 200404 $49b.000 J" - [OX56%,4trD 12.1 6521 NORDIC DR 200404 $343 000 - 6609 ^C;"S ,�ioi19, °00 6513 SCANDIA RD 200404 $445,1.0 6713 TRACY Avu 200409 $525, G'0'jUyi ;ov 4 3t2av . 3o Seti 5513 VAURY LA 200406 $459,9 64P.0 VALLEY VIEW ILD 200409 $278,00. iraCP de r. ■ CITY of EDINA Board Appeal and Equalisation nnnnnn//,\ Assessor's Commentary Property ID Number: 05- 116 -21 -11 -0100 Date: April 14 2005 Property Address: 6307 Colonial Court Owner/Agent Name: Christopher & Cheryl Pedrolie 2005 EMV $397,800 Requested Value None Requested Recommended Value $370,000 Comments: Subject property is a dormered 1 1/2 story, built in 1987, with an attached 2 stall garage, and a screened porch. There is no finish in the basement, and it is not a walkout. The main floor has the laundry room and a half bath as you enter from the garage. There is also access through the screened porch and a French door into the informal dining area, as well as a front door entry. A great room with a fireplace, the kitchen, and a main floor master bedroom complete the first floor. The master bedroom has a bath with whirlpool tub, shower, double sinks, and water closet. Upstairs there is a full bath and 2 bedrooms. Part of the second floor is not finished. The property is on a cul -de -sac off Valley View Road, and it backs to Highway 62. The site is 14,077 sq. ft. There is a total of 2055 finished square feet above grade. Because of the location, I used 2 sales on Valley View Road that also back to Highway 62. The style on those 2 were split level and 2 story. A third comparable that is 1 1/2 story style, and is the 2nd lot in from Highway 62 was used, although it was older than the subject. The information submitted by the owner was not used, as we do not deal with taxes. During my visit to the home, the owner was comparing her home to 2 others in her cul -de -sac that are larger than hers. Having briefly reviewed the data on those 2 homes, I have concluded that they should be looked at for next year's assessment. I also compared the value of this property to the one next door at 6305 that is very similar but slightly larger. The sales comparison approach supports a value of $370,000 for the subject, and that would also equalize the subject with the property next door. Bev Moos, Appraiser Land $ 109,600 Building $ 248,000 Total $ 357,600 Value 2004 History 2003 $ 91,400 $ 236,700 $ 328,100 2002 90,900 239,200 330,100 Sales 9/93 $ 215,000 History 7/99 $ 255,000 Comparables for 6307 Colonial Court Comparable #1 located at 6319 Valley View Road is within 3 houses of the subject and backs to Highway 62. It is a split level style house (although MLS calls it a 2 story), built in 1988, of superior construction, and with a 3 stall garage. Upward adjustments were made for baths, size above grade, and deck vs. screen porch for the subject. Downward adjustments were indicated for the quality, basement area and basement finish, garage stall of 3 vs. 2, fireplace count, and walkout. Comparable #2 is within a block at 6329 Valley View Road. The style of this home is 2 story, built in 1995, with a very large deck, and 3 stall garage. Plus adjustments to the property's sale price were made for a difference in baths, square footage above grade, and basement size. Adjustments in a negative direction were made for lot size, age, basement finish, and garage stall. Comparable #3 is located on the east side of Highway 100 and is the 2 "d lot in on the north side of Highway 62. The combination of being a dormered 1 Y2 story style like the subject, plus its proximity to the highway, is why this comparable was included. It is older than the subject, but an adjustment was made for that difference. Increases to the sale price of the comparable were made for site size, quality of the construction, age, baths, and basement area. Minuses were calculated for a difference in size, for the basement finish, and for a greater number of fireplaces. � S CASE #5 COMPARABLE SALE #2 ADDRESS: 6327 Valley View Road SALE DATE: 2/05 6/02 SALE PRICE: $382,000 $302,000 COMPARABLE SALE #3 } _ i Fl 7 ADDRESS: 6308 Concord Avenue SALE DATE: 8/04 SALE PRICE: $380,000 I.•'' T� ,� �: ." � /, •% � w ai C . CITY OF EDINA Board Appeal and Equalization ^^ Assessor's Commentary Property ID Number: 30- 117 -21 -12 -0079 Date: April 13 2005 Property Address: 421 Tyler Ave Owner/Agent Name: 2005 EMV $286,400 Requested Value 250 000- 265 000 Recommended Value Sustain at $286,400 Comments: Subject property is a 4 level split style with a 2 stall tuck -under garage that was built in 1959. It is situated on a lot that is 100'x 108' at the corner of Maloney Ave. and Tyler. Maloney Ave has a fair amount of residential traffic. Entry is on the same grade of the garage, is tiled, has an updated 3/4 bath, and provides an open area to either go down to the family room or up to the main living area. The family room is sheetrock and carpeted, with a gas fireplace. A laundry and mechanical area is in the unfinished portion of the family room level. The living room has a gas fireplace, and the living and dining rooms have a trayed ceiling and hardwood floors. There is a sliding glass door from the dining room to the patio. The patio is badly cracked and contributes minimal value. The kitchen was redone in 2001 with maple cabinets and tile floor, and it has an informal dining area. Three bedrooms and 1 3/4 baths are on the uppermost level. Both baths have been updated with some new fixtures and bath vanity, although the 3/4 bath shower is not yet completed. Since the purchase in 2000 the updates have included the kitchen, the baths, all new 6 panel doors, all new windows and sliding glass door, redoing or replacing flooring, new roof, new furnace and air conditioner, and the gas conversion of the fireplaces. My search for comparables was for 4 level splits that have tuck -under garages, but I did include a split entry referenced by the owner, as well as a 4 level of different layout, but in close proximity to the subject. The valuation indicated by the sales comparison approach is $325,000, so we recommend that the present value be sustained at $286,400, with a valuation review for 2006 placed on this appraiser's calendar. Bev Moos. ADDraiser Land $ 74,700 Building $ 189,400 Total $ 264,100 Value 2004 History 2003 $ 74,700 $ 159,100 $ 233,800 2002 61 500 $170,400 $231,900 Sales 6/1977 $ 64,000 History 7/2000 $197,000 Comparables for 421 Tyler Ave. Comparable #1 was chosen because of its close proximity to the subject and because it is a 4 level split style home. The garage is attached, rather than a tuck- under, but the utility is the same. The site is larger, but is on a small pond. It was sold by an original owner, and no mention of updating was indicated. It has 2 bedrooms and one full bath on the upper level, with 2 bedrooms and a 3/4 bath on the lower level. This home was built in 1957 and has 178 lesser sq. ft. above grade, as well as lesser finished area below grade. Comparable #2 was referenced by the owners as one that they were familiar with and felt would be a good indicator of value for their property. I considered this sale, even though it is a slightly less desirable style as a split entry with a 2 stall tuck -under garage. It is an older sale from January 2003, so required a larger adjustment for time to bring it to the assessment date of January 2005. The property is 168 sq. ft. smaller than the subject above grade and slightly larger below grade. According to MLS the home had new kitchen appliances and flooring, hardwood floors and 6 panel doors on the upper level. 3 bedrooms and one full bath are up, and a half bath was on the lower level. The site is smaller, so an upward adjustment was required. Comparable #3 was used because it had 2 sales within 6 months, during which time the home was remodeled. Since the subject property has had extensive remodeling, I felt this would be a good comparable. This comparable is of the same style and layout and is located across the street from a school, which would generate a fair amount of residential traffic. The sale in October 2003 was for $315,000, while the sale after remodeling was in April 2004 for $404,000. According to MLS the remodel included a new kitchen with granite counter and new appliances. No mention of any other changes was mentioned, and no permits were pulled. There are 4 bedrooms and 1 3/4 baths up, but 3 of the bedrooms are quite small. The lower level has about the same amount of square footage of finish, but has only a half bath. The lot is similar in size at 81 x 125. Comparable #4 sold October 2003 for $317,000 and is the same style as the subject. It was built in 1957, has 3 bedrooms and 1 3/4 baths up, like the subject, and had new kitchen counters and floor mentioned as updates. The home is 200+ sq. ft. larger above grade, with an equal area of finish in the lower level. 6120 Zenith is close to Hwy. 62, so has a lesser appeal for location. Since the purchase, over $80,000 of permits have been pulled. Comparable #5 was not calculated with adjustments to arrive at an estimate of value for the subject. It is referenced because it was a sale on a busy street, had an original owner with few, if any updates, is a little smaller, built 1959, and has 3 bedrooms and 1 %x baths up, with no other bath in the lower level. With a sale price of $267,800 from March 2004, plus the differences noted above, it supports the value of the subject. CASE #6 SUBJECT 421 TYLER AVE COMPARABLE SALE #1 ADDRESS: 309 Griffit St SALE DATE: May 2004 SALE PRICE: $313,500 CASE #6 COMPARABLE SALE #2 ADDRESS: 416 Harrison Ave SALE DATE: January 2003 SALE PRICE: $245,000 COMPARABLE SALE #3 ADDRESS: 7133 Cornelia Dr SALE DATE: April 2004 SALE PRICE: $404,000 CASE #6 COMPARABLE SALE #4 ADDRESS: 6120 Zenith Ave S SALE DATE: October 2003 SALE PRICE: $317,000 COMPARABLE SALE #5 SALE DATE: March 2004 SALE PRICE: $267,800 Lei Metropolitan Council Employment Forecasts Regional Development Framework Adopted January 14, 2004 City or Township 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Reconvened Meeting 2005 BOARD CITY OF EDINA OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION April 25, 2005 MARKET VALUES SUMMARY 5:00 P.M. SITE ADDRESS 2005 ORIGINAL 2005 REQUESTED STAFF RECOMMEN- COMMENTS BOARD ACTION VOTE +/-CHANGE ORIGINAL CASE APPLICANT PID PROPERTY NO. TYPE Creek Valley Road $ 406,800 $ 365,000 DATION $ 406,800 LM/4S H-0 $ 4 0 Q • NCO 1 Marie M Anderegg 05- 116 -21 -24 -0004 R 15848 6804 Brook Drive $ 452,800 $ 415,470 $ 452,800 AA L-VV\ y- _G '4 2 Mark & Usha 05- 116 -21-44 -0041 R Abramovitz Edinborough Way #6105 $ 178,000 $ 100,000 $ 178,000 LW hV- V -0 I-7 8, MO 3 Joan McMillan 32- 028 -24 -34 -0706 X 17601 6103 Jeffrey Lane $ 473,500 $ 400,000 $ 447,100 A3/ � « 4`0 (4 -It ) N) Richard N & Laura 32- 117 -21 -23 -0037 R 4 B Kuyath Inspected by staff �,��.L�� Cheryl & 5 Christopher 05- 116 -21 -11 -0100 R 6307 Colonial Court $ 397,800 not specified $ 370,000 4/12/05. Assessor's review submitted Pedrolie Inspected by staff A- .S 6 Richard & Kathy 30- 117 -21 -12 -0079 R 421 Tyler Ave $ 2861400 $250 000- $265000 $ 286,400 4/12/05. Assessors Elkin , review submitted 6708 Point Drive $ 807, 800 $ 742,000 $ 807,800 Letter received 4/7/2005 after deadline -1 - As j Bruce D &Susan 7 30- 028 -24-42 -0024 R Lee McCarthy 7449 Cahill Road Withdrawn Withdrawn Withdrawn Withdrawn No action required 8 Jayson Smith 08- 116 -21-41 -0014 1 Industrial Prop 5400 West 77th St $ 1,835,500 not specified $ 1,835,500 9 Bradley Bakke 08- 116 -21 -11 -0018 A Apartment Prop 4301 Valley View Road $ 557,800 not specified $ 557,800 10 Bradley Bakke 30- 028 -24 -12 -0063 A Apartment Prop 5330 France Ave S $ 959,300 not specified $ 959,300 11 Bradley Bakke 18- 028 -24-44 -0113 A Apartment Prop Main Street Partners, LLP $ 1,689,000 $ 1,225,000 $ 1,689,000 Jim Maciej 31- 028 -24-41 -0008 1 12 Industrial Prop 4,444 West 76th St 7400 Edinborough Way #5308 $ 313,400 $ 293,600 $ 313,400 13 Ray & Patricia 32- 028 -24 -32 -0474 X DeMont 5615 Schaefer Road $ 1,010,800 not specified $ 1,010,800 Letter received 4/8/2005 after deadline 14 Cathy McKay 31- 117 -21 -14 -0037 R Letter received 15 Virginia S Thomas 31- 117 -21 -11 -0001 R 6228 Parkwood Road $ 698,500 not specified $ 698,500 4/11/2005 after deadline Letter received 16 Bradley &Lori 08-116 -21 -21 -0060 R 7101 Lanham Lane $ 681,200 not specified $ 681,200 4/11/2005 after deadline Bakke A - Apartment / L- I r �y � 5 ` � I - Industrial, KEY: R - Residential, X - Condominium, City of Edina 2004 vs 2005 Valuation Changes Residential Properties Single Family, Condos and Townhomes Percentage of Change 2004 to 2005 Number of Parcels Percentage of Residential Parcels -20% and down 41 0.2402% -10% to —19% 107 0.6269% -5% to —9% 479 1 2.8066% -1% to -4% 671 3.9316% No Change ' 1128 I 6.6092% +1% to +5% 3678 i ( 21.5504% +6% to +10% 4951 29.0092% +11 % to +19% 4781 28.0131% +20% and up 1231 7.2127% TOTAL 17067 I 100.0000% Parcels where change is 5% or less 6104 35.76% Parcels with declining values 1298 7.61% Parcels with Increasing values 14,641 85.79%