Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2024-09-25 PLAN Packet
Meeting location: Edina City Hall Council Chambers 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Wednesday, September 25, 2024 7:00 PM Participate in the meeting: Watch the meeting on cable TV or at YouTube.com/EdinaTV. Provide feedback during Community Comment by calling 312-535- 8110. Enter access code 2630 751 1196. Password is 5454. Press *3 on your telephone keypad when you would like to get in the queue to speak. A staff member will unmute you when it is your turn. Accessibility Support: The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927- 8861 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Meeting Agenda 4. Approval of Meeting Minutes 4.1. Approve Minutes: September 12, 2024 5. Community Comment During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share issues or concerns that are not scheduled for a future public hearing. Items that are on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board/Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Board/Commission might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. 6. Public Hearings 6.1. A 3-foot height variance from the maximum height requirement of 6 feet to allow a 9-foot-tall fence along France Ave. for owners of 4701, 4703, 4705 and 4707 Meadow Road. 6.2. A Conditional Use permit at 4208 Philbrook Lane for a stem wall with fill pad for a new home to be compliant with FEMA and with zoning variances that include a 4.09 ft setback variance from the 10 ft requirement for a 5.91 ft side yard setback on the west side of the property and for a 22.7% variance from the 50% maximum for Page 1 of 160 exterior basement walls to be 72.7% above grade and therefore counted as a 3rd story. 7. Reports/Recommendations 7.1. Resolution B-24- 09: Finding that the proposed 72nd & France #3 TIF Plan conforms to the general plans for development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. 8. Chair and Member Comments 9. Staff Comments 10. Adjournment Page 2 of 160 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: September 25, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: Planning Commission Agenda Number: 4.1 Prepared By: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Item Type: Minutes Department: Community Development Item Title: Approve Minutes: September 12, 2024 Action Requested: Approve September 12, 2024 meeting minutes Information/Background: Minutes from the September 12, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting. Supporting Documentation: 1. September 12, 2024 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 160 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 1 of 4 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers September 12, 2024 I. Call To Order Chair Bennett called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Alkire, Bornstein, Miranda, Daye, Padilla, Smith, Hahneman, Felt, Jha, and Chair Bennett. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director, and Emily Dalrymple. Absent from the roll call: Youth Commissioner Schultze. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Commissioner Miranda moved to approve the September 12, 2024, agenda. Commissioner Daye seconded the motion. Motion carried. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A. Minutes: Planning Commission, August 14, 2024, and August 28, 2024 Commissioner Daye moved to approve the August 14, 2024, Special Worksession meeting minutes and the August 28, 2024, regular meeting minutes. Commissioner Hahneman seconded the motion. Motion carried. V. Community Comment Chair Bennett introduced Youth Commissioner Adita Jha. Youth Commission Jha thanked Chair Bennett and explained why she wanted to be a Youth Commissioner in Edina. VI. Public Hearings A. Ordinance No. 2024-06; an Ordinance Amendment Concerning the Heritage Preservation Commission and Edina Heritage Landmarks and Update to the Country Club Plan of Treatment Assistant City Planner Dalrymple presented the request for a proposed ordinance amendment concerning the Heritage Preservation Commission and Edina Heritage Landmarks and an update to the Country Club Page 4 of 160 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 2 of 4 Plan of treatment. Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance 2024-06, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Chair Jane Lundquist, Heritage Preservation Commission presented the proposed changes. Ms. Rachel Peterson, Hess, Roise & Company, was at the meeting to help address concerns and questions. Staff answered Commission questions. Public Hearing Mr. Brandon Swanson, 4602 Glasgow, addressed the Commission on the escrow policy. Cheryl Dulos, 4609 Bruce Avenue, addressed the Commission indicating she and her husband have previously given advice and information to the Heritage Preservation Commission and she supported the proposed Ordinance amendment. Commissioner Miranda moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Hahneman seconded the motion. Motion carried. The Commission discussed the proposed Ordinance amendment and felt the changes were appropriate. Some of the Commissioners were not in favor of the proposed escrow fee. Motion Commissioner Alkire moved that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance No. 2024-06 with the changes outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein and conditions as discussed at the Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Daye seconded the motion. Further discussion ensued by the Planning Commission on the escrow fee, adding an alternative to the escrow fee and racial covenants on deeds and deed restrictions. Motion carried 8 ayes, 1 nay (Miranda). The entire meeting discussion can be viewed on the official City website. B. Preliminary Plat with Variance for 5120 and 5124 Hankerson Avenue Director Teague presented the request of 5120 and 5124 Hankerson Avenue for a variance. He reviewed the information for the Planning Commission. Staff answered Commission questions. Appearing for the Applicant Page 5 of 160 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 3 of 4 Mr. Steven Behnke, Donnay Homes, addressed the Commission and answered questions. Public Hearing Ms. Jessica Fitch, 5017 Hankerson, indicated she lives in the area and addressed the Commission on affordability and density. Ms. Elizabeth McDonnell, 5221 Interlachen Boulevard, addressed the Commission indicating her opposition to the rezoning. Commissioner Alkire moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Padilla seconded the motion. Motion carried. The Commission discussed the affordability, density, and concerns of the community. Youth Commission Jha left the meeting during this item. Motion Commissioner Miranda moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the preliminary plat and variance for 5120 and 5124 Hankerson Avenue as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Hahneman seconded the motion. Motion carried 8 ayes, 1 nay (Padilla). Comments by the Commission can be viewed in the official meeting video on the City website. VII. Reports/Recommendations A. 2025 Planning Commission Work Plan Director Teague presented the 2025 Planning Commission Work Plan for discussion. The Commission discussed the work plan. Commissioner Padilla moved to approve the 2025 Planning Commission Work Plan. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion. Motion carried. VIII. Chair and Member Comments Received. IX. Staff Comments None. X. Adjournment Page 6 of 160 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 4 of 4 Commissioner Hahneman moved to adjourn the September 12, 2024, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 10:20 PM. Commissioner Miranda seconded the motion. Motion carried. Page 7 of 160 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: September 25, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: Planning Commission Agenda Number: 6.1 Prepared By: Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner Item Type: Public Hearing Department: Community Development Item Title: A 3-foot height variance from the maximum height requirement of 6 feet to allow a 9-foot-tall fence along France Ave. for owners of 4701, 4703, 4705 and 4707 Meadow Road. Action Requested: A case can be made for approval and denial of this project, see staff report attached. Information/Background: Sec. 36-1255 of the Edina City Code limits fence height to 6 feet in the rear yard area. The four northern most properties between 47th and 48th Streets are requesting fence replacement to achieve a nine-foot height. The fence would consist of an 8 ft tall, solid wall fence with a 1 ft trellis top for an over-all height of 9 ft as measured from grade to the top of the fence. The purpose of the request is due to improvements to be implemented along France Ave. Metro Transit is currently in the process of converting bus line 6, which runs in part on France Avenue from 44th and France to the Southdale Transit station, to a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) E-line. Better together public input Supporting Documentation: 1. Staff Report 2. 47th station 3. Engineering Memo 4. Applicant Submittal 5. 58th and62nd Stations Page 8 of 160 The subject properties front Meadow Road with their rear lot lines adjacent to France Ave. The homes along Meadow Road sit at lower elevations to France Ave. Currently there are 6 ft fences along all back yard properties between 47-48th St. west of France Ave. Sec. 36-1255 of the Edina City Code limits fence height to 6 feet in the rear yard area. The four northern most properties between 47th and 48th Streets are requesting fence replacement to achieve a nine-foot height. The fence would consist of an 8 ft tall, solid wall fence with a 1 ft trellis top for an over-all height of 9 ft as measured from grade to the top of the fence. The purpose of the request is due to improvements to be implemented along France Ave. Metro Transit is currently in the process of converting bus line 6, which runs in part on France Avenue from 44th and France to the Southdale Transit station, to a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) E-line. As part of the conversion to a BRT E-line, numerous changes will be made all along France Ave. Changes to the intersection of 47th. and France Ave. include the installation of a 60' long bus platform, or station, on both the east and west sides of the street. The 4700 block of France will have stations directly across from each other, rather than on diagonally opposite sides of an intersection as in most stop designs. The stations, include bus shelters which are 12 feet long with a sloping roof. The front of the shelters are 12.5 feet tall; the backs are 8.6 feet. The shelters are lighted and heated. The station will have a 14-foot-tall LED illuminated pylon sign. Stations also include "talking" fare card machines, bike racks, trash and recycling receptacles. As part of the e-line project, Hennepin County is installing a median strip through the 47th/France intersection, preventing a north turn on France from 47th. Crosswalks with rectangular rapid flashing beacons September 25, 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner B-24-07, Property owners of 4701, 4703, 4705 and 4707 Meadow Road, (collectively "the Properties"), are requesting a 3-foot height variance from the maximum height requirement of 6 feet to allow a 9-foot-tall fence along France Ave. adjacent to the easterly property lines of “the Properties”. Information / Background: Page 9 of 160 STAFF REPORT Page 2 will be installed on both the north and south sides of the intersection; a new 30-foot streetlight will be installed on the southwest corner. The applicants request a taller fence along four properties adjacent to the 47th St. E-Line bus stop stations, to minimize the additional visual, noise, light, air and sound pollution to which the Properties will be exposed to, given the BRT E-line stations. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single Unit residential homes zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District Grading & Drainage The City Engineer has reviewed the application and is in full support of the request with submitted comments as attached in their memorandum. Compliance Sec. 36-1255. Fences in the R-1 and R-2 districts. Fences erected in the R-1 and R-2 districts shall conform to the following: (1) Fences exceeding four feet in height shall not be erected within a required front street setback or side street setback, pursuant to the provisions of section 36-439(1). *(2) No fence shall exceed six feet in height. (3) Fences shall be installed with the finished side facing neighboring properties. (4) No fence shall be installed so as to obstruct a required clear view at street intersections as required by article VII of chapter 26. *Requires a variance Page 10 of 160 STAFF REPORT Page 3 PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issue •Is the proposed variance justified? No, staff does not believe the requested variance is justified. Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively to grant a variance. The proposed variance will/will not: 1.The variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District and complies with zoning standards, with exception of the height proposed for the new fence. The reason for the variance request is due to the proposed BRT E-line improvements along France Ave. to screen the rear yards of four properties backing up to France Ave. There are a total of 9 properties backing up to France Ave. between 47th and 48th Streets and single dwelling units on the east/Mpls. side. All Edina properties along the block currently have 6-foot fences adjacent to France. There will be a three- foot fence height difference between the four homes in this request and the five remaining properties along the block. The purpose and intent of the fence height ordinance is to provide reasonable fence height to allow privacy and to provide a consistent height standard in the R-1 zoning district. Staff acknowledges that screening is appropriate between conflicting and impacted land uses and supports protecting residential properties including the four applicants’, however, there are other properties along France Ave. that are affected under similar circumstance, with homes fronting France and stations adjacent to front yards, (see attached 58th and 62nd St. E-Line stations and 62nd St. rendering). Screening/fencing of residential property from conflicting land use could benefit from a more comprehensive approach instead of individual variance requests with similar circumstances. Criteria not met. 2.The variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan guides the property for Low Density Residential Use. The principal use of the property would still be as a single-family home and the property would remain zoned R-1. Criteria met. Page 11 of 160 STAFF REPORT Page 4 3.There are practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance. The term “practical difficulties” means the following: i.The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without a variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. “Practical difficulties” may include functional and aesthetic concerns. The properties currently have reasonable use with exiting 6-foot-tall fences along France Ave. that are consistent with other fences along France/E-Line and consistent with the intent of the ordinance. Implementation of 9 ft tall fences only along 4 properties out of 9, (currently with 6- foot-tall fences installed along France), will provide a disjointed fence height and may introduce aesthetic concerns. Criteria not met. ii.The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Staff does not find there to be unique and specific circumstances relating only to the 4 properties and not applicable to other properties affect by the E-line located along France Ave. There are other properties in the vicinity having similar impacts. There are Edina E-line bus stations with similar bus stop shelter installations locating at the intersections of 58th and France and 62nd and France having stations adjacent to front yards and side yards that are in much closer proximity to the front/side of homes and in full view. Criteria not met. iii.The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The improvement will be 3+ feet taller than the 6-foot-tall fences along the subject block. The fence height differences may seem to alter the essential character of the locality and introduce a disjointed appearance. Criteria not met. Optional Actions A case can be made for approval and denial of this project. Below provides options for the Planning Commission to consider: Page 12 of 160 STAFF REPORT Page 5 Denial Deny the request for a 3-foot fence height variance. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal does not meet the standards for variance with no circumstances unique and specific to the lot. There are other properties located along France Ave. affected by improvements of the BRT E-Line. 2. The properties currently have reasonable use with existing 6-foot fences located along their east lot lines. 3. The property owner’s situation is not unique with other properties along France Ave. with the same or possibly more severe circumstances and impacts that could promote requests for similar variances to fence height and set a precedence. Approval Approve the request for a 3 ft fence height variance to allow a 9 ft fence spanning four properties at 4701, 4703, 4705 and 4707 Meadow Road. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The practical difficulty is caused by the Required BRT E-line improvements including Lighting, noise, and bus stops directly across from each other on the south side of the 47th Street and France intersection as opposed to staggered, (one on the north and one no south sides). 2. A unique circumstance includes the new crosswalk improvements with flashing lights and a new streetlight at that intersection. 3. The proposal would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. A 9-foot-tall fence would offer screening for neighboring properties from improvements at the intersection and would help maintain neighborhood character. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Subject to plans and survey date stamped August 21, 2024. 2. Subject to Engineering staff’s memo dated September 13, 2024. Staff Recommendation Staff is sympathetic to the impact improvements will have along Fance Ave. on residential properties, however, cannot support the request given there are other properties impacted by the BRT E-Line improvements. Staff recommends denial of the variance request. Deadline for a City decision: November 23, 2024. Page 13 of 160 Page 14 of 160 Page 15 of 160 DATE: 9/13/2024 TO: Kris Aaker – Assistant City Planner FROM: Chad Millner, PE – Engineering Director RE: 4701, 4703, 4705, 4707 Meadow Rd – Fence Variance Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review was performed at the request of the Planning Department. Plans reviewed included planning application packet submitted/stamped 8/21/2024. Summary of Work The applicant proposes to construct a 9 - 9.5-ft fence. The request is for a variance is for fence height requirements. The fence would help block sightlines of the new Metro Transit E-Line Bus Rapid Transit Project. The project is constructing a 60-ft long bus platform along France Ave adjacent to these properties. The platform includes a 12-ft tall bus shelter and a 14-ft tall LED pylon sign. The bus service operates every 10-minutes from 6 am to midnight. See attached graphics below of the bus platform. The Engineering Department supports this variance request. It seems like a 3 - 3.5 ft fence height variance is a reasonable request adjacent to a new bus shelter with lighting that operates most hours. Easements N.A. the existing and proposed fence will be located on the property line. Grading and Drainage The fence does not add any impervious area. No impact to private property. Erosion and Sediment Control An erosion and sediment control plan will not be required. Street and Driveway Entrance N.A. Public Utilities N.A. Miscellaneous Graphics from Metro Transit Page 16 of 160 Rendering of the Bus Shelter and Pylon Light at Meadow Rd and France Example of the Bus Shelter and Pylon Light Page 17 of 160 EXPLANATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST Metro Transit is currently in the process of converting its bus line 6, which runs in part on France Avenue from 44th and France to the Southdale Transit station, to a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) e- line. The properties requesting a variance — 4701, 4703, 4705 and 4707 Meadow Road (collectively "the Properties") — are all two-story single-family homes with back yards that "front" on the 4700 block of France Avenue. All of the Properties currently have six-foot fences along their east property lines (see photos, Exh. A) As part of the conversion to a BRT line, numerous changes will be made on the 4700 block of France, as depicted in the attached drawing from Metro Transit (Exh. B). Those changes include the installation of a 60' long bus platform, or station, on both the east and west sides of the street. The 4700 block of France is the only residential block on the entire e-line where stations are directly across from each other, rather than on diagonally opposite sides of an intersection. The BRT buses are scheduled to run, in each direction, every ten minutes from 6 am to midnight. The 60' platforms will extend out into the street some distance beyond the existing sidewalks, as shown in Exhibit B. The platforms, or stations, include a number of features, including bus shelters which are 12 feet long with a sloping roof. The front of the shelters is 12.5 feet tall; the backs are 8.6 feet. The shelters are lighted and heated 24/7. As you can see in the attached photo (Exh. C), the shelters are very bright at night. A second feature of the station is a 14-foot-tall LED pylon sign which also is illuminated, continuously, in all directions, as shown in the attached photo (Exh.D). Stations also include "talking" fare card machines, bike racks, trash and recycling receptacles, In addition to the streetlight on the southwest corner of France and 47th, a 15 foot tall light will be installed in the bus platform on the east side of France Avenue. According to information from Metro Transit, the shelter on the west side of France will be less than 4' from the property line of 4701 and 4703 Meadow Road. As part of the e-line project, Hennepin County is installing an extensive median strip through the 47th/France intersection, such that it will no longer be possible to turn north on France from 47th. Crosswalks with tall rectangular rapid flashing beacons will be installed on both the north and south sides of the intersection; a new 30-foot streetlight will be installed on the southwest corner. As noted, the Properties currently have a 6-foot privacy fence along France Avenue. We are requesting this Variance to be allowed to build an 8' Western Red Cedar stockade style fence with overlapping panels, extended to 9 or 9.5 feet by a decorative "lattice," as shown in the attached photos (Exh. E). The current zoning for the Properties is R-1. It is not commercial; it is not even multi-family. However, the station features for the 4700 France Avenue block are exactly the same, with the possible exception of the length of the shelters, as found elsewhere on the e-line in commercial or multi-family zoned neighborhoods. The conversion of the 6 line to a BRT line, with busses running every ten minutes from 6 am to midnight; the accompanying bus shelters with significant bright lighting 24/7; tall, brightly lit LED signs; flashing crosswalks; "talking" machines and, presumably, increased human use of the platform directly behind the Properties will significantly increase the visual, noise, light, air and sound pollution from France Avenue to the back yards of the Properties. The pollution will be particularly apparent from the homes' second story windows facing east, which include bedrooms in all four homes, and owner's suites in the three of the four homes. (4701 also has east facing French doors which open from the owner's suite onto a balcony; 4707 has a door which opens from a bedroom onto an east facing deck). The four homes comprising the Properties are expensive, well-maintained homes whose owners have spent considerable time and money improving their properties for the benefit of all Edina, including such modifications as removal of buckthorn and the installation of rain and pollinator gardens. The bus shelters and pylon signs will primarily be behind the 4701 and 4703 Properties but will be visible from all the Properties. Allowing the construction of a 9 to a 9 and a half foot attractive fence, of which only 8 feet is solid wood, is certainly a reasonable option to help Page 18 of 160 minimize the additional visual, noise, light, air and sound pollution to which the Properties will be exposed. It is a reasonable use that will partially correct circumstances which are applicable to the Properties requesting this Variance, but which do not affect other properties in the neighborhood. In securing the survey required for this variance application, the Property owners have learned that the city sidewalk encroaches on the Properties' land, starting with a 9 inch encroachment at the northeast corner of 4701. The fence requested herein will also allow the Properties owners to correct circumstances applicable to them, which presumably do not affect other properties in the neighborhood. Not only is the Variance a reasonable use to partially correct circumstances applicable to the Properties but not to other properties in the neighborhood, the Variance will actually improve the aesthetic character of the neighborhood. Although each of the Properties currently has, as noted above, a 6-foot fence along France Avenue, the four fences vary in style, age and placement relative to the sidewalk. Assuming the Variance is granted, one fence contractor (that 3 of the 4 Properties have previously used) will be installing all four fences, which all will be the style shown in Exh. E. Since the fences are being installed at the same time, the cedar will age consistently and uniformly. In addition, the part of the fence at 4707 Meadow Rd. which is currently set back from France will be brought forward, consistent with the other three fences. As a result, the electrical pole which is now visible from France Ave. will be camouflaged by the fence, as is the case with the pole at 4703 Meadow Rd. The lots south of 4707 have a six-foot "retaining wall fence" which was built by the City when it installed the sidewalk some years ago. This retaining wall fence protrudes easterly onto the sidewalk 14.5 inches farther than the 4707 lot line. Therefore, this retaining wall fence currently does not align with the existing fence at 4707, nor will it align with the planned new fence which is the subject of this Variance Application. The planned new fence will transition to the southerly retaining wall fence by means of a simple right triangle with a base of 14.5 inches and a hypotenuse that extends from the top of the new fence down to the top of the adjacent southerly six-foot retaining wall fence. A taller fence will have no effect on the character of the neighborhood. The installation of two bus stations directly behind the Properties, coupled with the changes to France Avenue and particularly the significant increase in constant noise, light, air, sound and visual pollution, WILL have an effect — a negative one — on the character of the neighborhood, especially the Properties. The requested Variance will not. Finally, the City ordinances require that a variance must be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance. Article 1, Sec. 36-2 of the zoning ordinance provides in part: This chapter is intended to implement the following objectives, some of which are contained in the comprehensive plan: (1) Maintain, protect and enhance single-family detached dwelling neighborhoods as the dominant land use. This requested Variance would do nothing other than assist the Properties in maintaining and protecting the current character of their single-family dwellings and therefore should be approved. Since construction has already begun on station on the east side of France at 47th, we would appreciate prompt consideration of our request. Page 19 of 160 e •k 3 Page 20 of 160 Page 21 of 160 Pavement IMprOvemenl Proposed Platform Area New Grass Plantrp Parcel Lines Public Rght-of-Way Bus Stop !la be Removed A• 4,352 =-ar=e R r Enhanced pedestrian crossing wilt Rectangulsr Rapki Flashing Beacon I France Ave S —Fienneran County France — Avenue HSIP Protect Existing Connecnor to Residence to Remain in Piece 3900 47th St 4646 France Ave S 4640 France Ave S I—Existing Cennecion to Residence to 1—edsting Connection to Remittance to Remain in Place Remain in Mite I 470' France Ave S 4707 France Ave S 47C9 Frar:e Ave S fReal- Irekel mad nee tene sign and fare card rnek-mn volariatnnt r.r Typical Station Features scacr, Jrid•ecycling C f aledricail bearding area Racks Sheller wen heal light and security cameras 3 Legend Page 22 of 160 3 Page 23 of 160 s `'‘ Page 24 of 160 - Page 25 of 160 WOOD FENCE, ti 0.3'+/- WEST OF RIGHT OF WAY \ I- L.} L.: L_J/ vi iIJIv c\-1- 7-1 L _ ../ I .e- / I V \J. nIn ‘.1 I FOUND 1/2" IRON A AINII\lr-C•rv-rn 1V1 v I/-1 0 0 — ROW FENCE EXHIBIT FOR 4701, 4703, 4705 MEADOW ROAD, EDINA MN 55424 ..--NE CORNER SECTION 18, TWP. 28 N., RGE. 24 W ---SECTION LINE /1---- 30— / 30' RIGHT OF WAY-/ 47TH STREET WEST WOOD FENCE---- 0.8'+/- WEST OF ROAD ROW -DETAIL NOT TO SCALE WOOD FENCE-, Et 0.4'+/- WEST OF ROAD ROW \ FOUND 1/2" IRON PIPE ------- WOOD FENCE--/g 0.4'+/- WEST OF ROAD ROW MEADOW ROAD OWNER: KARIN L WILLE & MICHAEL G CASSERLY SR 4701 MEADOW RD EDINA MN 55424 P.I.D. 1802824110034 r\-r- L I c- OWNER: KEITH R & ROBIN R HARMON 4703 MEADOW RD EDINA MN 55424 P.I.D. 1802824110035 OWNER: MOLLY RICE / ANDREW SLOTHOWER 4705 MEADOW RD EDINA MN 55424 P.I.D. 1802824110036 /co WOOD FENCE-' / 0.3'+/- WEST OF RIGHT OF WAY ti El4 WOOD FENCE-.... 0.1'+/- WEST OF RIGHT OF WAY I n-7- r) 1.7.; L.\-/ / z- DETAIL NOT TO SCALE -DETAIL NOT TO SCALE FOUND 1/2" IRON (LYING FLAT) I Ir-1\11\1r-T)/ r•ni Ito-T-\/ F7L_I vl vL_I 11 v vl./VI v I I 30' RIGHT OF WAY-- 0 50 SCALE IN FEET CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that this exhibit was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. .ct o \419" \A-C )‘14 \4C" 201.* -EAST QUARTER SECTION 18, TWP. 28 N., RGE. 24 W A I I 1--\ I Tn 0 C` r I \•L ./I -DETAIL NOT TO SCALE o 110 4' I Date of survey. June 3, 2024. Date of signature: June 14, 2024. Lee J. Nord Minnesota License No. 22033 In ord©efnsurvey.com • FOUND IRON MONUMENT WOOD FENCE CONCRETE SURFACE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY 475 Old Highway 8 NW, Suite 200 New Brighton, Minnesota 55112 PHONE: (612) 466-3300 WWW.EFNSURVEY.COM Egan, Field & Nowak, Inc. COPYRIGHT © 2024 By EGAN, FIELD & NOWAK, INC. land surveyors since 1872 FIELD BOOK PAGE FENCE EXHIBIT FOR: PROPERTY OWNERS 4701, 4703, 4705 MEADOW RD EDINA, MN 55424 FIELDWORK CHIEF: TV DRAWN BY: DF CHECKED BY: LJN DRAWING NAME: 41999 dwg JOB NO. FILE NO. 1 Page 26 of 160 INIMINIMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMEMEMEMEMMEMMOMMUMEMEMMEMMEMMEM MIME • • • INIMMEMMEMMEMMINIMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMEMMEMMEMEMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMEMINIMME MMEMMEMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMEMEMMEMINIMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEM MIIMMEMMUMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMMEMEM MEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMOMMINIMMEMMEMMEMMEMMMWENMEMMEMMEMEM MMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMEMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMINIMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEM MMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMINIMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMINIMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMUMEMMOMMEMMEMM MMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMOMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEM MMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMENOMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMIIIMMEMMEMEM mommommommommommommommommummummimmummummommummommommomm mummummommimmimmommommummummummemmmilmommommimmommom mmommommimminmsommummommummommummommommommommumm mommummummummommommummmummummimmommummommommommomm MEEMBOMMEMZERNMEMMINIMMEMMEMEMEMOMMEMEMOMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMM MIIMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMEMMINIMMEMMENEWMINIMMEMEMEMMEMEMEMMMEMMEMMEMMEMM MEMEMMIIMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMOMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMMEMMEMEMMEMM MEMMEMEMEMMEMEMEMMEMINIMMEMMMUMENUMMENEMEMMEMEMMEMMEMEMEMMEMMEMMEMM mommommiAMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMEMMEMENIMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMEM EMMIMMUMANUMMUMMEINIMMEMEMMIMMEMEMEMEMEMMEMMEMEMMEWAIMMEMEMEMMEM MMOMUMAMMUMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEAMMEMMEMEMM MMEMMEUMMMAIMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEM MEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMMMEEMEMIEELEMEEMMIEMIEMMEMCM2MMEMEMEMMIIM MIMMEMEMMEMMEMEMffem .1 1. EMEMMUUMMIIMMINIMMEM MIIMMEMMEMMEMEMEIMEMMEMEMMIIMEEMMMUEUmmim immmmmmummmwMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM MIIMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMINIMMEMMEMMEMMIMMEMMINIMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEM MEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMINIMMEMMEMMEMMINIMMEMMEMMEMEME MMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMOMOMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEM MEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMMEMMENNIMMIIIMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEM MMEOMMIIMMEMMEMMOMMMEMMEMMMINIMMEM MEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEM MEMMEMMIONIMMEMMUMSNEEMMEEMESSENW MENUMMECEMMEMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMM MEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMEM MEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEM MEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEUEEMEMEUMIHMMEMMEMEMBEEMEMANIMAMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMEM MEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMIIMMINEMEMINMEMENNEMUMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMM MEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMIMMEMEMME MEMEMMEMMEMMEMEMENMEMMEMEMMEMEMMIMMEMMEMEMMOMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEM MEMMEMEMMEMEMMENUMMUMNSIMMOMMUMMWMIIMEMEOWENMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMINIMME MMINIMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMMEMEMEMMMEMEMEM MEMMEMMEMMINIMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMM MMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMINIMMEMMEMEMMEMMINIMMEMEMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMMEMEMEMMII MMINIMMEMMEM MMEMMEMMEMMEMEMEEMMIIMMEMM MEM= MMEMMEMEMMEMEMMEMMEMEM Page 27 of 160 4 8978 EXISTING WAGE /../////' t.OT 27 A I ani-rx-sDcs t-M11.-61 I A./IA.-7 8958 30 SUB,DIVISO:s4 4(000 RETAINING WALLS 892.4 MC\ -441 sfiLl.°....,...9 36'41°W 200.37 , PLAT) .9, WOOD 41A3N.ItiG, WALL V V. (201.4 AT) EXtS TING HOUSE rn --WOOD FENCE 004 895 8985 893 5 a / .5 OM 08715.". / 8 7 3 AIRS 9,1 6927 89 ALL 865 3 eas.1 601.9 RETAINN 6. azos 88i.6 885.3 804.3 - BLOCK RETAINING WALL 082 5 882 885 5 892.9 884 0013 20 Y 882.7 901 tA 8920 89 881.5 8967 093 UT- 884 7 5 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY 7.2%_ 87 73.7 893.4 8915 O O N Ed a) 1") IN o 2 X 06K-ODA I 882 876 tD 850 876 8 ,9012 277 875 8 875.1 , \ „„ „9 N N \ \ ,>, NN \ O \ N N -NN \'/f \ \ \ \ \ \ .,BULDING 8.1 "Tit. 23.5 \ \ Aft. 586 6 9018 • 9013 OS 19.2 8915 891 890.1 ADDITION )43 891 I \I 8904 5 :G: 1: 3904 11 . AR E' 890.6 0. 891.3 6957 89/ TA . 082 5 'en TC, -4 .:,4t . 0 8841 'f''' / N -- V3 , .0 s 411 - Vii,-, ' 4'', ,.e, ,,, ,,,,,,,.. , '.4-:___.) 8.57_7 ..' A?5,713 79 880 ''-- keit-NA-RETAINING W AUT r8-,. - - '43 --____ k 03'1'0' 891 4 I0.6 11 20.4 8909 N lE DT DR AINTILE 89: • 7 )70 0 - 0' A rly -9?. ) N lu 12.0 I0M630- N A 8.54.0 8B19 PI& 6 58579 N86°10'18't 138.96 (139.9 PLAT) 8880 sm., 884,2 884/ 8882 881. nose • 894 3 _- 884 1 883 9 883 8 Ato 5764 87" • 892_3 N 79 9 883.8 882 1584 2 30 883.9 876 886 4 864.2 876 874.7 01 875 5 tt 8719 874.1 EXISTING HOUSE 874.4 • 557 6 092 4 • 895 2 OF 1)/A/4 406, 2 /211 .2 DLFIN%ATh'(.3!' PROPERTY STIfr4YED Lot 9. IVIIITE OAKS 5TH ADDITION. according ordcd pl / at tt thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota /Ci7.A I) Site Address: 4707 Meadow Road, Edina, Minnesota 55424 /7. 2) Flood Zone information: This property appears to lie in Zone X (Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance flood plain) per Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Pond No. 27053C0362F, effective date of November 4th, 2016. 3) Pared Area Information: Gross Area: 11,261 s.f. - 0.259 acres 4) Benchmark: Elevations are based on MN/DOT Geodetic Station Name: MEDIAN MN053 winch has an elevation of: 881.074 feet (NAVD88). 5) Zoning Information: The current Zoning for the subject property is R-1 (Single Dwelling Unit District) per the City of Edina's zoning map dated April 2015. The setback, height, and floor space area restrictions for said zoning designation were obtained from the City of Edina found on their web site on the date of May 26th, 2017 and are as follows: a 874.0 874 Fencedes are shown on the side of the boundary line that the fence Is located on. si ir.,.:,,E'A r 1.4 11 'Su r .". 1 :AI' , li ..2 - .„, ' u , 1H7-,--;'--4-': _ i , A,,,,,,- 1 -,- V -.. to ,, nr.' I -a-- 4v. Existing Hardcover Lot Area House Area Concrete Area Pavers Area Retaining Wall Arca Stairs Arca Total Area Coverage- 28.1% Proposed Hardcover Lot Area = 11,261 S.F. !louse Area = 1,349 S.F. House Addition Area 614 S.F. Concrete Area 1,233 S.F. New Patio Arca = 320 S.F. New Sidewalk Paver Arca 99 S.F. Ex. Retaining Wall Area 100 S.F. Prop. Retaining Well Area= 76 S.F. Stairs Area - 44 S.F. Total Area = 3,835 S.F. Coverage= 34.0696 Proposed Lot Coverage - 11,261 S.F. 1,349 S.F. = 614 S.F. = 1,963 S.F. 11,261 S.F. 1,349 S.F. 1,391 S.F. 324 S.F. 134 S.F. 57 S.F. 3,165 S.F. Bearings are based on the Hennepin Costly Cooninate System (NAD 83- 1986 ad}) Existing Lot Coverage Lot Arca 11,261 S.F. House Area 1 349 S.F. Coverage- 11.98% 10 5 0 5 10 SCALE IN FEET Lot Area House Area Addition Area Total Area Coverage = 17.43% SURVEY LEGEND OO 0 ci !xi •cf O A • Principal Structure Setbacks - Front: Average Front Setback Side: N'aries depending on building height and lot width. See city code for specific side yard requiretnems. Rear: 25 feet Height: 30 feet to highest point ott roof Lot Coverage: 25 percent of lot area CAST IRON MONUMENT CATCH BASIN FLARED END SECTION GATE VALVE COI WIRE HYDRANT SURVEY MONUMENT SET SURVEY MONUMENT FOUND SURVEY CONTROL POINT LIGHT POLE POWER POLE SANITARY MANHOLE SANITARY CLEANOUT SIGN GROUND ELEVATION STORM DRAIN STORM MANHOLE YARD LIGHT A/C UNIT WOE WALKOUT ELEVATION FFE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION GEE GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION TOF TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEV LOE LOWEST OPENING ELEV. El CABLE TV PEDESTAL ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER ELECTRIC MANHOLE ELECTRIC METER GAS METER GAS VALVE HAND HOLE SOIL BORING TREE CONIFEROUS TREE DECIDUOUS TELEPHONE MANHOLE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL BITUMINOUS ------- BOLDING SETBACK LINE crc- CABLE TV CONCRETE CURB CONCRETE CONTOUR EXISTING _ CONTOUR PROPOSED GUARD RAIL - oT - DRAIN TILE ELECTRIC UNDERGROUND -A-A- FENCE - ro- FIBER OPTIC UNDERGROIND - GAS UNDERGROUND -001- OVERHEAD UNLIT I 1-14+401+++ITH 1+ RAILROAD TRACKS SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER - Tn. - TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND Please note that the general restrictions for the subject property may have been amended through a city process. We could be unaware of such amendments if they arc not in a recorded document provided to us. We recommend that a zoning letter be obtained from the Zoning Administrator for the current restrictions for this site. 6) Utilities: We have shown the location of utilities on the suneyed property by observed evidence only. There may be underground utilities encumbering the subject property we are unaware. Please note that we have not placed a Gopher Stale One Call for this survey. There may or may not be underground utilities in the mapped area, therefore extreme caution must be exercise before any excavation takes place on or near this site. Before digging. you are required by law to notify Gopher State One Call at least 48 hours in advance at 651/454-0002. O (1) 55 o==.-- TRAFFIC SIGNAL Et UTILITY MANHOLE El UTILITY PEDESTAL -- UTILITY UNDERGROUND - I - WATERMAN ELL FIELD CREW CT JS DRAWN BMW BY REVISION PROPOSED CONDITIONS REVISED PROP. CONDMONG DRAINTILE - FRONT PORCH REV. CHARGED FRONT WALK MATERIAL HARDCOVER DATE I hereby certify that this survey. plan or report sax prepared A) Me or Mkt my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under laws of the Mate of Minnesota. TWP:0213-RGE.024-SEC.18 USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGOUIST,INC's EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION, USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHREBERGOUIST. INC. OF AU. RESPONSIBILITY. SATHREABERGOUIST,INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD NAY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. FILE NO, BOR SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. EMW 0/20/2017 Hennepin County CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY PREPARED FOR: BETTY GOODMAN 2 BMW 0 31285-001 016,2017 Dated this 260 day of Ala 2017. 3 EMW 0/18/2017 EDINA, MINNESOTA CHECKED 4 EMW W26/2017 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 VVWW.SATHRE.COM DBP DATE 6-16-17 os..As David B. Pemberton, PIS pembenonsalhre.com Minnesota License No. 40344 Page 28 of 160 Page 29 of 160 Page 30 of 160 Page 31 of 160 Page 32 of 160 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: September 25, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: Planning Commission Agenda Number: 6.2 Prepared By: Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner Item Type: Public Hearing Department: Community Development Item Title: A Conditional Use permit at 4208 Philbrook Lane for a stem wall with fill pad for a new home to be compliant with FEMA and with zoning variances that include a 4.09 ft setback variance from the 10 ft requirement for a 5.91 ft side yard setback on the west side of the property and for a 22.7% variance from the 50% maximum for exterior basement walls to be 72.7% above grade and therefore counted as a 3rd story. Action Requested: Approve the Conditional Use Permit with variances for 4208 Philbrook subject to the conditions as outlined in the staff report. Information/Background: Heather Maanum on behalf of homeowners Mike and Courtney Bush, is requesting a Conditional Use permit for a stem wall with fill pad for a new home to be compliant with FEMA and with zoning variances that include a 4.09 ft setback variance from the 10 ft requirement for a 5.91 ft side yard setback on the west side of the property and for a 22.7% variance from the 50% maximum for exterior basement walls to be 72.7% above grade and therefore counted as a 3rd story. The maximum building height allowed is 2 and ½ stories with the basement counting as a story if more than 50% of the exterior basement wall is above grade. Better together public input Supporting Documentation: 1. Staff Report Philbrook 2. Engineering Memo 3. Applicant Narratives 4. Plans and Renderings. Page 33 of 160 September 25, 2024 Planning Commission Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner Conditional Use Permit with Variances – 4208 Philbrook Lane, tear-down/rebuild/new home. Information / Background: The is request is for a Conditional Use Permit with Variances to tear down and build a new home at 4208 Philbrook Lane. (See attached narrative and plans.) The property is located on Northeast side of Philbrook Lane and backs up to Pamela Park. Heather Maanum on behalf of homeowners Mike and Courtney Bush, are requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a stem wall with fill pad for a new home to be compliant with FEMA rules and are requesting zoning variances that include a 4.09 ft setback variance from the 10 ft requirement for a 5.91 ft side yard setback on the front south corner of the home to match the existing nonconforming side yard setback and for a 22.7% variance from the 50% maximum for exterior basement walls to be 72.7% above grade and therefore counted as a 3rd story. The maximum building height allowed is 2 and ½ stories with the basement counting as a story if more than 50% of the exterior basement wall is above grade. It should be noted that the measured height of the new home from average existing grade to roof peak will be 31.83 ft, well within the maximum allowed of 35.61 ft. The site of the existing and proposed home is currently in the floodway. The original home was built in 1960 and predates the Flood Insurance study conducted in the late 1970’s and was designated in the floodway. Grading and fill are restricted in the floodway. After conducting a site and structure study the homeowner established that renovation or addition to the current structure is not possible given floodway designation and family needs. Page 34 of 160 STAFF REPORT Page 2 The new home design and location were determined to be possible after extensive coordination with the City of Edina, DNR and Watershed District. The CUP and variance review and approval is the 1st step in the local effort to move the project forward towards FEMA review. The next step after receiving all local approvals is to pursue a floodplain Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) through FEMA to remove the floodway designation on a portion of the property. A subsequent action will also be needed to request a LOMR-f to remove the new home, (once built), based on fill from the floodplain designation to potentially alleviate the need for flood insurance. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single-family homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Easterly: Pamela Park/Minnehaha Creek; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single-family homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single-family homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features The property currently consists of a rambler with a two-car garage built in 1960 with an in- ground swimming pool. The property is located within the FEMA designated floodway. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District Conditional Use Permit Per Section 36-305, the City Council shall not grant a Conditional Use Permit unless it finds that the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use: 1. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements. The proposed project is located within an established neighborhood and will be re-building on a former home site with pre-existing governmental facilities, utilities, services and improvements. The existing home will be replaced with a new home that will not have adverse or additional impact on existing infrastructure. Page 35 of 160 STAFF REPORT Page 3 2. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property. The proposed project will not generate additional traffic. 3. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety, or welfare. Staff does not believe the project would have an adverse impact on public health, safety, or welfare. 4. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity. Staff believes the proposed new home would enhance the property and will fit well within the site. The proposed use is allowed within the R-1 zoning district. The proposed project does not impede the normal and orderly development or improvement of surrounding property or property within the vicinity. 5. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located as imposed by this Section. The proposed project has been designed to satisfy all city code provisions with exception of variances based and supported on existing site conditions. Upon receiving city approval, the project will also need to satisfy FEMA approvals. 6. Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. No amendment is needed to the comprehensive plan as the new single dwelling unit is the designated land use and is permitted in the R-1 Zoning District. Site Circulation The site circulation is not changing. The property access and site access will remain the same. Landscaping The plans submitted were reviewed by the city’s Forester and will meet the requirements for the tree ordinance. Engineering/Grading/Drainage/Utilities City Engineering staff has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be acceptable subject to the comments and conditions outlined in the review memo. The Engineering memo dated September 16, 2024, is attached for reference. Page 36 of 160 STAFF REPORT Page 4 Building The proposed building is similar in character to other homes built in the vicinity and will accomplish a city goal to remove obstructions within the floodway by rebuilding on the property with a stem wall with a fill pad that requires approval of all needed local and Federal review authorities. Setback Compliance Table Setbacks City Standard Proposed Front lot line Right side lot line Left side lot line Rear lot line 34.05 feet 10 feet 10 feet 25 feet 34.5 feet 12.54feet *5.91 feet (existing and proposed) +100 feet Building Height/Coverage/1st Floor Elevation Building Height Number of stories Structure coverage Impervious surface coverage 1st floor height 35.61 feet 2 and ½ 25% 50% 866.86 31.83 feet *3 (limited fill allowed around the basement) 12.3% 17.94% *871.0 * Requires a variance * Sec. 36-439. –Qualifies for an Engineering Administrative exception based on flood plain status as part of building permit review. PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issue Are the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) criteria met? Page 37 of 160 STAFF REPORT Page 5 Yes, staff believes the criteria is met. The new home will replace the existing home located in the floodway on the lot with a flood compliant structure that will not have adverse impact on facilities, will not generate additional traffic, will not impact health, safety or welfare of other properties and will not impede development of surrounding properties. The plan conforms to restrictions within the district including the two variances requested and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Is the proposed variance justified? Yes. Staff believes the variance criteria is met in this instance. Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively to grant a variance. The proposed variance will: 1) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. The practical difficulty of the lot is its location in the floodway. The right, side yard setback variance of 4.09 from the 10 ft requirement for a 5.91 ft side yard setback on the front south corner of the home matches the existing nonconforming side yard setback of the original home. The new home will maintain existing nonconforming setback on the right side, while shifting the footprint to adhere to the current setback requirement on the left side. The applicant has indicated multiple scenarios were studied and while the home width could be reduced, or the front yard setback increased, this would increase the amount of fill and impact on the floodway. Neighboring home’s side yard setbacks are consistently around 5 feet. The proposal will maintain and increase side yard setbacks given existing conditions. The basement wall exposure is caused by the inability to lower the basement floor in the ground due to minimum low floor flood elevation requirements. Restrictions on fill on the property also impact grading ability exposing basement walls. 2)Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. The floodway designation is an extraordinary circumstance affecting and driving all aspects of the home design. The proposed 4.09 ft setback variance is reasonable. The property has extraordinary circumstance due to limited opportunities given the flood zone impacts and due to the nature of the existing setbacks in the neighborhood and on the block that are closer than current standards. Page 38 of 160 STAFF REPORT Page 6 The basement is limited in ability to comply with the zoning ordinance while also complying with the floodplain ordinance. 3) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created? The circumstances related to the proposed project and both requested variances are unique to the property given lot configuration and flood zone elevations with impacts that are specific and unique to the site that are not like other similarly zoned parcels. 4) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Granting the variances will not alter the character of the neighborhood. The subject property is currently used for a single dwelling unit. The size, location and scale of the proposed structure is similar to other existing buildings in the neighborhood. The location of the structure was chosen for compliance with FEMA. The side yard setbacks will match one side and increase on the other from the existing home ‘s setbacks. Basement exposure is due to limitations on fill in the flood zone. The home will appear as a 2-story home from the street and will conform to maximum height as measured from existing grade before improvements. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit with a 4.09 ft setback variance and a 22.7% variance from the 50% maximum for exterior basement walls to construct a new home at 4208 Philbrook. Approval is subject to the following findings: 1. The proposed project meets the Conditional Use Permit standards of Chapter 36. 2. The proposed project meets the criteria of Minnesota State Statutes and the Edina Zoning Ordinances to grant both variances requested. 3. The property is currently located in a FEMA designated floodway. It is a goal of the city to remove structures from the flood zone when presented with the opportunity. This proposal will achieve that goal. 4. The project presents opportunity to correct flood plain designation which is a practical difficulty that is unique and an extraordinary circumstance of the property. 5. The proposed project will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Page 39 of 160 STAFF REPORT Page 7 Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The Construction Plans must be consistent with the proposed survey and plans date stamped August 15, 2024. 2. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the City Engineering memo dated September 16, 2024, as follows: Administrative exception to the first-floor variance requirement A successful Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from FEMA, which moves the floodway designation off the building pad, and which has been formally adopted by the City Demonstrated no increase or transfer in flood risk to others, certified by a licensed engineer The proposed stem wall must be certified by a licensed structural engineer Permit issued by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District An Elevation Certificate will be required before issuing a Certificate of Occupancy 3. Compliance with the tree protection ordinance in coordination with the City Forrester. Deadline for a City decision: November 13, 2024. Page 40 of 160 DATE:9/16/2024 TO: Cary Teague – Planning Director FROM: Ben Jore, PE – Senior Project Engineer and Jessica V. Wilson, CFM – Water Resources Manager RE: 4208 Philbrook Ln – Plan Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, stormwater, erosion and sediment control, floodplain redevelopment, and for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review was performed at the request of the Planning Department; a more detailed review will be performed at the time of building permit application. Plans reviewed included site plan with a revision date of 8/6/2024 and preliminary grading memo dated January 12, 2024 and amended August 5, 2024. Summary of Work The applicant proposes a demo and new build located at 4208 Philbrook Ln. Easements A storm utility easement is located on the north side of the property. Grading and Drainage Site drains to a regional (FEMA) floodplain including a floodway designation. Stormwater Mitigation A preliminary grading memo and stormwater management plan was provided. A stormwater plan will be required for permit review consistent with City of Edina Building Policy SP-003 standards. A stormwater plan prepared by a licensed professional Civil Engineer will be required which demonstrates no increase in peak rate to private properties for the 10% annual probability event (NOAA Atlas 14, 10-year). A final grade as-built survey and inspection will be required to verify compliance with the approved stormwater plan. Floodplain Development Floodway Designation and Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) The parcel intersects with the FEMA floodplain and floodway. The floodplain is the area covered by the regional flood, while the floodway is the portion of the floodplain that refers to the primary conveyance area of a creek channel. The existing non-conforming structure, built in 1960, is within the floodway designation. The city adopted ordinances to meet or exceed FEMA requirements and joined the National Flood Insurance Program in 1980. The property at 4208 Philbrook Lane is not directly adjacent to the creek channel and the regulatory floodway designation in this area seems to be a product of the modeling methodology rather than a representation of the primary conveyance of the creek through the channel. Staff have consulted with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) and were informed that a watershed-wide or county-wide update to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps for this area is years off, has been repeatedly delayed, and is not a priority. Once the process starts, it also typically takes a year or more for Page 41 of 160 the map review and approval process. The current effective FEMA maps are legal documents, and the city is not allowed to use preliminary maps for regulating redevelopment. There is an option to pursue formally revising the floodway designation for a small section of the creek. This would be through a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR). Aside from a full watershed-wide or county-wide update which is prioritized and facilitated by the MN DNR, the only process for modifying a floodway designation is through the LOMR process with FEMA. The owners will need to work with an engineer to perform a modeling analysis propose modifying the FEMA floodplain maps. A favorable outcome from FEMA is not guaranteed. If the applicants are successful in pursuit of a LOMR, it would have to go through the formal review and approval process at the local level before the city could legally apply it. The proposed plans show the structure in the existing floodway area. A successful Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from FEMA which moves the floodway designation off the building pad will be required before a building permit for a new structure will be issued. Regulatory Elevations The FEMA Base Flood Elevation (BFE) for this property is 860.2 feet (NGVD29). The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District maintains its own model which has incorporated more modern precipitation data (Atlas 14) and their model predicts a 1%-annual chance flood elevation of 860.5 feet. The proposed plans show the structure with a lowest floor elevation of 862.0 feet (NGVD29) providing 1.8 ft of freeboard for the FEMA BFE. The proposed plans show the structure with a lowest opening elevation of 862.7 feet providing 2.2 ft of freeboard for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District standard. Grading Per Sec. 36-842. - Standards for Flood Fringe permitted uses (a)All structures, including accessory structures, must be elevated on fill so that the lowest floor, as defined, is at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation. The finished fill elevation for structures must be no lower than one foot below the regulatory flood protection elevation and the fill must extend at the same elevation at least 15 feet beyond the outside limits of the structure. Any structure not elevated on fill in accordance with Sec. 36-842 may be allowed as a conditional use (Sec. 36- 843). The applicant is requesting a proposed conditional use for less than 15-foot extended fill pad and proposing to use a stem wall. The stem wall design must be certified by a licensed structural engineer. Sec. 36-944. - Conditional uses require submittal of hearing notices with at least ten days’ notice to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for proposed conditional uses. A copy of all decisions regarding conditional uses must also be forwarded to the DNR. The applicant has copied staff on their submittal to the DNR. The reviewed materials appear to meet the compensatory storage requirements of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, mitigating the fill needed to elevate the home. The grading plan provides a lowest adjacent grade (LAG) of 861.0 which provides 0.5 ft of freeboard from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Study base flood elevation. This is not a regulatory requirement but is advisory to Page 42 of 160 allow for the property to be eligible for a Letter of Map Revision based on Fill (LOMR-F) from FEMA post- project which could reduce or relieve flood insurance requirements. Erosion and Sediment Control An erosion and sediment control plan will need to be submitted at time of permit consistent with City of Edina Building Policy SP-002. Street and Driveway Entrance The applicant proposes to relocate/replace the existing curb cut. A driveway entrance permit will be required. The street was overlaid in 2013. Refer to standard plate 543 for patching requirements. Public Utilities Water and sanitary is served from Philbrook Ln. A one-inch water service line from the curb stop to the dwelling is required per the City’s policy SP-024. Sewer and water connection fees shall be paid prior to building permit issuance. Sump line available for connection. If connecting to the City sump line, a permit and compliance with City of Edina Building Policy SP-006 will be required. Miscellaneous A private well is likely not located onsite as the property was built in 1960 and the watermain was built in 1952. If a well is discovered during construction, it must be sealed by a licensed well contractor and a well sealing record provided to the city. For retaining walls greater than 4-feet, the applicant will be required to submit drawings, cross-section, and calculations prepared and signed by a Minnesota licensed professional engineer. Proposed Conditions •Administrative exception to the first-floor variance requirement •A successful Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from FEMA, which moves the floodway designation off the building pad, and which has been formally adopted by the City •Demonstrated no increase or transfer in flood risk to others, certified by a licensed engineer •The proposed stem wall must be certified by a licensed structural engineer •Permit issued by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District •An Elevation Certificate will be required before issuing a Certificate of Occupancy Page 43 of 160 MAANUM ARCHITECTURE, INC. 2905 SADDLEBROOK CIRCLE MINNETONKA, MN 55395 952.201,5030 WWW.MUANUMARCHITECTURE.COM 8/14/2024 4208 Philbrook Ln. Written Statement, CUP CITY OF EDINA AUG 1'5 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT The intended use of the property located at 4208 Philbrook Ln. is to tear down the existing non- conforming structure and build a new single-family home that conforms to the current floodway requirements by use of stem wall and fill. The new structure will create a reduction in impervious surface coverage and floodway encroachment and raise the lowest floor elevation and opening. Much time and study of options went into the plans that are submitted at this time. Coordination with the city, watershed and DNR was done to create what we believe is the best solution for the owners of this particularly challenging site. At this time of this report, there remains a floodway designation on the subject property. As grading and fill is restricted within the FEMA defined regulatory floodway, it is the intent to pursue a Letter of Map Revision(LOMR) to remove the floodway designation on a portion of the property. A later phase of this project includes a LOMR-f based on fill which would remove the floodplain designation from the new home and potentially alleviate the burden of flood insurance. The preliminary grading plan focuses on earthwork immediately adjacent to the proposed fill location,within the backyard and limited to the property boundary as the most effective means of providing compensatory mitigation. Several alternatives were considered for the preliminary grading plan. The CUP request is for the proposed use of a stem wall as an accepted alternate to the 15-foot extended fill pad. This is part of the overall effort with this site to manage the current city codes with the MCWD and FEMA floodway requirements. The proposed new single family home layout will reduce the building footprint and impervious surface coverage while also elevating the home to meet the elevation requirements associated with the floodway. The fill and stem wall proposed will provide compensatory storage required by the watershed to offset volume of fill placed in the floodplain. FEMA has a 15 foot buffer requirement on structures elevated on fill. This means that the fill is required to extend 15 feet beyond the limits of the proposed house foundation and presents challenges due to the proximity of the house to the side property boundary. In lieu of the 15 foot fill buffer, FEMA and the city allow a structural stem wall retaining wall to support the house foundation on fill. A stem wall in this instance will not only allow the fill to be certifiable to FEMA, but also has the benefit of significantly reducing the volume of compensatory mitigation required in the floodplain Per section 36-305, a conditional use permit shall meet the following. • Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements o Yes. There are no neighboring governmental facilities, utilities, services impacted. The proposed project improves floodway impacts. • Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property. o Yes. The proposed plan replaces an existing single family home with a new construction single family home so there will be no traffic impacts. Any construction traffic will follow all city ordinances. Page 44 of 160 MAANUM ARCHITECTURE, INC. 2905 SADDLEBROOK CIRCLE MINNETONKA, MN 55395 952.201.5030 WW W.MAANUMAACHITECTURE.C.0t0 • Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare. o Yes. The proposal makes improvements intended to bring the property winthin current standards. • Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity. o Yes. The intent of this proposal is to adhere to all zoning ordinances within the site constraints. • Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located, as imposed by this chapter. o Yes. The intent of this proposal is to adhere to all restrictions and special conditions. • Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. o Yes. Maanum Architecture, Inc. is a firm located in Minnetonka with numerous projects and land planning experience in the western metro area. A sampling of projects are listed below. North Lake Residences, Wayzata, MN Legacy Oaks, Minnetonka, MN Waypointe Condominiums, Wayzata, MN Aava Vetta Townhomes, Long Lake, MN Single Family Home, MeCaulley Tert., Edina, MN Single Family Home, Benton Blvd, Minneapolis, MN Remodel, Ridge Rd, Edina, MN CITY OF EDINA AUG 15 2024 Thank you, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Heather Maanum, AIA, LEED AP Page 45 of 160 MAANUM ARCHITECTURE, INC. 2905 SADDLEBROOK CIRCLE MINNETONKA, MN 55395 952.201.5030 Vil.WN.MAANUMARC NITECTURE,COM 8/14/2024 4208 Philbrook Ln. Written Statement, Variance Application CITY OF EDINA AUG 1 5 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT The intended use of the property located at 4208 Philbrook Ln. is to demo the existing non- conforming structure and build a new single-family home that conforms to the current floodway requirements by use of stem wall and fill. The homeowners are third-generation owners of the property and since the structure was built the floodway designation has changed. This was learned through exploring renovation and addition options for the existing home. The restrictions placed on the home due to the floodway designation made an addition not possible and a renovation not practical for a family with young children. The new structure will create a reduction in impervious surface coverage and floodway encroachment and raise the lowest floor elevation and opening. Much time and study of options went into the plans that are submitted at this time. Coordination with the city, watershed and DNR was done to create what we believe is the best solution for the owners of this particularly challenging site. At this time of this report, there remains a floodway designation on the subject property. As grading and fill is restricted within the FEMA defined regulatory floodway, it is the intent to pursue a Letter of Map Revision(LOMR) to remove the floodway designation on a portion of the property. A later phase of this project includes a LOMR-f based on fill which would remove the floodplain designation from the new home and potentially alleviate the burden of flood insurance. The preliminary grading plan focuses on earthwork immediately adjacent to the proposed fill location,within the backyard and limited to the property boundary as the most effective means of providing compensatory mitigation. Several alternatives were considered for the preliminary grading plan. The first request is for a 4.09ft setback variance from the 10ft requirement for a 5.91 ft side yard setback on the west side of the property. The setback would maintain the setback of the existing home on the west side, while shifting the footprint to adhere to the current setback requirement on the east side. Multiple scenarios were studied and while the home width could be reduced, or the front yard setback increased, this would increase the amount of fill and impact on the floodway. We believe this variance meets the intent of the ordinance and maintains the character of the existing neighborhood where the side yard setbacks are consistently around 5 feet There is also no negative impact as the existing setbacks are maintained or increased. The second request is for the maximum building height. The maximum building height allowed is 2 and 1/2 stories with the basement counting as a story if more than 50% of the exterior basement wall is above grade. It is a request for a 22.7% variance from the 50% maximum for exterior basement walls to be 72.7% above grade and therefore counted as a 3rd story. To adhere to floodway requirements, the overall height of the structure is being raised to meet the lowest floor elevation requirement. With this, the entire structure raises exposing more of the lower level. It is possible to then bring in additional fill and raise the grades within the site, but this will involve a great deal of cost and potentially impact the neighboring homes. As planned, the driveway and garage maintain the existing grades and are aligned with the garages of the surrounding homes, We believe that we meet the intent of the ordinance to manage building height relative to grade while respecting impact on neighboring properties. Great effort was made in the design of the home to reduce overall height and fit in with the neighboring homes and we sit at approximately 31' where ordinance allows up to 40' by lot width without the 2 and a half story requirement. Page 46 of 160 MAANUM ARCHITECTURE, INC. 2905 SADDLEBROOK CIRCLE MINNETONKA, MN 55395 952.201.5030 WNW, MAANUMARCHITECTURECOM Maanum Architecture, Inc. is a firm located in Minnetonka, MN with numerous projects and land planning experience in the western metro area. A sampling of projects are listed below. North Lake Residences, Wayzata, MN Legacy Oaks, Minnetonka, MN Waypointe Condominiums, Wayzata, MN Aava Vetta Townhomes, Long Lake, MN Single Family Horne, MeCaulley Tete., Edina, MN Single Family Home, Benton Blvd, Minneapolis, MN Remodel, Ridge Rd, Edina, MN Thank you, Heather Maanum, AIA, LEED AP CITY OF EDINA AUG 15 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Page 47 of 160 HOUSTON n , ENGINEERING INC Technical Memorandum To: Mike & Courtney Bush From: Adam Nies PE, CFM Houston Engineering, Inc. Subject: Phase 2 — Preliminary Grading Plan Date: January 12, 2024 (Amended August 5, 2024) Project #: 1377-0001 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. //' Adam N. Nies Date Registration No. PE-53358 8/5/2024 INTRODUCTION Following the phase 1 hydraulic analysis that incorporated an initial look at the floodway alignment shift, the Phase 2 Preliminary Grading Plan could be pursued. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) has a volume-based storage rule that requires compensatory storage to offset volume of fill placed in the floodplain. At the time of this report, there remains a floodway designation on the subject property. As grading and fill is restricted within the FEMA defined regulatory floodway, it is the intent to pursue a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) to remove the floodway designation on a portion of the property. This grading analysis assumes the LOMR will be successful, and the floodway designation will be removed, with the floodplain designation to remain in the interim. A later phase of this project includes a LOMR-f based on fill which would remove the floodplain designation from the new home and potentially alleviate the burden of flood insurance. This Technical Memorandum documents the development of the preliminary grading plan and the constraints of the compensatory mitigation. The intent is to design a potential solution(s) to mitigate the storage reduction caused by placing fill in the floodplain. Elevations listed in this report and preliminary grading plan reference NAVD88. The preliminary grading plan focuses on earthwork immediately adjacent to the proposed fill location, within the backyard and limited to the property boundary as the most effective means of providing compensatory mitigation. Several alternatives were considered for this preliminary grading plan. As is the case with most any residential lot in an urban setting, there are certain limitations with how the grading can take shape, as further described herein. The site plan and profiles are included within Exhibit 1 and include relevant sheets for storage volume curves for required fill mitigation to aid in permitting with the City. The stormwater management plan Displayed in Exhibit 2 includes discussion on the impervious surface areas between existing and proposed conditions and provides drainage contours with flow direction arrows to display the anticipated runoff patterns and ensures no new flow will be redirected to residential structures. Exhibit 3 presents a conceptual floodway realignment sheet displaying our anticipated realignment of the floodway during a future LOMR phase. These are further discussed in subsequent sections, CITY OF EDINA AUG l b 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7550 MERIDIAN CIR N, SUITE 1201 MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 Page 48 of 160 Alareer,11600..M, . HOUSTON ENGIFEERING INC. ON-SITE- CRAPING CONSTRAINTS One of the primary concerns with any grading plan is utilities. At the subject property, there is storm sewer along the north portion of the property and prevents any excavation work within the approximately 15 feet of the north property boundary. That area is currently landscaped with boulders and small vegetation. Also in the same area is a landscaped water feature that is desired by the client to remain. Another water feature on the property is a pool/pond within the backyard that is also restricted for excavation work. These constraints, along with several mature trees, and multiple sheds help define the boundaries with which excavation is feasible. Although some tree removals may be required, a recent city ordinance requires a tree survey and tree protection plan be established that requires certain species of trees be replaced if cut down. At the project site, there are several mature trees on the protected list and require the grading plan to avoid if possible. One tree in particular is a honey locust and is adjacent to the home, fill, and grading, and must be designed around and protected. STEM WALI The existing house is located within the property setback limits defined by the city. While the proposed house will partially alleviate the encroachment on the side yard setback, it is understood at this time as still requiring a variance. This is relevant to the compensatory mitigation of fill because FEMA has a 15 foot buffer requirement on structures elevated on fill. This means that the fill is required to extend 15 feet beyond the limits of the proposed house foundation and presents challenges due to the proximity of the house to the side property boundary. In lieu of the 15 foot fill buffer, FEMA and the city allow a structural stem wall retaining wall to support the house foundation on fill. A stem wall in this instance will not only allow the fill to be certifiable to FEMA, but also has the benefit of significantly reducing the volume of compensatory mitigation required in the floodplain. Several alternatives were discussed for the alignment of the stem wall, and the alignment chosen balances the desire for a backyard patio and reducing the fill in the floodplain. Placing the stem wall off of the easternmost corner of the proposed house eliminates the "deepest" portion of the fill in the floodplain, allowing this area of the yard to be used for grading and mitigation instead. The stem wall will add cost as it is required to be designed and certified by a structural engineer as part of future phases of the project, but will reduce some portion of the grading cost by eliminating a portion of the volume of fill required and the subsequent grading needs. The stem wall is likely to be constructed of sheet pile driven in place by vibratory hammer, as the easiest means of construction in a residential setting. Figure 1 displays an example stem wall from a recent project. Aesthetics of the stem wall can be enhanced by the landowner through traditional landscaping means. DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN One of the primary concerns with any grading plan is the drainage from the site. The project site is not currently experiencing major drainage concerns. The intent with the preliminary grading plan is to provide approximately a 1% cross slope grade or steeper within the grading footprint such that rainwater will flow in a generally northeasterly direction, in generally the same way as the existing site. Grading will not direct water at neighboring properties and runoff from the site will follow the same general drainage pattern as it does today. The grading will not cause adverse impact to the public stormwater drainage system since no new lands are directed into the drainage system. The overall impervious surface area on the property will be reduced with the proposed house plan, therefore the project will not increase the rate of runoff leaving the site. Exhibit 2 displays the approximate drainage flow path changes and impervious surface reduction as displayed on the stormwater management plan. CITY OF EDINA 7550 MERIDIAN CIR N, SUITE 120 I MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 AUG 15 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT PAGE 2 OF 5 • Page 49 of 160 $4,--44"Rogv; HOUSTON ENGINEERING INC. An early alternative design for the grading plan included grading near the northeast corner of the property, which introduced an obstruction to the natural drainage pattern away from the property by creating a "high ridge" with potential for ponding water. This ultimately led to other alternatives being pursued, however it is worth documenting in this report as discussion with the city was pursued to get verbal confirmation that a drainage connection would be acceptable, as long as appropriate permitting is obtained. The drainage connection concept would likely take the form of subsurface drain tile from the northeast corner of the property out to the east to become a private connection to the public drainage system adjacent to the subject property. A 6 inch diameter drain tile would provide sufficient drainage with backflow prevention and would be approximately 50 feet in length. A catch basin would be installed at the low point in the grading, example shown in Figure 2. Due to the extra permitting and cost, this alternative is not the preferred alternative. COMPENSATORY MITIGATioN The volume requirement to offset fill in the floodplain is a MCWD regulation as a "higher standard" than regulatory requirements established by FEMA. Therefore, FEMA's effective floodplain boundary and base flood elevation (BFE) of 861.0 are not what is utilized to establish the volume. Instead, the MCWD has a working model with more detailed input data than the FEMA modeling and results in a BFE of 860.7 (NAVD88), which is to be used for calculating compensatory storage mitigation and equates to a fill volume of 25.7 cubic yards, as displayed on the plans. Note that the plans do show fill up to elevation 861.0, which is applicable to the future anticipated LOMR-F, however the volume calculation for fill requiring mitigation is based on 860.7 (NAVD88). Figure 3 displays the elevation / volume curve comparing the available volume between existing and proposed conditions within the footprint of where fill is intended to be placed. The difference in available volume between the two curves corresponds to the required mitigation volume at 860.7 (NAVD88) and is 25.7 cubic yards. LOW OPENING Both the City and the MCWD require a minimum 2-foot freeboard between the low opening of the structure and the BFE of 860.7 (NAVD88). The low opening of the proposed house is at elevation 862.9 (NAVD88) providing 2.2 feet of freeboard, and is a walk-out patio door in the basement. RECOMMENDATION The preferred grading alternative as displayed in Exhibit 1 incorporates stern wall to significantly reduce the volume of compensatory mitigation required, and places the grading footprint closer to the house, immediately adjacent to the fill footprint, while avoiding protected trees, The total disturbance area of the combined cut and fill footprint is approximately 3,300 square feet. This project is not draining any new lands, it is allowing the property to drain essentially as it does under present day conditions, and reduces the amount of total impervious surface at the property, as displayed within Exhibit 2. This project will not alter floodplain connectivity during the base flood event. The preliminary grading plan represents a reasonable solution to compensatory mitigation. In a later phase, this preliminary plan can be converted into a construction-ready site plan, including a site survey, structural engineer certified stem wall design, geotechnical analysis, and construction specifications, if so desired. At this time it is understood that the City is requesting formal variance application. Depending on the level of detail required for the variance application, there may be need for geotechnical investigation and structural engineering completed _PnINA for certification of the fill pad and stem wall design. HEI does not have geotechnical staff personnec 1-Tan/Wei-we AUG 1 5 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7550 MERIDIAN CIR N, SUITE 1201 MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 PAGE 3 OF 5 Page 50 of 160 HOUSTON ENGINEERING INC do frequently work with geotechnical subconsultants on many of our projects. We would be happy to coordinate with them on your behalf and/or provide their contact information. Following the variance process with the city, the next phase of this project would be the pursuit of a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) submittal package to FEMA through the MnDNR that would officially revise the alignment of the floodway away from the working portion of the property, conceptually displayed in Exhibit 3. This can happen concurrently with, or following the variance application with the City. HEI would be happy to provide a detailed quote letter for coordination and completion of the LOMR. For future planning purposes, a basic outline of the regulating/permitting process as it relates to the floodplain is as follows: 1. Preliminary hydraulic analysis to confirm impacts due to floodway alignment shift (complete). 2. Preliminary grading plan for compensatory storage to mitigate fill in floodplain (complete, this report). 3. Geotechnical investigation and structural engineering design of the fill pad and stem wall, if required. 4. Pursue a LOMR to get the floodway alignment officially shifted. 5. Submit a CLOMR-F to get conditional approval from FEMA for the fill design (optional; recommended). 6. Tear down existing house/ Construct new house elevated on fill. Construct the mitigation for compensatory storage. 7. Apply for LOMR-F to officially remove new house from floodplain. Note that the order of steps outlined herein is subject to change pending regulatory requirements or approvals. CITY OF EDINA AUG 1 5 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7550 MERIDIAN CIR N, SUITE 1201 MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 Page 51 of 160 n II HOUSTON IIII ENGINEERING INC. Figure 1: Example stem wall sheet pile retaining wall. Figure 2: Example Catch Basin for Storm Drain Photo courtesy of DrainExchange, site accessed on 8/15/2023. Ilipslimw.drainexchancle.corninds-9-catch•basin-kit-areen- grate?ocfichvKCAiwx0ymBhAFEiwArbodBLFIlicel K84UzA7NPfZVikatZPk44NEOnVVMXGYV9DePXmxhBEGJmRoCIU4QAvD BwE Figure 3: Storage Volume Comparison within "Fill" Footprint 861.25 861.00 860.75 00 860.50 z 860.25 C ti 860.00 a) w 859.75 859.50 859.25 Existing —Proposed 859.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Volume (cu. ft.) CITY OF EDINA AUG 15 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7550 MERIDIAN CIR N, SUITE 120 I MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 .,-"r7e1r--71WIA Page 52 of 160 Houston Liviineef in.. Preliminary Grading Plan CITY OF EDINA AUG 5 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT L4 7550 MERIDIAN CIR N, STE 120 I MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 .411111111111111111 Page 53 of 160 10' 0 10' 20' Scale Feet LEGEND EASEMENT WOOD FENCE —t — UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINE SANITARY SEWER --"-- WATER MAIN - --- STORM SEWER FEMA ADMINISTRATIVE FLOODWAY MINNEHAHA CREEK OHW CITY OF EDINA AUG 15 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOTES: 1. HORIZONTAL CONTROL: ANY COORDINATES LISTED IN THIS PLAN ARE MINNESOTA STATE PLANE, SOUTH ZONE, US FOOT. 2. VERTICAL CONTROL: ALL ELEVATIONS ARE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88). Id 5:70 —_ _ I/ —( )TS ____E.42" CP ITS STS IC-eox 8509 I / 858.8 - I 859.0 r- PID: 1902824130091 Address:4300 PhIlbrook Lane Owner: JR Hoover & B Hoover , EXISTING POND LOT 17 BLOCK 1 EXISTING SHED PID: 1902824140082 Address:Unassigned Owner: Village of E,Ina - 1/01.; / \ `‘ I \ \ I I, \ I 8,60.0 41 > < :PROPOSED HOUSE FOOTPRINT 6.53` EXISTING HOUSE FOOTPRINT t / / ••••— •••-•::- 4114 eegifieti Site IGT: i I iN N 'c„ 611(‘R MINNEHAHA CREEK OHW 858.15 (NAVD88) ‘N (S) 15. r ASH I _/ EXISTING CONCRETE PAD \ Existing)cause PID: 1907824149074 \ Address:4204 PhTbrook Cane Owner: Jesse Schultz and Kvsta Schultze, 1 2 1 taji HOUSTON • . en ineeri , inc gng Drawn by APD Date 1/2/2024 4208 PHILBROOK - LOMR MIKE AND COURTNEY BUSH EDINA, MINNESOTA EXISTING TOPO FROM LIDAR PROJECT NO. 1377-0001 SHEET 1 I Checked by ANN Scale AS SHOWN No. Revision Date By H: VBN \ 1300 \ 1377 \ 1377_0001 \ CAMPlans \ 1377-0001 Philbrook Existing Plan.dwg-Layoutl-2/21/2024 7:44 AM-(adargay) Page 54 of 160 I Ve. 85679 I TRANSECT EXISTING SHED \\ ,\\ PID: 1902824140082 / I \ \ 11 Owner: Villageof Edina Address: Unassigned / COT- \_ 16 r 15: EXISTING WATER FEATURE NOTES: 1. HORIZONTAL CONTROL: ANY COORDINATES LISTED IN THIS PLAN ARE MINNESOTA STATE PLANE, SOUTH ZONE, US FOOT. 2. VERTICAL CONTROL: ALL ELEVATIONS ARE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAND 88). E ---t ,31, r Low Opening Elevation 862.9 (NAVD 88) TRANSECT 3 A \.\\ LOT ALS 18 \ MINNEHAHA CREEK OHW 858.15 (NAVD88) V Existing\110050 , \-, \ \ \ PIO: 190„7824149074 L N \s„, \1 \ Address:4204 PhlIbrookne \ \ — N I \ \..., Owner: lesse'SchOtz and IC.cvsta Schultz. '—‘ --> I \ \\ r k -- --- L‘ - t.- \. ,-- > ,_, \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ I \ 1 \ __ (\ 1_) \ •,... _ei i i 4-. , -- -,_ \ / -- \ -__ \ \ --\ \ ) . \ / \ , \ -_ \ \ ./ -N 1 ( 1 ) / / I \ / `-,. ) \ / \ \ I • FEMA FLOODWAY 8FE 861 -1711 — E1 t 1 \ \_ PID: 1902824130091 Address:4300 PhIlbrook Lane PROPOSED Owner: JR Hoover & B Hoover STEM WALL V 10' 0 10' 20' Scale Feet LEGEND CUT VOLUME: 26.63 CY / 2057.2 SQ FT * FILL VOLUME: 25.67 CY / 1224.14 SQ FT EASEMENT WOOD FENCE UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINE SANITARY SEWER WATER MAIN STORM SEWER FEMA ADMINISTRATIVE FLOODWAY MINNEHAHA CREEK OHW * FILL VOLUME DETERMINED UP TO MCWD 100 - YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION 860.7 (NAVD88). CITY OF EDINA AUG 1 5 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 0 611 HOUSTON engineering, inc. Drawn by APD Date 1/2/2024 4208 PHILBROOK - LOMR MIKE AND COURTNEY BUSH EDINA, MINNESOTA SITE DESIGN PROJECT NO. 1377-0007 SHEET 2 I Checked by ANN Scale 1' = 10' `No. Revision Date By 2 `4? 5 9 8 3 P Page 55 of 160 Elevations in NAVD88 NOTES: 1. HORIZONTAL CONTROL: ANY COORDINATES LISTED IN THIS PLAN ARE MINNESOTA STATE PLANE, SOUTH ZONE, US FOOT. 2. VERTICAL CONTROL: ALL ELEVATIONS ARE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88). 870 870 870 870 0+00 0+00 0+50 0+50 TRANSECT 2 TRANSECT 1 870 870 870 870 0+00 0+50 0+00 0+50 865 ( 1 1 i 865 860 _ 860 EXISTING GRADE T....±.....-...-------,.....—.. — --, 855 ----„,..7........„ -- ___ 855 PROPOSED GRADE -/i - - I I I I 865 865 860 - III"' EXTERIOR WALL OF PROPOSED HOUSE PROPOSED GRADE - 860 4:1 855 --- , --_. EXISTING GRADE -/ I L 1.5% _ 855 I _ 1 865 1 I I r 865 860 - - EXTERIOR WALL OF ".Z.- PROPOSED HOUSE ,/- PROPOSED GRADE _ - - 860 ,.....„..,....-- STEM WALL 855 _ - — -.......„..........._ ^-_ — — — — —1.590 - — --._ I - EXISTING GRADE - - I 855 \- PROPOSED GRADE I I TRANSECT 3 865 _ 865 860 .-- --- ---- _ _ _1.5% 860 855 / ... - .... E___ XISTIN___G GRADE ...41.1„... ...,..... ....... _ ..._&i ---. -- _ ____ _ 855 PROPOSED GRADE TRANSECT 4 CITY OF EDINA AUG 15 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT f 611 HOUSTON engineering, inc. Drawn by APD Date 1/2/2024 4208 PHILBROOK — LOMR MIKE AND COURTNEY BUSH EDINA, MINNESOTA PROFILES PROJECT NO. 1377-0007 S SHEET 3 i Checked by ANN Scale N.T.S. Spa Revision Date By c4_ ry 4. 4.6 LL B 8 a 7 Page 56 of 160 Elevation (NAVD 88) 860.25 860.00 861.25 861.00 860.75 860.50 Fill volume cross-checked by comparing the existing vs. proposed available storage volume within the fill footprint. Existing and Proposed ground surfaces exported from CAD and available storage volume curves are computed in GIS. Subtracting the proposed available volume from the existing available volume curve at elevation 860.7 (NAVD88) confirms the required mitigation volume is correct as listed in plans. Proposed —Existing 859.75 859.50 859.25 859.00 Storage Volume Comparison within "Fill" Footprint 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Volume (cu. ft.) Page 57 of 160 EXHIBIT 2 Stormwater Management Plan Including approximate drainage flow paths and summary of impervious surface area comparison between existing and proposed 7550 MERIDIAN CIR N, STE 120 I MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 Page 58 of 160 NOTES: 1. HORIZONTAL CONTROL: ANY COORDINATES LISTED IN THIS PLAN ARE MINNESOTA STATE PLANE, SOUTH ZONE, US FOOT. 2. VERTICAL CONTROL: ALL ELEVATIONS ARE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88). 0-' I STS STS I— 0S-1 27' PDX STS IlLftCP / I V= ic4-oox \ 8509 J ? “Ys, 11: x I I— e4:9, I- \ / \ ._ / ,.) 1 / \ 6'5) .8 '''',. ----- \ I N . ,; 3;9.0- \ . LEGEND ' LO 17 BLACK; 1 EXISTING POND EXISTING SHED PID: 1902824140082 / Address:Unassigned Owner: Village of Edina EASEMENT WOOD FENCE UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINE SANITARY SEWER WATER MAIN STORM SEWER FEMA ADMINISTRATIVE FLOODWAY MINNEHAHA CREEK OHW \ /1 N PROPOSED HOUSE ry FOO AS FO -'o cr?,. EXISTING HOUSE FOOTPRINT 1 1 1 / Approximate Existing \ Drainage Path \ PID: 1902824130091 Address:4300 Philbrook lane Owner: JR Hoover & B Hoover .-- CITY OF EDINA kc -J -A--- /k / MINNEHAHA CREEK OHW 858.15 (NAVD88) \-) , I i \ / r4, — --- ---- \ t \ ) \ / c \,. \ ) \ p vs , ( \, s \\ \ \ \ 1 N \ Existing use N \ PIO: 19(1.2824140074 \ \ Address:4204 Phibrook lane \ Owner: Jesse SchuItz and Kcysta Schultz \ -- \ \ \ \,. --- \ ,,,, --. \ \ \ \ \ ( \ ,3 \,/ ) \ > / / I \ \ r— J "N. 1 AUG 1' 5 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT P O‘'▪ \ <(/\ CS'S ( ' 0' 0 10' 20' Scale Feet 0 ( I 1/ - --- 6i HOUSTON • • engineering, inc. Drawn by APD Date 1/2/2024 4208 PHILBROOK - LOMR MIKE AND COURTNEY BUSH EDINA, MINNESOTA EXISTING TOPO FROM LIDAR PROJECT NO. 1377-0001 N SHEET 1 .01 ( Checked by ANN Scale AS SHOWN . No. Revision Date By a 3 a O O z Page 59 of 160 10' 0 Approximate Proposed Drainage Path Scale LEGEND CUT VOLUME: 26.63 CY / 2057.2 SQ FT * FILL VOLUME: 25.67 CY / 1224.14 SQ FT EASEMENT WOOD FENCE UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINE SANITARY SEWER WATER MAIN STORM SEWER FEMA ADMINISTRATIVE FLOODWAY MINNEHAHA CREEK OHW * FILL VOLUME DETERMINED UP TO MCWD 100 - YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION 860,7 (NAVD88). NOTES: S. HORIZONTAL CONTROL: ANY COORDINATES LISTED IN THIS PLAN ARE MINNESOTA STATE PLANE, SOUTH ZONE, US FOOT. 2. VERTICAL CONTROL: ALL ELEVATIONS ARE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAV° 88). Low Opening Elevation 862.9 (NAVD 88) PROPOSED STEM WALL TRANSECTS / rt,1 TRANSECT 2 4,4„?..1 ahe ZONE AE C t t t t I t STS 42" RCP STS-- --:) T ,.., --- ---- ----- -141. -rrtBS8.8- — — ..--- --- _ -.55(30— --- — ..---' . 1 [ I \ / EXISTING . WATER FEATURE TRANSECT 3 EXISTING POND As'o r PRE (.5 ir Box • Ve EXISTING SHED PID: 1902824140082 / Address:Unassigned Owner: Village of Edina r- \ \ — \ \ \ N r 10' 20' Feet \ FEMA FLOODWAY BFE 861. Approximate Existing Drainage Path CITY OF EDINA I AUG 1 5 2024 esi: PLANNING 0%<<>Wes /e'(' T- col CS 18 -f-r„ — Existing house • PID: 1902824149074 Addresst42Phtlbrook.ane Owner: Jesse Sclulktv and lysta Schultz \ MINNEHAHA CREEK —77 OHW 858.15 (NAVD88) N N ~.\- 2 N \ ( r ' N i I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or 611 HOUSTON engineering, inc. Drawn by APD Date 1/2/2024 4208 PHILBROOK - LOMR MIKE AND COURTNEY BUSH EDINA, MINNESOTA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN PROJECT NO. 1377-0007 SHEET 2 I under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the Stale of Minnesota. /4(,_, /I /7-7- 8/05/2024 Checked by ANN Scale '10' 1 = .‘,1,10. Revision Date By Adam N. Nies Date License No. 53358 HAJEINM300 \ 1377 \ 1377_0001 \CAD \ Plans \ 1377-0001 Final Philbrook Plan.dwg-Layout1-2/21/2024 7:45 AM-(adargay) Existing Impervious Area: 4,260 sq. ft. or approx. 23% of total lot area 18,889 sq. ft. Proposed Impervious Area: 3,389 sq. ft. or approx. 18% of total lot area 18,889 sq. ft. Due to the planned approx. 5% reduction of impervious area, no increase in runoff rate from the project site is anticipated. No new lands are directed to the City stormwater system. No new connections to the City storm sewer system are planned. No stormwater controls or facilities are being considered for this project. Proposed drainage paths follow generally the same patterns as existing conditions and will not direct water at neighboring properties more than existing conditions. Flow concentration areas will not be substantially altered for the project. Page 60 of 160 • 2 I HoustonEn9ineenng inc IN Conceptual Proposed Floodway Boundary CITY OF EDINA AUG 1 5 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT - 7550 MERIDIAN CIR N, STE 120 I MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 Page 61 of 160 T I — r RCP STS ' TS f 858 2 Ptual Proposed_-_ It4bundary-- .858.2,' —\ ‘, 10' 0 10' 20' Scale Feet — EXISTING POND r— N \ ( ti NOTES: 1. HORIZONTAL CONTROL: ANY COORDINATES LISTED IN THIS PLAN ARE MINNESOTA STATE PLANE, SOUTH ZONE, US FOOT. 2. VERTICAL CONTROL: ALL ELEVATIONS ARE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88). INV- 8S6‘.79 I EXISTING / WATER FEATURE \ v \TRANSECT 1 ....,_ / ' V. PID: 1902824130091 , i Address:4300 Ph Ilbrook Lane ', PROPOSED Owner: JR Hoover & B HOover STEM WALL Li LEGEND LOT 17 ,OCK 1 EXISTING SHED PID: 1902824140082 CUT VOLUME: 26.63 CY / 2057.2 SQ FT / Address:Unassined / Owner: Village of V ina / * FILL VOLUME: 25.67 CY / 1224.14 SQ FT (i r EASEMENT WOOD FENCE \ , F --- UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINE \ LOT- 16 r SANITARY SEWER :, i ! .- WATER MAIN ' STORM SEWER \ \ FEMA ADMINISTRATIVE FLOODWAY 7\ / „I c ( 3 r I 1 ( MINNEHAHA CREEK OHW o * FILL VOLUME DETERMINED UP TO MCWD --_, j 1 1 IN \ \ 100 -YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION •"</- I ) I 11 4\/-.A \ 860.7 (NAVD88). i -11 2 • 1) ---. -- / I ' / r a." \ Low Opening Elevation 862.9 (NAVD 88) FEMA FLOODWAY BFE 861 I / 1. L--- > \..- \ .) ( 1. ;4 ) - ---.., -.--_, --"` N i \., \ \ '' `',,, \ \ , \ -\ , / \ , . ( 1 \ 1 :RANSECT 3 ZONE AE - TRANSECT4 \ , PID: 19J:1282410074 \ -N. \ ' Address:420 Plilbrook Lane ' \ ' N. \ \ Owner: )esseSchtiltz And 81-ysta Schultz\ 1_, ..... k \ , \ \ - , \ \ \ . \ 1 ,) • ,) \ \ \ NJ i \ , ,N ,\ '--, : \ : \ .) , 1 ' /> / ' /. . \ 1 \ \ Existing(louse „..si V\ ( ,N, 1 ) '', / (II((i., //.. , LOT --\ , I ji, /- ' 18 / 1 ,-.„ 1)\ ,.._1.---_,:,,, MINNEHAHA CREEK) ,.....„ If I I , 1 ,-- ,,N I OHW 858.15 (NAVD88) ' -----. l/ r• ' I ,.., i j ---, - , \ \ j_.1 \ \ \ \ ( \ s 7- 2. 11-' i N v AUG 1 2024 (IA ‘:(- \\"‘ PLANNING DEP‘\ ; Q. IsC4c;S •SL Conceptual Proposed ' Floodway Boundary for LOMR phase CITY OF EDINA \ 1300 \ 1377 \ 1377_0001 \ CAD\PlanA 1377-0001 Final Philbrook Plan.dwg-Layout1-2/21/2024 7:45 ANI-(adargay) 61 HOUSTON engineering, inc. Drawn by APD Date 1/2/2024 4208 PHILBROOK - LOMR MIKE AND COURTNEY BUSH EDINA, MINNESOTA SITE DESIGN PROJECT NO. 1377-0007 SHEET 2 1. Checked by ANN Scale 1' = 10' . No. Revision Date By Page 62 of 160 0 10' • Scale • ,).,•L';.0° I•,), ZONE AE (),0 O • .1 / ss— TRA11 SECT 4 • A ) / Existing kinuse \ PIO: 190282414'1074 Address:4204 Ph'Ibruukne Owner: Jesse SchnIU and likysta Schultz, NOTES: 1. HORIZONTAL CONTROL: ANY COORDINATES LISTED IN THIS PLAN ARE MINNESOTA STATE PLANE, SOUTH ZONE, US FOOT. 2. VERTICAL CONTROL: ALL ELEVATIONS ARE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88). Existing Impervious Area: 4,260 sq. ft. or approx. 23% of total lot area 18,889 sq. ft. Proposed Impervious Area: 3,389 sq. ft. or approx. 18% of total lot area 18,889 sq. ft. It / 'r I '85N ;.% --fXISTING WATER FEATURE 4 STS 42" RCP STS —/ — (\ ,\ 857,18 --- Ts, I 8o j 77' I01 858 5 858.2 EXISTING POND ) Due to the planned approx. 5% reduction of impervious area, no increase in runoff rate from the project site is anticipated. No new lands are directed to the City stormwater system. No new connections to the City storm sewer system are planned. No stormwater controls or facilities are being considered for this project. Proposed drainage paths follow generally the same patterns as existing conditions and will not direct water at neighboring properties more than existing conditions. Flow concentration areas will not be substantially altered for the project. IS I ‘\\ \ 1 ' \' \ ,)\\ ‘\, 1 / EXISTING SHED PID: 1902824140082 Address:Unassigried / Owner: Village Of Edna // / r \ ) 1 2 1 II S . 2 PROPOS TEM W TRANSECT 1- PROPOSED STEM WALL EASEMENT WOOD FENCE UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINE SANITARY SEWER WATER MAIN STORM SEWER FEMA ADMINISTRATIVE FLOODWAY MINNEHAHA CREEK OHW * FILL VOLUME DETERMINED UP TO MCWD 100 -YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION 860.7 (NAVD88). li`› TRANSECT 2 On 00,,fe) 7x4 . P. Low Opening Elevation 862.9 (NAVD 88) Approximate Existing Drainage Path At! MIN NEHAHA CREEK OHW 858.15 (NAVD88) Approximate Proposed Drainage Path • s\_ 8600 858.2 10' 20' Feet CITY OF EDINA AUG 15 2024 LibEICINNING DEPARTMENT CUT VOLUME: 26.63 CY / 2057.2 SQ FT * FILL VOLUME: 25.67 CY / 1224.14 SQ FT hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or 61 HOUSTON engineering, inc. Drawn by APD Date 1/2/2024 4208 PHILBROOK - LOMR MIKE AND COURTNEY BUSH EDINA, MINNESOTA STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN PROJECT NO. 1377-0007 SHEET 2 No. i under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer /7 under t1) , eras of th late of Minnesota. 8/05/2024 Checked by ANN Scale 1' = 10' Revision Date By Adam N. Mes Date License No. 53358 Page 63 of 160 4208 PhlEeaok Lane PID: 1902824140073 4159 Heatherton Place,. Minnetonka, MN 55345 AUG 1 5 2024 FlELD CREW DRAVA( BY C;afp 9N 5 10 20 5 0 CivilSite Building Setback Lite, i" beerFence---- 42' PCP - >> >> >> '» Minnehaha Creek Ordkory High Water Line = 857.96 (NM 29)- 111111 Line Of Lot 17 As F,,,,---- NE19.54'32"E 106.70 Flonurnentatioll And P.. .11.1 fill II Lhe Of -G.A. )01815011'S SOUTHWOOD' As Descrebed On Pecorded (II of the 5 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the TIE 1/4 OF Ser. 19,1,, 20, Png. 241 ICI Private Electric I Line and Outlets x Cress Properly Ltle I g Ig / L ClB) r sT'snes'IT oPpe71; e (GR OUP EM Enginavring • Surve)Ing • Landscape Architecture 5000 Glenwood Avenue Golden Volley, MN 55422 elv1,1•Awns, roe DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED Lot 17, Bbok 1, G.A. Johnson's Southwood, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Torrens Properly) General Notes I. This drawing was prepwed foe Whitten Associates, Inc. 2. Bearings are based on the Hennepin County C000dinate System (1986 Adjustment). 3. Site Address: 4208 Philbrook Lane, Edina, MN 55424. 4. The Gross Land area h 18,889 4/. square feet or 0.434 4/- acres. 5. Elevations are based on the IMO 29 Datum. The She Benchmark is the top nut of the fre hydrant !waled on the north side of PhIbrook Lane, approoknately 12 feet southwesterly of the southwesterly corner of subject property, as shown hereon. Elevation = 866.46. 6. Proposed grades shown adjacent to building foundation refers to top of black dirt. 7. Proposed grades north of the proposed house are desqned by Houston Engneering as part of a FEMA tiro Revision submittal. 8. The proposed driveway, side wok, and stem wag shown is conceptual only and does not purport to show exactly how they wig be built. 9. Building Plans Associates, Inc. dated 10-03-2023. 10. Background topographk survey prepwed by Civil Site Group dated 03-04-2022. Place slit fence around perimeter of construction area as depicted hereon. 12. Place rack construction entrance as depicted hereon. 13. Per a letter horn the M innehah a Creek Watershed provided to us by the client, the °winery High Water of Minnehaha Creek 6 858.15 (NAVD 88 Vahan) and the 100 year High Water Level is 860.7(NAVD 88 Datum). This survey is based on NGVD 29 Datum. To convert hom NAVD 88 Datum to NGVD 29 Datum, subtract 0.19 feet for an Ordinary High Water of 857.96 and a 100 year High Water Level of 860.5. 612-815-0060 \ --100 Yew High Water \ Level = 860.5 (8611 29) kt,\ Landscape Ootrldels p . . . . 3 Replacerfient Eastern Red Cedar Tree! Building Setbacks (Per Architect Discussions with City) FRONT YARD 34.5 SIDE YARD 5.9 (West), 11.8 (East) PEAR YARD 25.0 PID: 1902824130091 Address:4300 PhIlbrook Lane Owner: JP Hoover e 6 Hoover Proposed Lot Elevation. GFE 0 Opening = 866.0 GFE 0 Back = 866.4 FFE = 871.0 LFE = 862.0 LOE= 862.7 POD: 1902824140007 Address.Unassigned Village of Elk, Proposed Hardcover Calcluations House Area = 2,186 Sq. Ft. Driveway Area = 648 Sq. Ft. Stoop Area = 132 Sq. FL Walk Area = 80 Sq. Ft. Deck Area = 288 Sq. FL Ret. Wag Area = 55 So. FL Total Hardcover Area = 3,389 Sq. Ft. Total Lot Area = 18,889 Sq. FL Proposed Hardcover = 17.94% Minnehaha Creek Ordinary , -Hqh Water Line = 857.96 I 4 % (MVO 29) brook Lane titi Whitten Associates, Inc. Edina, Hennepin County, MN 55424 On CITY OF EDINA -Found Opel Iron Pve 1.02 feet S of and 1.34 Feel E of corner. 0 de s‘:64 ` 863 ' Tiber F ence -Tinter Fence PLANNING DEPARTME b g. (.2 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY, PLAN, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SURER VISION AND THAT IAM ADULT LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR LANDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. •-• A i -r-t I A i/s ',I II / II IIr t 1111,1 RORY L. 91TS9TELIEN • --864-.0 \,„ .0 ,.N tot‘ n 1•54 DATE 12-6-2023 UCEll SE no 44565 Xe,,, QA(QC REVIEWED BY UPDATED BY X case SCALE IN FEET AN VICINITY MAP Linetype & Symbol Legend SU. GUARDRAIL • ACCESS RESTRICTION CONCRETE SURFACE PAVER SURFACE BITUHNOUS SURFACE GRAVEL/LANDSCAPE SURFACE %.„ Basement Exposure C 'anions garage stoop front wal dde wall side wall rear wall Total length ii ft 22 22 16 39 39 60 198 grade 866 866 866 863.75 avg. 863.75 avg. 861.5 percentage 11.10% 11.10% 8.10% 19.70% 19.70% 30.30% basement ex posire ft 0 5 5 7.25 7.25 9 percentage 0% 55.50% 55.50% 80.50% 80.50% 100% Basement exposure sq ft 0 110 80 282.75 282.75 540.00 1295.5 Total aposure 72.70% AIR CONDITIONER IID CABLE TY BOX 0 • ELECTRIC MANHOLE 01 ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER gg • ELECTRICAL METER 0 FIBER/COMM. MANHOLE POWER POLE GUY WIRE O GAS METER GAS MANHOLE GAS VALVE ROOF DRAW B SEV)ER CLEAN OUT SANITARY MANHOLE STORM MAITHME a FLARED END SECTION CATCH BASIN 0 DECIDUOUS TREE 18 TELEPHONE BOX OSB SOIL BORING TELEPHONE MANHOLE • 106.810 IRON MONUMENT TRAFFIC SIGNAL O SET OR TO BE SET IRON MONUMENT HYDRANT CAST IRON MONUMENT FIRE CONNECTION POST INDICATOR VALVE • WATER MANHOLE 8 WATER VALVE WELL Ni] REVISION SUMMARY DATE DESCRIPTION 1.05.1024 Added LOE MCWD OHW 4061024 Revised Lav Flow Etrentl on Comment, ON Comments 0: 22012.00 LOT CERTIFICATE V1 . 0 s'•-100 Year High Water Level = 860.5 (NM 29) UTILITY VAULT UTILITY MANHOLE ELECTRICAL OUTLET HAND HOLE BOLLARD FLAG POLE FUEL TANK HANDICAP S1MBOL LIGHT POLE MAIL BOX SIGN CONIFEROUS TREE 7-242024 6-682024 PROJECT ELECTRIC LINE ---E----E-- ELECTRIC LINE (RECORD) F- FIBER/COMA LINE ---F----r FIBER/COMM LINE (RECORD) • GASM(I - - OVERHEAD UTILITIES ->- SANITARY SEWER -6-->-- SANITARY SEWER (RECORD) - >> - STORM SEWER STORM SEWER (RECORD) TELEPHONE UNE ---T----T-- TELERIONE UNE (RECORD) -Ti- WATERMAIN WATERMAN (RECORD) X CHAIMAISK FENCELIKE -0- WOCOEN FENCELIKE ©COP YR.+, 2023 C.-5.1TE 0R011,1.1 Page 64 of 160 ' — " — Es) ch it r * 4- ilk 0 UP 1 RISER ., GUEST OFFICE iv SUITE C.T FAMILY 14' - 9" o CPT. ROOM L b CL --a BAR _ - - --r, UP j 1 cf) kl. — — — — — I — T i--- UNEX. MECH / STOR / FUT. WORKOUT / SAUNA CV MECH/STOR I -,, 22' - 0" 22' - 0" 16' - 0" CITY OF EDINA LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1160 fin sf AUG 15 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2905 SADDLEBROOK CIRCLE MAANUM ARCHITECTURE, INC. MINNETONKA, MN 55395 952.201.5030 4208 PHILBROOK LN EDINA, MN 20 MAY 2024 WWW.MAANUMARCHITECTURECOM Page 65 of 160 DECK 24' - 0" 0 60' - 0" 19' - 6" 14'- 0" 12' - 0" . . 8' - 7 1/2" LL 5' - 4 1/2" . L .... .......... i' ,i! EL] R PANTRY % DW WIC - KITCHEN GREAT .... g — w o o 0 Os— MUD Z N a. 00 0 0 I I II II FP OWNERS b In ROOM r4 o T T J -- SUITE F-- D 0 I 0 1 __I L. IF Il II II"III I I UP 9' - -- 10 1/2" — ---1 — — — r [ -----1 LQ a I b 1 "en co DN UP I I T11 I =._--- to ..sr BEN Hi i It HOOKS 1 WIC b) II N _ = . 1) 7' 6" - GARAGE 1 MI ,... cv - '-' LAUNDRY — — —I HUTCH _L 1 I_ 6' - 10 /2" (0) 0 t.i . [3 D PORCH L _, / .:r ' b ,-- d , 14' - 9" r 5' - 2 1/2" 6' - 9 1/2" 22' - 0" 16' - 0" 22' - 0" 60' - 0" MAIN LF,V1H,L FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 11-0" 1 680sf 2905 SADDLEBROOK CIRCLE MAAN JIV ARMITECTURE, INC, MINNETONKA, MN 55395 952,201.5030 WWW.MAANUMARCHITECrURECOM 4208 PHILBROOK LN EDINAI MN 20 MAY 2024 Page 66 of 160 5' - 2 1/2" 6' - 9 1/2" 6" 19' - DECK 24' - 0" 0 60' - 0" 14' - 0" 12' - 0" O 0) 8' - 7 1/2" LL 5' - 4 1/2" R t I-- PANTRY - -1 DW HE WIC 1 I I i _ KITCHEN GREAT N -,:: iu 0 0 1 z 0 0 1 0 FP I Li MUD N a. 0 0 I OWNERS T - _I - SUITE Ca ROOM ce o 1 0 L-1 [--i i--1 LJ I__I _J L 1- - - III II III 1 1 UP 9' - 10 1/2" — —''' j e I= Li= - ALA / Zo in . in co DN UP I - ____C NM__ 7 BENCH/ i-_- - - W '4' HOOKS WIC 7' - 6" o GARAGE a, 74 c\I " AUI‘ DRY ZN .4. , b HUTCH I 6' 10 1/2" 6 i . E PORCH a 0 • 14' - 9" r 22' - 0" 16' - 0" 22' - 0" 60' - 0" MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1680sf CITY OF EDINA AUG 1 5 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2905 SADDLEBROOK CIRCLE MAANUM ARCHITECTURE, INC. MINNETONKA, MN 55395 952.2013030 4208 PHILBROOK LN EDINA, MN 20 MAY 2024 WWWMAANUMARCHITECTURE.COM Page 67 of 160 r UNFINISHED ATTI STORAGE CO O LL 38' - 7 1/2" 27' - 3" 11' - 4 1/2" 8' - 0" 12' - 1 1/2" 5' - 0" 11' - 0" o OFFICE _ 9 111 pp.-- BEDROOM - X 01 BEDROOM 1 WIC ---- IWIC I 4' 6" - 4 5' - 0" ILID DN r-- 14' - 7 3/4" LOFT ,-7. o — —_,---- BEDROOM ¨ WIC 4l e 10' - 10 1/2" 3' - 6" 22' - 7 1/2" 16' - 0" a CITY OF EDINA UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 11-0" 1390sf AUG 15 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2905 SADDLEBROOK CIRCLE MAANUM ARCHITECTURE, INC. MINNETONKA, MN 55395 952.201.5030 4208 PHILBROOK LN EDINA MN • 7 1 20 MAY 2024 WWW.MAANUMARCHITECTURE.COM Page 68 of 160 b GARAGE LEVEL LEVEL \--- ROOF O CO SECOND LEVEL b MAIN LEVEL 0 1 =I m LOWER LEVEL SOUTH EL FNATION SCALE: 3/32" = 1,-0" EAST 14,I_EVATION SCALE: 3/32" = 1-0" '-`1 OF EDINA AUG 1 5 2024 pL,,,v,,,NG DEPARTMENT [it '111111t1 NORTH ET WF,ST ELEVATION SCALE: 3/32" = SCALE: 3/32" = 11-0" 2905 SADDLEBROOK CIRCLE MAANUM ARCHITECTURE, INC. MINNETONKA, MN 55395 952.201.5030 4208 PHILBROOK LN., EDINA,MN 26 JUL 2024 WWW.MAANUMARCHITECTURE.COM Page 69 of 160 b GARAGE LEVEL 866 ROOF LEVEL - — 0 Eo 7r, ,s SECOND LEVEL b MAIN LEVEL / LOWER LEVEL — • SOUTH FLEVATION SCALE: 3/32" = 1-0" EAST ELF,VATION SCALE: 3/32" = CITY OF EDINA AUG 15 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT NORTH ELFNATION SCALE: 3/32" = 1,-0" WEST IH,LFNATION SCALE: 3/32" = 2905 SADDLEBROOK CIRCLE MAANUM ARCHITECTURE, INC. MINNETONKA, MN 55395 952.201.5030 4208 PHILBROOK LN EDINA, MN • 7 26 JUL 2024 WWWMAANUMARCHITECTURE.COM Page 70 of 160 11•11,•••111 FRONT PERSPECTIVE VIEW NO SCALE CITY OF EDINA AUG 15 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2905 SADDLEBROOK CIRCLE MAANUM ARCHITECTURE, INC. MINNETONKA, MN 55395 952.201.5030 4208 PHILBROOK LN EDINA, MN 20 MAY 2024 WWW.MAANUMARCHITECTURE.COM Page 71 of 160 PERSPECTIVE VIEW - NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES NO SCALE CITY OF EDINA AUG f 5 2024 PLANNING DEPARTiviEN I MAANUM ARCHITECTURE, INC. m ..c. (.-1, . 7,„ 4208 PHILBROOK LN., EDINA, MN Page 72 of 160 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: September 25, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: Planning Commission Agenda Number: 7.1 Prepared By: Bill Neuendorf, Economic Dev Mgr Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Community Development Item Title: Resolution B-24- 09: Finding that the proposed 72nd & France #3 TIF Plan conforms to the general plans for development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Action Requested: Approve Resolution B-24-09 finding that the proposed 72nd & France #3 TIF Plan conforms to the general plans for development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Information/Background: This item pertains to the proposed TIF Plan that will serve as the guiding document for the 72nd & France #3 TIF District. The Planning Commission is asked to submit a written response to confirm that the project pursued in this TIF Plan conforms to the City's general plans for development and redevelopment. A staff report and presentation affirms this conformance. The City Council approved the rezoning of this project on September 17, 2024. The approved plans are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission is asked to verify that the approved plans are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, including the Southdale District Plan. Staff recommends that Resolution B-24-09 be approved. Supporting Documentation: 1. PC Res B-24-09 _ 72 France #3 TIF District Staff-Report 2. Planning Commission Resolution B-24-09 72nd France #3 TIF District 3. 72 and France #3 TIF District presentation PC 9-25-2024 4. TIF Plan - 72nd and France #3 DRAFT 8-29-2024 Page 73 of 160 September 25, 2024 Chair and Commissioners of Edina Planning Commission Bill Neuendorf, Economic Development Manager Resolution B-24-09: Findings Regarding the Proposed 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District Information / Background: A real estate developer intends to redevelop the 8-acre commercial site at 7235 France Avenue. This property is currently home to Macys Furniture Gallery. Built in 1977, the property has been evaluated and found to be “substandard” according to the provisions in Minnesota Statute that govern Tax Increment Financing. The business intends to relocate to a nearby site and the developer intends to clear the site and construct the new improvements. The redevelopment project is embodied in the recently approved PUD-25 and related Development Plans and Site Plans. This project is aligned with Edina’s Comprehensive Plan. This project is anticipated to be constructed in 3 or 4 phases. The project consists of shared roadway infrastructure and four independent elements: • Overall Site - Completely new circulation and utility infrastructure that responds to the Greater Southdale Plan with a new north/south road, improved east/west roads, improved bicycle trail, new perimeter and interior sidewalks, new east/west public spaces, and new public space along France Avenue potentially leading to a grade-separated pedestrian crossing • Lot 1 – Northwest Parcel – A 7-story (85 feet) tall mixed use building containing approximately 20,825 square feet of professional office space, 124 rental apartments, approximately 7,592 square feet retail space and approximately 282 stall parking garage all surrounded by public realm space • Lot 2 – Northeast Parcel - A 7-story (82 feet) tall residential building containing 223 rental apartments and approximately 346 stall parking garage all surrounded by public realm space • Lot 2 – Southeast Parcel - A 7-story (82 feet) tall mixed use building containing 176 rental apartments, approximately 4,141 square feet retail space and approximately 380 stall parking garage all surrounded by public realm space • Lot 3 – Southwest Parcel - An 11-story (155 feet) tall mixed use building containing approximately 47,236 square feet of professional office space, 49 ownership condominiums for buyers 55 and older, approximately 9,549 square feet retail space and approximately 280 stall parking garage all surrounded by public realm space Page 74 of 160 STAFF REPORT – 72nd & France #3 TIF Plan Page 2 The project embodied in PUD-25 is the anticipated outcome of the 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District (reference Appendix E of TIF Plan). The TIF Plan also allows for financing of a future pedestrian crossing under or over France Avenue. This redevelopment proposal was considered using the City’s standard procedural review – including posting of the project on the City website, printed notices in the Sun Current, mailed notices to surrounding neighbors, online input via BetterTogetherEdina.com, multiple in person public hearings, and lengthy periods for concerned people to submit comments via email, US mail or voicemail. The whole public review process took place over 19-months. On May 22, 2024, after holding a public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the overall development plan, site plan and PUD rezoning be approved. The City Council held another public hearing and granted preliminary approval on June 18, 2024. The City Council granted final approvals to Resolution 2024-60 and Ordinance 2024-07 on September 17, 2024, thus granting final zoning approval for PUD-25, overall development plan approval and final site plan approval. The developer has requested that the City use Tax Increment Financing (TIF) to enable the project to obtain the necessary levels of debt and equity. The cost to develop and construct a project of this scope and caliber is very high. Some of the costs are due to the following: • Demolition of existing substandard structure • Relocation of underground utilities • Construction of new public circulation routes in response to the Greater Southdale Guidelines • Reconstruction of existing bicycle path • Landscaping and streetscaping multiple public spaces and broad setback areas along France Avenue and Gallagher Drive • Inclusion of affordable housing units in each building • Facility improvements in response to Edina’s Sustainable Buildings Policy The City has reviewed the developer’s financial pro forma and confirmed that without the use of TIF, this project will not move forward and the public realm improvements envisioned in the Greater Southdale Plan will not be delivered on this site. As such, the City is considering the creation of a new Redevelopment TIF District to enable the type, scale and scope of redevelopment approved for this site. Summary of Proposed TIF Plan and Review Process The City’s financial advisors at Ehlers Associates have prepared the proposed 72nd and France #3 TIF Plan (attached). This proposed Plan has been distributed to the Richfield Public School District and Hennepin County for input. This proposed TIF Plan will also be presented to the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority for review and consideration. Finally, the City Council will conduct a public hearing to discuss the proposal before the TIF Plan is given full consideration. Requested Action This proposed TIF Plan is presented to the Planning Commission as part of the state-mandated review process. Particular attention should be paid to Appendix E entitled Project Description. This appendix contains a general Page 75 of 160 STAFF REPORT – 72nd & France #3 TIF Plan Page 3 description of the anticipated redevelopment site plan and building design. A written opinion is requested in advance of the City Council’s Public Hearing. Specifically, the Planning Commission is asked to confirm that the proposed 72nd and France #3 TIF Plan is in compliance with Edina’s Comprehensive Plan including the Greater Southdale District Plan referenced therein. Note that specific details regarding the future use, terms and conditions of tax increment expenditures are evaluated by the Edina City Council and Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority (not the Planning Commission). Staff Findings Staff has reviewed the proposed 72nd and France #3 TIF Plan, Edina’s Redevelopment Plan and Edina’s Comprehensive Plan (with Appendixes) and provides these findings: This proposed TIF District is located within the boundaries of the 2012 Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area as amended. Objectives of this Plan include: o Increasing the value of property subject to taxation (3-4 (3)) o Supporting multi-modal transportation improvements (3-4(4)) o Supporting redevelopment of mixed-use sites that include retail, housing and employment in walkable neighborhoods (3-4(6)) o Increasing the capacity of streets, roadways and bridges to support growth that has and will occur (3-4(7)) o Encouraging expansion of local businesses and economic activity (3-4(9)) The proposed TIF District Plan is responsive to the Greater Southdale District Plan including: o Subdivision of large lots into street grid (page 48 and Figure 4.4) o Creation of public realm connecting spaces (page 50) o Apply ‘street room’ and other principles of the Design Experience Guidelines (page 61) o Create public plazas (page 65, item 1-B) o Encourage redevelopment of surface parking lots and auto-oriented sites (page 66, item 2-B) o Integrate public art into the public realm (page 67, item 3-E) o Encourage transit-supportive concentrations of housing, jobs and shopping (page 67, item 4-A) o Incorporate transit and bicycle supportive facilities within building and site design (page 67, item 4-G) o Respond to changing patterns of automobile ownership and use (page 69, item 7-B) The proposed TIF District Plan reflects the goals of the 2018 Comprehensive Plan including: o Page 3-24 and Figure 3.11: Identified as “potential area of change” Page 76 of 160 STAFF REPORT – 72nd & France #3 TIF Plan Page 4 o Pages 3-26, Figure 3.12 and 3-31: Guided as mixed use “Community Activity Center” with maximum density up to 150 units per acre with retail, office, lodging, entertainment, multi-family residential, institutional and recreation uses, in separate or combined buildings. Vertical mixed-use is encouraged. o Page 3-31: Development Character should follow the Design Experience Guidelines, especially regarding “building placement, massing and street-level treatment. Buildings should be placed in appropriate proximity to streets to create pedestrian scale. Buildings may “step down" at boundaries with lower-density districts and upper stories “step back" from street. More stringent design standards for larger buildings. Emphasize pedestrian circulation; reintroduce finer- grained circulation patterns where feasible.” o Pages 3-41 to 3-45: Community Design Guidelines for Medium to High Density include: 1) Pedestrian-Friendly environment (moving away from auto-oriented design) 2) Encourage mixed-use developments 3) Building placement to create consistent “street walls” 4) Allow for more movement patterns with sidewalks 5) Use appropriate parking standards 6) Improve connectivity in large-scale developments o Page 3-46: “Land Use Goal 1: Encourage infill and redevelopment that optimize use of city infrastructure, complement community character and respond to needs at all stages of life.” o Page 3-46: “Land Use Goal 3: Grow and develop sustainably to protect the natural environment, promote energy efficiency, conserve natural resources and minimize impacts of buildings on the environment.” o Page 3-47: “Land Use Goal 5: Support and enhance commercial and mixed-use areas that serve the neighborhoods, the city and the larger region.” o Page 3-47: “Land Use Goal 6: Ensure that public realm design respects community character, supports commercial and mixed-use development, promotes community identity, and creates high quality experiences for pedestrians, cyclists, transit users and motorists.” o Page 4-24: “Housing Goal 4: Support the development of a wide range of housing options to meet the diverse needs and preferences of the existing and future Edina community.” o Page 10-15: “Economic Competitiveness Goal: Retain, attract and support employment opportunities in innovative and creative industries, such as technology and medical devices.” o Page 10-16: “Economic Competitiveness Goal: Encourage vibrant neighborhood commercial nodes that meet resident needs for goods and services and build a sense of community” Recommended Action Based on this evaluation, Planning Commission Resolution B-24-09 has been prepared to document that the 72nd and France #3 TIF Plan conforms to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Staff recommends this resolution be approved. # # # Page 77 of 160 PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. B-24-09 FINDING THAT THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE 72nd AND FRANCE #3 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT CONFORMS TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY WHEREAS, property located at 7235 France Avenue (the “Property”) was developed in 1977 and improved from a sand and gravel mining operation to a single-user commercial building with surface parking lot; and WHEREAS, the property has been occupied by a retail furniture business for many years and is under contract to be sold and redeveloped; and WHEREAS, the Edina Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on May 22, 2024 to consider a proposal to rezone the property from PCD-3 to PUD-25 and establish an Overall Development Plan for the Property and Overall Site Plan and Subdivision; and WHEREAS, after the conclusion of the Public Hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the proposal be approved; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a second Public Hearing on June 4, 2024 to receive input on the proposed PUD-25 and related development and site plans in consideration of Resolution 2024-40 and Ordinance 2024-07; and WHEREAS, the City Council granted preliminary approval of the proposal subject to several conditions as identified in its adoption of Resolution 2024-40 on June 18, 2024; and WHEREAS, on September 17, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolutions 2024-60 and Ordinance 2024-07 approving the Zoning Ordinance Amendment for PUD-25, Overall Development Plan, Final Rezoning of the Site, as well as the Development Contract, Assessment Agreement and Final Plat based on findings and conditions included in Resolution 2024-60; and WHEREAS, the City Council will be considering the establishment of a new 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District (the “TIF District”) to provide financial assistance to enable the private redevelopment of the Property; and Page 78 of 160 Planning Commission Resolution B-24-09 Page 2 WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes require notification and input from several entities, including a public hearing by the City Council, as part of the process of establishing the TIF District; and WHEREAS, the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City propose to consider the adoption of a Modification to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan for the establishment of the TIF District (the Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "TIF Plans") and have submitted the TIF Plans to the Edina Planning Commission pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subd. 3 in order to request a written opinion that the proposed redevelopment contained therein conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole; and WHEREAS, the project that is described in Appendix E as the subject of the TIF Plans is the same as that recommended by the Planning Commission on May 22, 2024 as meeting the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and later approved by City Council on September 17, 2024; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the aforementioned TIF Plans to determine the conformity of the TIF Plans with the general plans and guided land use as described in the comprehensive plan for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that the 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing Plan conforms to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Dated: September 25, 2024 _______________________________________ Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: ___________________________________ Planning Commission Secretary Page 79 of 160 Edina Planning Commission Resolution B-24-09 Findings Regarding the Proposed 72nd & France #3 Tax Increment Financing District Prepared by: Bill Neuendorf, Economic Development Manager September 25, 2024 Page 80 of 160 Outline of Presentation 2 Requested Action Project Background Steps to establish TIF District Proposed TIF Plan / Approved Redevelopment Plan Staff Findings Staff Recommendation Page 81 of 160 3 The City is considering a new Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District at 7235 France Ave. Called, 72nd & France #3, this TIF District is intended to support private redevelopment of a commercial parcel in accordance with the approved site plan from Enclave Companies. Before the TIF District is established, the Planning Commission is asked to opine whether the TIF Plan conforms to the general plans for development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Requested Action by Planning Commission Page 82 of 160 Current Plans for Development & Redevelopment in Edina 4 •SE Edina Redevelopment Project Area & Plan (2012) •2040 Comprehensive Plan (2018-2020) •Greater Southdale Plan (2018) Requested Action by Planning Commission Page 83 of 160 Background - Community Vision Plans 5 Multi-modal Transportation Options - … improve access for pedestrians and bicyclists...” (SERP 3-4(4))Mixed Use Development… support redevelopment that includes retail, housing and employment in walkable neighborhoods (SERP page 3-4(6)) Sustainability … protect the natural environment, promote energy efficiency, conserve natural resources and minimize impacts (Comp Plan pg 3-46) Page 84 of 160 Project Background - Site Location 6 Proposed 72nd & France #3 TIF District Page 85 of 160 Project Background - Former gravel pit and Daytons Home Store 7 Source: Minnesota Star Tribune April 3, 2023 https://www.startribune.com/earth-shelter-macys-daytons- edina/600264083 1951 aerial photo shows 1) Glacier Sand and Gravel and 2) Oscar Roberts Company Source: Edina Historical Society as published in Winter 2016 About Town magazine Future Southdale Center Mall Future Galleria Future Cornelia Neighborhood Page 86 of 160 Project Background - Existing Conditions •8-acre site •Constructed 1977 •Occupied commercial building •Deemed ‘sub-standard’ and eligible for TIF designation per MN Statute •Under contract for sale by Macy’s 8 Page 87 of 160 Steps to Establish TIF District 9 TIF Plan includes: •Boundaries •Project Scope •Budget •Term •Qualifications •But-for Step 1) Create Financing “District” •Private developments •Public improvements Step 2) Consider Funding for Specific Projects •4-year knock down •5-year construction •Annual reporting •Contract payments •De-certification Step 3) Monitoring & Compliance Action considered by PC today Actions considered in future School / County Plan Commission Public Hearing HRA Board City Council HRA Board (tentative Oct 2024) City Council (tentative Oct 2024) Future Monitoring and Actions Page 88 of 160 Proposed TIF Plan includes Approved Development Plans 10 Appendix E of the TIF Plan contains a summary of the approved redevelopment plans for the 7235 France site. The project described in the TIF Plan is the same project recommended by Planning Commission (5/22/2024) and approved by City Council (6/18/2024 and 9/17/2024). Additionally, this TIF Plan addresses the potential for a future grade-separated pedestrian crossing across France Ave. Page 89 of 160 Approved Development Plan – Site Layout 11 PUD-25 Zoning, Overall Development Plan and Site Approval September 17, 2024 Page 90 of 160 Approved Development Plan – Aerial Rendering 12 Page 91 of 160 Approved Development Plan – Aerial Rendering 13 Page 92 of 160 Concept for Future Pedestrian Crossing Concept Renderings 8-29-2024 14 Page 93 of 160 Proposed TIF Plan – Staff Findings 15 SE Edina Redevelopment Project Area & Plan (2012) •Increase value of taxable property •Support multi-modal transportation •Support redevelopment of mixed-use sites with retail, housing and employment in walkable neighborhoods •Encourage expansion of local businesses and economic activity Page 94 of 160 Proposed TIF Plan – Staff Findings 16 Page 95 of 160 Proposed TIF Plan – Staff Findings 17 Edina’s 2018 Comprehensive Plan (2020) •Land Use Goal 3: Grow and develop sustainably to protect the natural environment, promote energy efficiency … •Land Use Goal 5: Support mixed-use areas that serve the neighborhoods, the city and the larger region •Housing Goal 4: Support a wide range of housing options to meet diverse needs and preferences •Economic Goal: Attract employment opportunities in innovation and creative industries •Economic Goal: Encourage vibrant commercial nodes that meet resident needs for goods and services and build a sense of community Page 96 of 160 Proposed TIF Plan – Staff Findings 18 Greater Southdale District Plan (2020) •Subdivide large sites with street grid •Create public realm connecting spaces and public plazas •Integrate public art into public realm •Apply ‘street room’ and other principles of Design Experience Guidelines •Incorporate transit and bicycle facilities within building and site design •Encourage shared parking Page 97 of 160 19 Recommended Action: Based on the Staff Findings, it is recommended that Resolution B-24-09 by approved to confirm that the proposed TIF Plan conforms to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Proposed TIF Plan – Staff Recommendation Page 98 of 160 Public Hearing Date: October 1, 2024 Anticipated Adoption Date: October 15, 2024 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota Modification to the Redevelopment Plan Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area & Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Plan Establishment of 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District (a redevelopment district) BUILDING COMMUNITIES. IT’S WHAT WE DO. Prepared by: Ehlers 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Roseville, Minnesota 55113 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 99 of 160 TABLE OF CONTENTS Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area 1 FOREWORD 1 MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN 1 Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 4 FOREWORD 4 STATUTORY AUTHORITY 4 STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES 4 REDEVELOPMENT PLAN OVERVIEW 5 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY IN THE DISTRICT AND PROPERTY TO BE ACQUIRED 5 DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION 6 DURATION & FIRST YEAR OF DISTRICT’S TAX INCREMENT 6 ORIGINAL TAX CAPACITY, TAX RATE & ESTIMATED CAPTURED NET TAX CAPACITY VALUE/INCREMENT & NOTIFICATION OF PRIOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS 7 SOURCES OF REVENUE/BONDS TO BE ISSUED 8 USES OF FUNDS 9 FISCAL DISPARITIES ELECTION 10 ESTIMATED IMPACT ON OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS 11 SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION 13 DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION 14 Appendix A: Map of Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and the TIF District Appendix B: Estimated Cash Flow for the District Appendix C: Findings Including But/For Qualifications Appendix D: Redevelopment Qualifications for the District Appendix E: Project Description 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 100 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France 3 Tax Increment Financing District Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area FOREWORD The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area originally adopted September 29, 1977, and modified from time to time. The substantive changes include the establishment of the 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District. MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN Based upon the statutory authority described in the Redevelopment Plan, the public purpose findings by the City Council and for the purpose of fulfilling the City’s development objects as set forth in the Redevelopment Plan, the City Council has created, established and designated the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan pursuant to and in accordance with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.001 to 469.047. The original and amended Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan documents designated the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan as a redevelopment project and also a tax increment financing plan for tax increment districts created prior to 1988. The Centennial Lakes Tax Increment Financing District was created in 1988 pursuant to Tax Increment Financing Plan 88-1, which was subsequently renamed the Centennial Lakes Tax Increment District and referred to by Hennepin County as District #1203 and #1249. For purposes of clarification, this modification will refer to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan as the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.002. The following municipal action has been taken with regard to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan: September 29, 1977: The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina (the “HRA”) approved the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan. October 5, 1981: The Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan was amended to identify project costs and bonded indebtedness incurred to finance those costs. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 101 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 2 May 6, 1985: The HRA and the City approved an amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan which establishes an interest reduction program and enlarges the project area to include the “1985 Project Area.” August 19, 1985: The HRA and the City approved the First Amendment to the 1985 Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area Plan to enlarge the 1985 Project Area and authorize the issuance of additional bonds to acquire land within the enlarged 1985 Project Area. 1987: The HRA and City approved the 1987 Amendments to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan to enlarge the project area to include the 1987 Project Area. 1988: The HRA and City approved the 1988 Amendments to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan to provide an Interest Reduction Program in the amount of $2,500,000 to assist in the financing and construction of housing units and authorize the HRA and City to incur additional bonded indebtedness. February 21, 2012: The HRA and City expand the Southeast Edina Project Area. April 17, 2012: The HRA and City establish the Southdale 2 Tax Increment Financing District. February 18, 2014: The HRA and City establish the Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District. March 2, 2016: The HRA and City establish the Grandview 2 Tax Increment Financing District. April 5, 2016: The HRA and City modify the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Southdale 2 Tax Increment Financing District and establish the 66 West Tax Increment Financing District. June 20, 2017: The HRA and City establish the 50th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District. October 16, 2018: The HRA and City establish the 44th and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District. November 20, 2018: The HRA and City modify the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Southdale 2 Tax Increment Financing District to increase the TIF Budget and enable special legislative pooling authority for affordable housing. November 20, 2018: The HRA and City also establish the West 76th Street Tax Increment Financing District. March 19, 2019: The HRA and City establish the 72nd and France Tax Increment Financing District. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 102 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 3 December 17, 2019: The HRA and City modify the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Southdale 2 Tax Increment Financing District to designate property to be acquired and establish the Amundson Avenue Tax Increment Financing District. August 4, 2021: The HRA and City establish the 4040 West 70th Street Tax Increment Financing District. September 9, 2021: The HRA and City modify the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Southdale 2 Tax Increment Financing District to increase the estimated project costs expected to be paid or financed with tax increment from the Southdale 2 TIF District, to include affordable housing project costs. November 3, 2021: The HRA and City establish the Eden / Willson Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District. March 22, 2022: The HRA and City establish the 70th and France Renewal and Renovation Tax Increment Financing District. April 18, 2023: The HRA and City establish the 72nd and France 2 Tax Increment Financing District. (As Modified October 1, 2024) October 1, 2024: The HRA and City establish the 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area, is recommended. It is available from the HRA Executive Director at the City of Edina. Other relevant information is contained in the tax increment financing plans for the tax increment financing districts located within Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 103 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 4 Tax Increment Financing Plan for the 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District FOREWORD The Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), the City of Edina (the "City"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the Establishment of the 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District (the "District"), a redevelopment tax increment financing district, located in Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. STATUTORY AUTHORITY Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or redevelopment to occur. To this end, the HRA and City have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ("M.S."), Sections 469.001 - 469.047, inclusive, as amended (the “HRA Act”), and M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended (the "TIF Act"), to assist in financing public costs related to this project. This section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the District. Other relevant information is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES The District currently consists of one (1) parcel of land and adjacent roads and internal rights-of-way. The District is being created to facilitate the transformation of the 7235 France parcel consisting of a single-use commercial building and surface parking lot into a mixed-use redevelopment comprised of four buildings containing commercial office, retail, and multifamily rental and owner-occupied residential units with supporting parking and public infrastructure improvements as more fully described in Appendix E. The HRA anticipates entering into one or more financing agreements with Enclave Companies and Lifestyle Communities, LLC or other potential entities as the developers of the site. Development is anticipated to begin by the close of 2025. This TIF Plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Redevelopment Plan for Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 104 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 5 The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan do not preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated to occur over the life of Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and the District. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN OVERVIEW Pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan and authorizing state statutes, the HRA or City is authorized to undertake the following activities in the District: 1.Property to be Acquired - Selected property located within the District, including interior and adjacent street rights of way, may be acquired by the HRA or City and is further described in this TIF Plan. 2. Relocation - Relocation services, to the extent required by law, are available pursuant to M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws. 3. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary legal requirements, the HRA or City may sell to a developer selected properties that it may acquire within the District or may lease land or facilities to a developer. 4. The HRA or City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY IN THE DISTRICT AND PROPERTY TO BE ACQUIRED The District encompasses all property and adjacent roads rights-of-way, pedestrian pathways, crossings and abutting roadways and intersections identified by the parcel listed below. Parcel number Address Owner 32-028-24-23-0004 7235 France Ave S Macy's Retail Holdings LLC Please also see the map in Appendix A for further information on the location of the District. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 105 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 6 The HRA or City may acquire any parcel, or portion therein, within the District including interior and adjacent street rights of way. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the HRA or City only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets, pedestrian pathways, bridge, underpass, utilities and other transit facilities; or carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The HRA or City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION The HRA and City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with the TIF Act find that the District, to be established, is a redevelopment district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10(a)(1) with the following qualifications: $The District consists of one (1) parcel. $An inventory shows that the parcel consisting of more than 70% of the area in the District is occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. $An inspection of the buildings located within the District finds that more than 50% of the buildings are structurally substandard as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix D). Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 7, the District does not contain any parcel or part of a parcel that qualified under the provisions of M.S., Sections 273.111, 273.112, or 273.114 or Chapter 473H for taxes payable in any of the five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification of the District. DURATION & FIRST YEAR OF DISTRICT’S TAX INCREMENT Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration and first year of tax increment of the District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 1b., the duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the HRA or City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The HRA or City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2028, which is no later than four years following the year of approval of the District. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 106 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 7 Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2053, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The HRA or City reserves the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required date. ORIGINAL TAX CAPACITY, TAX RATE & ESTIMATED CAPTURED NET TAX CAPACITY VALUE/INCREMENT & NOTIFICATION OF PRIOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor in 2024 for taxes payable 2025. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 2028) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of: 1.Change in tax exempt status of property; 2.Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the District; 3.Change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements; 4.Change in the use of the property and classification; 5.Change in state law governing class rates; or 6.Change in previously issued building permits. In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTC, no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the HRA or City. The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2025, assuming the request for certification is made before June 30, 2025. The actual tax rates for 2025 were not available at the time the District was established. The ONTC and an estimate for the Original Local Tax Rate for the District appear in the table below. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area, upon completion of the redevelopment projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table below. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 107 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 8 The HRA and City request 100% of the available increase in tax capacity be used for repayment of the obligations of the HRA or City and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2028. The Project Tax Capacity (PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the projects within the District are completed. Estimated Project Tax Capacity (PTC) 3,967,145 Less: Original Net Tax Capacity (ONTC)276,948 Less: Fiscal Disparities 89,891 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) 3,600,306 x Estimated Original Local Tax Rate 97.5620%Pay 2024 Estimated Annual Tax Increment $3,512,531 Percent Retained by the HRA 100% Project Tax Capacity Note: Estimated PTC includes a 1% inflation factor applied for the duration of the District and is the estimated tax capacity of the District in year 25. The tax capacity of the District in year three after initial completion of all phases is estimated to be $3,155,633. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the HRA shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building permit was issued. The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District and determined that no building permits have been issued for improvements during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the City. SOURCES OF REVENUE/BONDS TO BE ISSUED The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are shown in the table below: SOURCES Tax Increment (26 years of collections) 77,126,605$ Interest 3,856,330 TOTAL 80,982,935$ 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 108 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 9 The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The HRA or City reserves the right to issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) or incur other indebtedness as a result of the TIF Plan. As presently proposed, the anticipated projects within the District will be financed in part by pay-as-you-go notes, interfund loans and/or a possible bond issue. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal modification to this TIF Plan. This provision does not obligate the HRA or City to incur debt. The HRA or City will issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The HRA or City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments from the District in a maximum principal amount of $41,443,283. Such bonds may be in the form of pay-as-you-go notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total bonded indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan as of the date of approval. USES OF FUNDS Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate private redevelopment of a single-use commercial site into a new mixed-use commercial and residential development with supporting parking and public infrastructure improvements. The HRA and City have determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District costs, as described herein. The HRA has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with the District is outlined in the following table. These estimates establish the maximum amount permitted to be expended, but the HRA and City are not obligated to expend the full amount. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 109 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 10 USES Land/Building Acquisition 1,000,000$ Site Improvements/Preparation 6,000,000 Affordable Housing 7,712,660 Utilities 2,400,000 Other Qualifying Improvements*16,617,963 Administrative Costs (up to 10%)7,712,660 PROJECT COSTS TOTAL 41,443,283$ Interest 39,539,652 PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL 80,982,935$ * Includes costs of streets, roads, sidewalks, bridge, underpass or similar improvements available for public use. The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total projected tax increments for the District as shown in the Sources of Revenue section. Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification to the TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25% of the tax increment paid by property within the District will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of the District but within the boundaries of Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of the District) subject to the limitations as described in the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2(d), the HRA and City may elect to increase by up to ten percentage points the permitted amount of expenditures for activities located outside the geographic area of the District. The HRA and City intend to pool tax increment paid by property within the District to be used to assist housing that meets the requirements contained in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2(d). FISCAL DISPARITIES ELECTION Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, the HRA or City may elect one of two methods to calculate fiscal disparities contribution of commercial/industrial net tax capacity from the District. The HRA will choose to calculate fiscal disparities by clause b (inside the District). 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 110 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 11 ESTIMATED IMPACT ON OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF Plan would occur without the creation of the District. However, the HRA or City has determined that such development or redevelopment would not reasonably be expected to occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: Entity 2023/Pay 2024 Total Net Tax Capacity Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) upon completion Percent of CTC to Entity Total Hennepin County 2,649,525,401 3,600,306 0.1359% City of Edina 185,733,490 3,600,306 1.9384% ISD 280 (Richfield Schools)69,102,707 3,600,306 5.2101% Impact on Tax Base If "But/For" Not Met Entity Pay 2024 Extension Rate Percent of Total Rate CTC Potential Annual Taxes Hennepin County 34.6810% 35.55% 3,600,306 $1,248,622 City of Edina 28.5440% 29.26% 3,600,306 1,027,671 ISD 280 (Richfield Schools)26.6040% 27.27% 3,600,306 957,825 Other 7.7330% 7.93% 3,600,306 278,412 97.5620% 100.00% $3,512,530 Impact on Tax Rates If "But/For" Not Met The estimates listed above display the estimated CTC when all construction is completed at the end of the District. The tax rate used for calculations is the Pay 2024 rate as obtained from Hennepin County. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on Pay 2024 figures. The District is anticipated to be certified under the Pay 2025 rates, which were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b): (1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment from property within the District that will be generated over the life of the District is $77,126,605; 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 111 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 12 (2) Probable impact of the District on city provided services and ability to issue debt. An impact of the District on police protection is expected as it is with any new development. With the addition of new residents or businesses, the new development is expected to generate approximately 100 calls for police response per year. The new development is likely to add an increase in vehicle and foot traffic in the immediate area, as well as additional overall demands to the call load compared to the existing furniture store. The City does not expect that the proposed redevelopment, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment in vehicles or facilities, nor an increase to staffing levels. The probable impact of the District on Fire/EMS services is not expected to be significant. The new, fully-sprinklered residential and mixed-use commercial buildings are expected to generate approximately 50 service calls per year and be of superior construction compliant with the latest building codes and have fire protection systems. The existing building located at the site, which will be eliminated by the new redevelopment, is of older construction and carries some minor issues due to limited entry points that are expected to be improved by the new site layout. As with police services, the City does not expect that the proposed redevelopment, in and of itself, will necessitate additional staffing or new capital investment in vehicles or facilities. The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be moderate. The redevelopment is not expected to significantly impact any traffic movements external to the area. New infrastructure funded by the District is proposed to enhance pedestrian movement throughout the greater Southdale area. The redevelopment will provide necessitated re-alignment of a large sanitary sewer pipe, new watermain systems, and pedestrian and roadway connection improvements as part of the private development costs. The city’s current system infrastructure for sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be able to handle the additional use volume generated from the proposed redevelopment. Based on the redevelopment plans, there are no additional municipal costs associated with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting and sidewalks. The development in the District is expected to contribute an estimated $1,502,530 in Met Council sanitary sewer (SAC) and $3,608,014 in City sanitary sewer and water fees. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 112 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 13 The probable impact of any District general obligation bonds payable from tax increment revenues on the City’s ability to issue debt for general fund purposes is expected to be minimal. The City may issue general obligation tax increment revenue bonds to fund public infrastructure at some point during the District, but any such issuance is not expected to require the City’s general revenue support and would not apply to the City’s statutory debt limit. (3) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to school district levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to school district levies, assuming the school district's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $21,031,510. The amount is calculated by multiplying the total estimated increment of $77,126,605 by the school district’s proportionate share of the total local tax rate (27.27%); (4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the county's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $27,416,697. The amount is calculated by multiplying the total estimated increment of $77,126,605 by the county’s proportionate share of the total local tax rate (35.55%); (5) Additional information requested by the county or school district. The City is not aware of any standard questions in a county or school district written policy regarding tax increment districts and impact on county or school district services. The county or school district must request additional information pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) within 15 days after receipt of the tax increment financing plan. At this time, no requests for additional information from the county or school district regarding the proposed development for the District have been received. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1 (a), clause 7 this TIF Plan must contain identification and description of studies and analyses used to make the determination set forth in M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3, clause (b)(2) and the findings are required in the resolution approving the District. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 113 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District 14 (i) In making said determination, reliance has been placed upon (1) written representation made by the Developers to such effects, (2) review of the Developers’ anticipated redevelopment proforma for each building; and (3) City staff awareness of the feasibility of developing the project site within the District, which is further outlined in the City Council resolution approving the establishment of the District and Appendix C. (ii) A comparative analysis of estimated market value both with and without establishment of the District and the use of tax increments has been performed. Such analysis is included with the cashflow in Appendix B and indicates that the increase in estimated market value of the proposed development (less the indicated subtractions) exceeds the estimated market value of the site absent the establishment of the District and the use of tax increments. DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION Administration of the District will be handled by the HRA Executive Director and Economic Development Manager. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 114 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District Appendix A: Map of Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and the TIF District 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 115 of 160 72nd & France 3 XERXES AVE S66TH ST W GLEA S O N R D V E RNO N AV E FRANCE AVE SYORK AVE SEX C E L S IO R B L V D 58TH ST W 70TH ST W 44TH ST W TRACY AVE78TH ST WCAHILL RD77TH ST W UPTON AVE SINTERLACHEN BLVD 39TH ST W 60TH ST W BENTON AVE 2ND ST N E5TH AVE NHILARY L N E D E N A V E 69TH ST W OLI N GER BLVD 76TH ST W MALONEY AVE OXFOR D S T BLAKE RD N54TH ST W DEWEY HILL RD V A LLEY LN SHADY OAK R D WASHINGTON AVE SCONCORD AVEW 78TH ST BLAKE RD SBROOKSIDE AVE62ND ST WQUENTIN AVE S 65TH ST W ANTRIM RDWOODDALE AVE50TH ST WLINCOLN DRCAMBRIDGE ST SMETANA DRVA L L E Y VIE W RD HANSEN RDUPTON AVE SBLAKE RD S78TH S T WLINCOLN DR UPTON AVE S44TH S T W June 2024 ± 0 2,000 Feet 72nd & France 3 TIF District Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 116 of 160 FRANCE AVE72ND ST W GALLAGHER DR 3202824230004 72nd and France 3 TIF District June 2024 ± 0 100 Feet 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 117 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District Appendix B: Estimated Cash Flow for the District 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 118 of 160 7235 France Avenue RedevelopmentCity of Edina, MNMixed-Use Redevelopment - Total SiteASSUMPTIONS AND RATESDistrictType:RedevelopmentDistrict Name/Number:TBDCounty District #:TBDExempt Class Rate (Exempt)0.00%First Year Construction or Inflation on Value2026Commercial Industrial Preferred Class Rate (C/I Pref.)Existing District - Specify No. Years RemainingFirst $150,0001.50%Inflation Rate - Every Year:1.00%Over $150,0002.00%Interest Rate:6.50%Commercial Industrial Class Rate (C/I)2.00%Present Value Date:1-Aug-27Rental Housing Class Rate (Rental)1.25%First Period Ending1-Feb-28Affordable Rental Housing Class Rate (Aff. Rental)Tax Year District was Certified:Pay 2025First $100,000 0.25%Cashflow Assumes First Tax Increment For Development: 2028 Over $100,000 0.25%Years of Tax Increment 26 Non-Homestead Residential (Non-H Res. 1 Unit)Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment2053First $500,0001.00%Fiscal Disparities Election [Outside (A), Inside (B), or NA]Inside(B)Over $500,0001.25%Incremental or Total Fiscal DisparitiesIncrementalHomestead Residential Class Rate (Hmstd. Res.)Fiscal Disparities Contribution Ratio34.6213% Pay 2024First $500,0001.00%Fiscal Disparities Metro-Wide Tax Rate123.0260% Pay 2024Over $500,0001.25%Maximum/Frozen Local Tax Rate: 97.562% Pay 2024Agricultural Non-Homestead1.00%Current Local Tax Rate: (Use lesser of Current or Max.)97.562% Pay 2024State-wide Tax Rate (Comm./Ind. only used for total taxes)29.2940% Pay 2024Market Value Tax Rate (Used for total taxes)0.16971% Pay 2024Building Total PercentageTax Year Property CurrentClassAfterLandMarket Market Of Value Used OriginalOriginalTaxOriginalAfterConversionMap ID PIDOwnerAddressMarket Value ValueValue for District Market Value Market Value Class Tax Capacity Conversion Orig. Tax Cap.132-028-24-23-0004Macy's Retail Holdings LLC 7235 France Ave S13,883,900 1,00013,884,900 100% 13,884,900 Pay 2025C/I Pref.276,948 C/I Pref.276,948 113,883,900 1,000 13,884,90013,884,900 276,948276,948Note:1. Base values are for pay 2025 based on review of County website on 8/21/2024.2. Located in ISD #280, WS #1.Area/ PhaseTax Rates BASE VALUE INFORMATION (Original Tax Capacity)8-29-2024 DRAFT for reviewPage 119 of 160 7235 France Avenue RedevelopmentCity of Edina, MNMixed-Use Redevelopment - Total SiteEstimated Taxable Total Taxable Property Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage First YearMarket Value Market Value Total Market Tax Project Project Tax Completed Completed Completed Completed Full TaxesArea/Phase New Use Per Sq. Ft./Unit Per Sq. Ft./Unit Sq. Ft./UnitsValueClass Tax Capacity Capacity/Unit 2026202720282029PayableEApartments325,000325,000 399129,675,000 Rental 1,620,9384,063 20%60%100%100%2030ERetail400400 4,1001,640,000 C/I Pref.32,0508 20%60%100%100%2030NWApartments325,000325,000 12440,300,000 Rental503,7504,063 40%80%100%100%2030NWRetail400400 7,5003,000,000 C/I Pref.59,2508 40%80%100%100%2030NWOffice250250 15,0003,750,000C/I75,0005 40%80%100%100%2030SWRetail400400 6,5582,623,200 C/I Pref.51,7148 40%80%100%100%2030SWOffice250250 41,76210,440,500C/I208,8105 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 290,300269,877 1269,877 Hmstd. Res. 2,6992,699 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 826,800826,800 1826,800 Hmstd. Res. 9,0859,085 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 811,200811,200 1811,200 Hmstd. Res. 8,8908,890 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,206,4001,206,400 11,206,400 Hmstd. Res. 13,83013,830 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,224,6001,224,600 11,224,600 Hmstd. Res. 14,05814,058 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,220,5381,220,538 11,220,538 Hmstd. Res. 14,00714,007 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,206,6831,206,683 11,206,683 Hmstd. Res. 13,83413,834 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 290,300269,877 1269,877 Hmstd. Res. 2,6992,699 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,018,6541,018,654 11,018,654 Hmstd. Res. 11,48311,483 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 839,202839,202 1839,202 Hmstd. Res. 9,2409,240 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 823,368823,368 1823,368 Hmstd. Res. 9,0429,042 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,224,4961,224,496 11,224,496 Hmstd. Res. 14,05614,056 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,242,9691,242,969 11,242,969 Hmstd. Res. 14,28714,287 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,238,8461,238,846 11,238,846 Hmstd. Res. 14,23614,236 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,224,7831,224,783 11,224,783 Hmstd. Res. 14,06014,060 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 290,300269,877 1269,877 Hmstd. Res. 2,6992,699 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,033,9341,033,934 11,033,934 Hmstd. Res. 11,67411,674 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 851,790851,790 1851,790 Hmstd. Res. 9,3979,397 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 835,719835,719 1835,719 Hmstd. Res. 9,1969,196 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,242,8631,242,863 11,242,863 Hmstd. Res. 14,28614,286 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,261,6141,261,614 11,261,614 Hmstd. Res. 14,52014,520 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,257,4281,257,428 11,257,428 Hmstd. Res. 14,46814,468 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,243,1551,243,155 11,243,155 Hmstd. Res. 14,28914,289 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 290,300269,877 1269,877 Hmstd. Res. 2,6992,699 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,049,4431,049,443 11,049,443 Hmstd. Res. 11,86811,868 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 864,567864,567 1864,567 Hmstd. Res. 9,5579,557 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 848,254848,254 1848,254 Hmstd. Res. 9,3539,353 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,261,5061,261,506 11,261,506 Hmstd. Res. 14,51914,519 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,280,5381,280,538 11,280,538 Hmstd. Res. 14,75714,757 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,276,2901,276,290 11,276,290 Hmstd. Res. 14,70414,704 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,261,8021,261,802 11,261,802 Hmstd. Res. 14,52314,523 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 290,300269,877 1269,877 Hmstd. Res. 2,6992,699 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,065,1841,065,184 11,065,184 Hmstd. Res. 12,06512,065 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 877,535877,535 1877,535 Hmstd. Res. 9,7199,719 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 860,978860,978 1860,978 Hmstd. Res. 9,5129,512 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,280,4291,280,429 11,280,429 Hmstd. Res. 14,75514,755 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,299,7461,299,746 11,299,746 Hmstd. Res. 14,99714,997 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,295,4341,295,434 11,295,434 Hmstd. Res. 14,94314,943 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,280,7291,280,729 11,280,729 Hmstd. Res. 14,75914,759 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 612,705612,705 1612,705 Hmstd. Res. 6,4096,409 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,081,1621,081,162 11,081,162 Hmstd. Res. 12,26512,265 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 890,698890,698 1890,698 Hmstd. Res. 9,8849,884 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 873,893873,893 1873,893 Hmstd. Res. 9,6749,674 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,299,6351,299,635 11,299,635 Hmstd. Res. 14,99514,995 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,319,2421,319,242 11,319,242 Hmstd. Res. 15,24115,241 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 2,054,7402,054,740 12,054,740 Hmstd. Res. 24,43424,434 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 2,090,2842,090,284 12,090,284 Hmstd. Res. 24,87924,879 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 2,365,5612,365,561 12,365,561 Hmstd. Res. 28,32028,320 40%80%100%100%2030SWCondominiums 1,424,7811,424,781 11,424,781 Hmstd. Res. 16,56016,560 40%80%100%100%2030TOTAL244,428,263 3,155,633 Subtotal Residential572 222,974,563 2,728,809 Subtotal Commercial/Ind.74,920 21,453,700 426,824 Note:1. Market values are planning estimates provided by the assessor's office, area comparables and the developer's residential condominium sales targets.PROJECT INFORMATION (Project Tax Capacity)8-29-2024 DRAFT for reviewPage 120 of 160 TotalFiscal LocalLocalFiscal State-wide MarketTaxDisparitiesTax Property Disparities PropertyValueTotalTaxes PerNew UseCapacity Tax Capacity CapacityTaxesTaxesTaxesTaxesTaxes Sq. Ft./UnitApartments 1,620,93801,620,938 1,581,41900220,071 1,801,490 4,515.01Retail32,05011,09620,95420,44313,6518,7302,78345,60711.12Apartments503,7500503,750491,4690068,393559,862 4,515.01Retail59,25020,51338,73737,79225,23616,6985,09184,81811.31Office75,00025,96649,03447,83931,94521,0926,364107,2397.15Retail51,71417,90433,81032,98622,02714,4904,45273,95411.28Office208,81072,293136,517133,189 88,93960,29017,719300,1367.19Condominiums 2,69902,6992,633004583,0913,090.98Condominiums 9,08509,0858,864001,40310,267 10,266.67Condominiums 8,89008,8908,673001,37710,050 10,049.95Condominiums 13,830013,83013,493002,04715,540 15,540.21Condominiums 14,058014,05813,715002,07815,793 15,793.05Condominiums 14,007014,00713,665002,07115,737 15,736.62Condominiums 13,834013,83413,496002,04815,544 15,544.14Condominiums 2,69902,6992,633004583,0913,090.98Condominiums 11,483011,48311,203001,72912,932 12,931.97Condominiums 9,24009,2409,015001,42410,439 10,438.96Condominiums 9,04209,0428,822001,39710,219 10,218.99Condominiums 14,056014,05613,714002,07815,792 15,791.60Condominiums 14,287014,28713,939002,10916,048 16,048.24Condominiums 14,236014,23613,889002,10215,991 15,990.96Condominiums 14,060014,06013,717002,07915,796 15,795.59Condominiums 2,69902,6992,633004583,0913,090.98Condominiums 11,674011,67411,390001,75513,144 13,144.25Condominiums 9,39709,3979,168001,44610,614 10,613.84Condominiums 9,19609,1968,972001,41810,391 10,390.58Condominiums 14,286014,28613,938002,10916,047 16,046.76Condominiums 14,520014,52014,166002,14116,307 16,307.26Condominiums 14,468014,46814,115002,13416,249 16,249.10Condominiums 14,289014,28913,941002,11016,051 16,050.82Condominiums 2,69902,6992,633004583,0913,090.98Condominiums 11,868011,86811,579001,78113,360 13,359.70Condominiums 9,55709,5579,324001,46710,791 10,791.34Condominiums 9,35309,3539,125001,44010,565 10,564.72Condominiums 14,519014,51914,165002,14116,306 16,305.76Condominiums 14,757014,75714,397002,17316,570 16,570.16Condominiums 14,704014,70414,345002,16616,511 16,511.14Condominiums 14,523014,52314,168002,14116,310 16,309.87Condominiums 2,69902,6992,633004583,0913,090.98Condominiums 12,065012,06511,771001,80813,578 13,578.38Condominiums 9,71909,7199,482001,48910,971 10,971.50Condominiums 9,51209,5129,280001,46110,741 10,741.48Condominiums 14,755014,75514,396002,17316,569 16,568.64Condominiums 14,997014,99714,631002,20616,837 16,837.00Condominiums 14,943014,94314,579002,19816,777 16,777.10Condominiums 14,759014,75914,399002,17416,573 16,572.81Condominiums 6,40906,4096,253001,0407,2927,292.39Condominiums 12,265012,26511,966001,83513,800 13,800.36Condominiums 9,88409,8849,643001,51211,154 11,154.36Condominiums 9,67409,6749,438001,48310,921 10,920.90Condominiums 14,995014,99514,630002,20616,835 16,835.46Condominiums 15,241015,24114,869002,23917,108 17,107.85Condominiums 24,434024,43423,839003,48727,326 27,325.64Condominiums 24,879024,87924,272003,54727,819 27,819.43Condominiums 28,320028,32027,629004,01531,644 31,643.68Condominiums 16,560016,56016,156002,41818,574 18,574.03TOTAL3,155,633147,7723,007,8612,934,529181,798121,299414,8193,652,445Note: 1. Taxes and tax increment will vary significantly from year to year depending upon values, rates, state law, fiscal disparities and other factors which cannot be predicted.Total Property Taxes 3,652,445Current Market Value - Est. 13,884,900less State-wide Taxes (121,299)New Market Value - Est. 244,428,263less Fiscal Disp. Adj. (181,798) Difference 230,543,363less Market Value Taxes (414,819)Present Value of Tax Increment 33,313,587less Base Value Taxes (176,651) Difference 197,229,776Annual Gross TIF 2,757,878Value likely to occur without Tax Increment is less than:197,229,776 WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM TIF?MARKET VALUE BUT / FOR ANALYSISTAX CALCULATIONS8-29-2024 DRAFT for reviewPage 121 of 160 7235 France Avenue RedevelopmentCity of Edina, MNMixed-Use Redevelopment - Total SiteTAX INCREMENT CASH FLOWProject Original Fiscal Captured Local Annual Semi-Annual State Admin. Semi-Annual Semi-Annual PERIOD% of Tax Tax Disparities Tax Tax Gross Tax Gross Tax Auditor at Net Tax Present ENDING Tax PaymentOTC Capacity Capacity Incremental Capacity Rate Increment Increment 0.36% 10% Increment Value Yrs. Year Date- - - - 02/01/28100% 931,656 (276,948) - 654,708 97.562% 638,746 319,373 (1,150) (31,822) 286,401 268,655 0.5 2028 08/01/28100% 931,656 (276,948) - 654,708 97.562% 638,746 319,373 (1,150) (31,822) 286,401 528,853 1 2028 02/01/29100% 2,193,909 (276,948) (18,967) 1,897,994 97.562% 1,851,721 925,860 (3,333) (92,253) 830,274 1,259,422 1.5 2029 08/01/29100% 2,193,909 (276,948) (18,967) 1,897,994 97.562% 1,851,721 925,860 (3,333) (92,253) 830,274 1,966,995 2 2029 02/01/30100% 3,155,633 (276,948) (51,889) 2,826,796 97.562% 2,757,878 1,378,939 (4,964) (137,397) 1,236,577 2,987,655 2.5 2030 08/01/30100% 3,155,633 (276,948) (51,889) 2,826,796 97.562% 2,757,878 1,378,939 (4,964) (137,397) 1,236,577 3,976,187 3 2030 02/01/31100% 3,187,189 (276,948) (53,367) 2,856,874 97.562% 2,787,224 1,393,612 (5,017) (138,859) 1,249,735 4,943,791 3.5 2031 08/01/31100% 3,187,189 (276,948) (53,367) 2,856,874 97.562% 2,787,224 1,393,612 (5,017) (138,859) 1,249,735 5,880,938 4 2031 02/01/32100% 3,219,061 (276,948) (54,859) 2,887,254 97.562% 2,816,862 1,408,431 (5,070) (140,336) 1,263,025 6,798,237 4.5 2032 08/01/32100% 3,219,061 (276,948) (54,859) 2,887,254 97.562% 2,816,862 1,408,431 (5,070) (140,336) 1,263,025 7,686,663 5 2032 02/01/33100% 3,251,251 (276,948) (56,367) 2,917,937 97.562% 2,846,797 1,423,399 (5,124) (141,827) 1,276,447 8,556,268 5.5 2033 08/01/33100% 3,251,251 (276,948) (56,367) 2,917,937 97.562% 2,846,797 1,423,399 (5,124) (141,827) 1,276,447 9,398,501 6 2033 02/01/34100% 3,283,764 (276,948) (57,889) 2,948,927 97.562% 2,877,032 1,438,516 (5,179) (143,334) 1,290,004 10,222,886 6.5 2034 08/01/34100% 3,283,764 (276,948) (57,889) 2,948,927 97.562% 2,877,032 1,438,516 (5,179) (143,334) 1,290,004 11,021,322 7 2034 02/01/35100% 3,316,602 (276,948) (59,427) 2,980,227 97.562% 2,907,569 1,453,784 (5,234) (144,855) 1,303,696 11,802,833 7.5 2035 08/01/35100% 3,316,602 (276,948) (59,427) 2,980,227 97.562% 2,907,569 1,453,784 (5,234) (144,855) 1,303,696 12,559,744 8 2035 02/01/36100% 3,349,768 (276,948) (60,980) 3,011,840 97.562% 2,938,411 1,469,205 (5,289) (146,392) 1,317,525 13,300,607 8.5 2036 08/01/36100%3,349,768 (276,948) (60,980) 3,011,840 97.562% 2,938,411 1,469,205 (5,289) (146,392) 1,317,525 14,018,150 9 2036 02/01/37100% 3,383,265 (276,948) (62,549) 3,043,769 97.562% 2,969,562 1,484,781 (5,345) (147,944) 1,331,492 14,720,473 9.5 2037 08/01/37100% 3,383,265 (276,948) (62,549) 3,043,769 97.562% 2,969,562 1,484,781 (5,345) (147,944) 1,331,492 15,400,690 10 2037 02/01/38100% 3,417,098 (276,948) (64,133) 3,076,017 97.562% 3,001,024 1,500,512 (5,402) (149,511) 1,345,599 16,066,476 10.5 2038 08/01/38100% 3,417,098 (276,948) (64,133) 3,076,017 97.562% 3,001,024 1,500,512 (5,402) (149,511) 1,345,599 16,711,304 11 2038 02/01/39100% 3,451,269 (276,948) (65,733) 3,108,588 97.562% 3,032,800 1,516,400 (5,459) (151,094) 1,359,847 17,342,448 11.5 2039 08/01/39100% 3,451,269 (276,948) (65,733) 3,108,588 97.562% 3,032,800 1,516,400 (5,459) (151,094) 1,359,847 17,953,726 12 2039 02/01/40100% 3,485,782 (276,948) (67,349) 3,141,484 97.562% 3,064,895 1,532,447 (5,517) (152,693) 1,374,238 18,552,028 12.5 2040 08/01/40100% 3,485,782 (276,948) (67,349) 3,141,484 97.562% 3,064,895 1,532,447 (5,517) (152,693) 1,374,238 19,131,497 13 2040 02/01/41100% 3,520,639 (276,948) (68,982) 3,174,710 97.562% 3,097,310 1,548,655 (5,575) (154,308) 1,388,772 19,698,662 13.5 2041 08/01/41100% 3,520,639 (276,948) (68,982) 3,174,710 97.562% 3,097,310 1,548,655 (5,575) (154,308) 1,388,772 20,247,974 14 2041 02/01/42100% 3,555,846 (276,948) (70,630) 3,208,268 97.562% 3,130,050 1,565,025 (5,634) (155,939) 1,403,452 20,785,619 14.5 2042 08/01/42100% 3,555,846 (276,948) (70,630) 3,208,268 97.562% 3,130,050 1,565,025 (5,634) (155,939) 1,403,452 21,306,340 15 2042 02/01/43100% 3,591,404 (276,948) (72,295) 3,242,161 97.562% 3,163,117 1,581,559 (5,694) (157,586) 1,418,278 21,815,999 15.5 2043 08/01/43100% 3,591,404 (276,948) (72,295) 3,242,161 97.562% 3,163,117 1,581,559 (5,694) (157,586) 1,418,278 22,309,616 16 2043 02/01/44100% 3,627,318 (276,948) (73,977) 3,276,393 97.562% 3,196,515 1,598,257 (5,754) (159,250) 1,433,253 22,792,742 16.5 2044 08/01/44100% 3,627,318 (276,948) (73,977) 3,276,393 97.562% 3,196,515 1,598,257 (5,754) (159,250) 1,433,253 23,260,661 17 2044 02/01/45100% 3,663,591 (276,948) (75,676) 3,310,968 97.562% 3,230,246 1,615,123 (5,814) (160,931) 1,448,378 23,718,634 17.5 2045 08/01/45100% 3,663,591 (276,948) (75,676) 3,310,968 97.562% 3,230,246 1,615,123 (5,814) (160,931) 1,448,378 24,162,191 18 2045 02/01/46100% 3,700,227 (276,948) (77,391) 3,345,888 97.562% 3,264,315 1,632,158 (5,876) (162,628) 1,463,654 24,596,318 18.5 2046 08/01/46100% 3,700,227 (276,948) (77,391) 3,345,888 97.562% 3,264,315 1,632,158 (5,876) (162,628) 1,463,654 25,016,779 19 2046 02/01/47100% 3,737,230 (276,948) (79,124) 3,381,158 97.562% 3,298,725 1,649,362 (5,938) (164,342) 1,479,082 25,428,298 19.5 2047 08/01/47100% 3,737,230 (276,948) (79,124) 3,381,158 97.562% 3,298,725 1,649,362 (5,938) (164,342) 1,479,082 25,826,863 20 2047 02/01/48100% 3,774,602 (276,948) (80,874) 3,416,780 97.562% 3,333,479 1,666,739 (6,000) (166,074) 1,494,665 26,216,950 20.5 2048 08/01/48100% 3,774,602 (276,948) (80,874) 3,416,780 97.562% 3,333,479 1,666,739 (6,000) (166,074) 1,494,665 26,594,759 21 2048 02/01/49100% 3,812,348 (276,948) (82,642) 3,452,758 97.562% 3,368,580 1,684,290 (6,063) (167,823) 1,510,404 26,964,528 21.5 2049 08/01/49100% 3,812,348 (276,948) (82,642) 3,452,758 97.562% 3,368,580 1,684,290 (6,063) (167,823) 1,510,404 27,322,657 22 2049 02/01/50100% 3,850,471 (276,948) (84,427) 3,489,096 97.562% 3,404,032 1,702,016 (6,127) (169,589) 1,526,300 27,673,165 22.5 2050 08/01/50100% 3,850,471 (276,948) (84,427) 3,489,096 97.562% 3,404,032 1,702,016 (6,127) (169,589) 1,526,300 28,012,639 23 2050 02/01/51100% 3,888,976 (276,948) (86,230) 3,525,798 97.562% 3,439,839 1,719,920 (6,192) (171,373) 1,542,355 28,344,886 23.5 2051 08/01/51100% 3,888,976 (276,948) (86,230) 3,525,798 97.562% 3,439,839 1,719,920 (6,192) (171,373) 1,542,355 28,666,676 24 2051 02/01/52100% 3,927,866 (276,948) (88,051) 3,562,867 97.562% 3,476,004 1,738,002 (6,257) (173,175) 1,558,571 28,981,612 24.5 2052 08/01/52100% 3,927,866 (276,948) (88,051) 3,562,867 97.562% 3,476,004 1,738,002 (6,257) (173,175) 1,558,571 29,286,636 25 2052 02/01/53100% 3,967,145 (276,948) (89,891) 3,600,306 97.562% 3,512,531 1,756,265 (6,323) (174,994) 1,574,948 29,585,163 25.5 2053 08/01/53100% 3,967,145 (276,948) (89,891) 3,600,306 97.562% 3,512,531 1,756,265 (6,323) (174,994) 1,574,948 29,874,293 26 2053 02/01/54 Total77,405,264 (278,659) (7,712,660) 69,413,944 Present Value (PV) From 08/01/2027PV Rate: 6.50%33,313,587 (119,929) (3,319,366) 29,874,293 8-29-2024 DRAFT for reviewPage 122 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District Appendix C: Findings Including But/For Qualifications The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan) for 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District (the “District”), as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes (M.S.), Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District is a redevelopment district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10. The District consists of one (1) parcel within Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area and its internal and external rights-of-way, abutting roadways and intersections, pedestrian pathways and crossings; with plans for demolition and clearance of a single-use commercial building for redevelopment of underutilized property at 7235 France Avenue South. The parcel, consisting of at least 70 percent of the area of the District, is occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures, and more than 50% of the buildings in the District are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. (See Appendix D of the TIF Plan.) 2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District permitted by the TIF Plan. The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact that the activities proposed in the TIF Plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment. The existing property contains a substandard building whose renovation requires added costs related to demolition, remediation, site improvement and construction of infrastructure. The redevelopment also requires substantial investment toward public improvements such as local transportation and utility infrastructure, pedestrian connections and parking. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 123 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District Because of the public and private cost of financing the proposed improvements which are essential to the comprehensive redevelopment of the area, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The Developers provided a proforma for each building outlining project sources and uses as well as projected rent, vacancy and financing assumptions. City staff and the City’s financial advisor reviewed the information and have determined that the projects are not feasible without assistance due to anticipated rent levels and market returns not supporting the redevelopment costs for this site. The Developers have indicated that the private investment necessary could not go forward without public assistance. The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan: This finding is justified on the grounds that the development intensity and tax base created on currently underutilized and declining property requires site and public improvement costs that are improbable without public assistance. Specifically, the cost of site preparation, demolition, remediation, and public improvements to include transportation and utility infrastructure will add significantly to the total redevelopment cost of any development in this area. Site and public improvements costs necessary to sustain the approved density have made redevelopment infeasible without tax increment assistance. The City reasonably determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope is anticipated on this site without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development. Therefore, the City concludes as follows: a. If the proposed development occurs, the total increase in taxable market value of the District will be $230,543,363. c. The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $33,313,587. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 124 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District d. Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur, the Council finds that no alternative would occur that would produce a market value increase greater than $197,229,776 (the amount in clause a less the amount in clause b) without tax increment assistance. 3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The City of Edina Planning Commission will review the proposed TIF Plan on September 25, 2024 to provide written opinion to affirm that the TIF Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City. 4. Finding that the TIF Plan for 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project Area by private enterprise. Through the implementation of the TIF Plan, the City will provide an impetus for the construction of a new mixed-use private development which will result in increased employment in the City and the State of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, new affordable housing options within the City, increased tax base of the State and add a high-quality development to the City. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 125 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District Appendix D: Redevelopment Qualifications for the District 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 126 of 160 REPORT OF INSPECTION PROCEDURES AND RESULTS FOR DETERMINING QUALIFICATIONS OF A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT MACY’S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT Prepared for CITY OF EDINA MINNESOTA August 10, 2023 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 127 of 160 Macy’s Furniture Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 Page 1 of 9 Final Report Table of Contents Part 1: Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose of the Evaluation ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 Scope of Work ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Part 2: Minnesota Statute 469.174, Subdivision 10 Requirements ....................................................................... 3 Interior Inspection .................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Exterior Inspection and Other Means ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Documentation ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Qualification Requirements ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 1. Coverage Test .................................................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Condition of Buildings Test ................................................................................................................................................. 4 3. Distribution of Substandard Buildings ................................................................................................................................. 5 Part 3: Procedures Followed .................................................................................................................................... 5 Part 4: Findings ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 1. Coverage Test ..................................................................................................................................................................... 5 2. Condition of Building Test .................................................................................................................................................... 6 3. Distribution of Substandard Structures ................................................................................................................................ 8 Part 5: Team Credentials .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Appendices ................................................................................................................................................................ 9 APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet APPENDIX B Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Reports APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 128 of 160 Macy’s Furniture Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 Page 2 of 9 Final Report Part 1: Executive Summary Purpose of the Evaluation LHB was hired by the City of Edina to inspect and evaluate the properties within a Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment District (“TIF District”) proposed to be established by the City. The proposed TIF District is located at 7235 France Avenue South, near the intersection of Gallagher Drive and France Avenue South, in Edina, MN (Diagram 1). The purpose of LHB’s work is to determine whether the proposed TIF District meets the statutory requirements for coverage, and whether one (1) building on one (1) parcel, located within the proposed TIF District, meets the qualifications required for a Redevelopment District. Diagram 1: Proposed TIF District Scope of Work The proposed TIF District consists of one (1) parcel with one (1) structure. The building was inspected on April 26, 2023. Building Code and Condition Deficiency reports are in Appendix B. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 129 of 160 Macy’s Furniture Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 Page 3 of 9 Final Report Conclusion After inspecting and evaluating the properties within the proposed TIF District and applying current statutory criteria for a Redevelopment District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10, it is our professional opinion that the proposed TIF District qualifies as a Redevelopment District because: The proposed TIF District has a coverage calculation of 100 percent which is above the 70 percent requirement. 100 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard which is above the 50 percent requirement. The substandard buildings are reasonably distributed. The remainder of this report describes our process and findings in detail. Part 2: Minnesota Statute 469.174, Subdivision 10 Requirements The properties were inspected in accordance with the following requirements under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), which states: Interior Inspection “The municipality may not make such determination [that the building is structurally substandard] without an interior inspection of the property...” Exterior Inspection and Other Means “An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard.” Documentation “Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspection was not conducted must be made and retained under section 469.175, subdivision 3(1).” Qualification Requirements Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10 (a) (1) requires three tests for occupied parcels: 1. COVERAGE TEST a. Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(a)(1) states: “parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or paved or gravel parking lots…”The coverage required by the parcel to be considered occupied is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(e), which states: “For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures.” 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 130 of 160 Macy’s Furniture Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 Page 4 of 9 Final Report 2. CONDITION OF BUILDINGS TEST a. Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(a) states: “…and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance;” b. Structurally substandard is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b), which states: “For purposes of this subdivision, ‘structurally substandard’ shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance.” i. We do not count energy code deficiencies toward the thresholds required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b) defined as “structurally substandard”, due to concerns expressed by the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals in the Walser Auto Sales, Inc. vs. City of Richfield case filed November 13, 2001. c. Buildings are not eligible to be considered structurally substandard unless they meet certain additional criteria, as set forth in Subdivision 10(c) which states: “A building is not structurally substandard if it follows the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence based on reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable evidence.” “Items of evidence that support such a conclusion [that the building is not disqualified] include recent fire or police inspections, on-site property tax appraisals or housing inspections, exterior evidence of deterioration, or other similar reliable evidence.” i. LHB counts energy code deficiencies toward the 15 percent code threshold required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c)) for the following reasons: 1) The Minnesota energy code is one of ten building code areas highlighted by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry website where minimum construction standards are required by law. 2) Chapter 13 of the 2015 Minnesota Building Code states, “Buildings shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the International Energy Conservation Code.” Furthermore, Minnesota Rules, Chapter 1305.0021 Subpart 9 states, “References to the International Energy Conservation Code in this code mean the Minnesota Energy Code…” 3) Chapter 11 of the 2015 Minnesota Residential Code incorporates Minnesota Rules, Chapters, 1322 and 1323 Minnesota Energy Code. 4) The Senior Building Code Representative for the Construction Codes and Licensing Division of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry confirmed that the Minnesota Energy Code is being enforced throughout the State of Minnesota. 5) In a January 2002 report to the Minnesota Legislature, the Management Analysis Division of the Minnesota Department of Administration confirmed that the construction cost of new buildings complying with the Minnesota Energy Code is higher than buildings built prior to the enactment of the code. 6) Proper TIF analysis requires a comparison between the replacement value of a new building built under current code standards with the repairs that would be necessary to bring the existing building up to current code standards. For an equal comparison to be made, all applicable code chapters should be applied to both scenarios. Since current construction estimating software automatically applies the construction cost of complying with the Minnesota Energy Code, energy code deficiencies should also be identified in the existing structures. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 131 of 160 Macy’s Furniture Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 Page 5 of 9 Final Report 3. DISTRIBUTION OF SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS a. Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10, defines a Redevelopment District and requires one or more of the following conditions “reasonably distributed throughout the district.”: “(1) Parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; (2) the property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used rail yards, rail storage facilities, or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way; (3) tank facilities, or property whose immediately previous use was for tank facilities…” b. Our interpretation of the distribution requirement is that the substandard buildings must be reasonably distributed throughout the district as compared to the location of all buildings in the district. For example, if all the buildings in a district are located on one half of the area of the district, with the other half occupied by parking lots (meeting the required 70 percent coverage for the district), we would evaluate the distribution of the substandard buildings compared with only the half of the district where the buildings are located. If all the buildings in a district are located evenly throughout the entire area of the district, the substandard buildings must be reasonably distributed throughout the entire area of the district. We believe this is consistent with the opinion expressed by the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals in the Walser Auto Sales, Inc. vs. City of Richfield case filed November 13, 2001. Part 3: Procedures Followed LHB inspected one building on the interior and exterior during the day of April 26, 2023. Part 4: Findings 1. Coverage Test a. The total square foot area of the parcels in the proposed TIF District were obtained from City records, GIS mapping and site verification. b. The total square foot area of buildings and site improvements on the parcels in the proposed TIF District were obtained from City records, GIS mapping and site verification. c. The percentage of coverage for each parcel in the proposed TIF District was computed to determine if the 15 percent minimum requirement was met. The total square footage of parcels meeting the 15 percent requirement was divided into the total square footage of the entire district to determine if the 70 percent requirement was met. FINDING The proposed TIF District met the coverage test under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(e), which resulted in parcels consisting of 100 percent of the area of the proposed TIF District being occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures (Diagram 2). This exceeds the 70 percent area coverage requirement for the proposed TIF District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision (a) (1). 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 132 of 160 Macy’s Furniture Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 Page 6 of 9 Final Report Diagram 2 – Coverage Diagram Shaded area depicts a parcel more than 15 percent occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures 2. Condition of Building Test a. BUILDING INSPECTION i. The first step in the evaluation process is the building inspection. After an initial walk-thru, the inspector makes a judgment whether a building “appears” to have enough defects or deficiencies of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. If it does, the inspector documents with notes and photographs code and non-code deficiencies in the building. b. REPLACEMENT COST i. The second step in evaluating a building to determine if it is substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance is to determine its replacement cost. This is the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on site. Replacement costs were researched using R.S. Means Cost Works square foot models for 2023. ii. A replacement cost was calculated by first establishing building use (office, retail, residential, etc.), building construction type (wood, concrete, masonry, etc.), and building size to obtain the appropriate median replacement cost, which factors in the costs of construction in Edina, Minnesota. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 133 of 160 Macy’s Furniture Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 Page 7 of 9 Final Report iii. Replacement cost includes labor, materials, and the contractor’s overhead and profit. Replacement costs do not include architectural fees, legal fees or other “soft” costs not directly related to construction activities. Replacement cost for each building is tabulated in Appendix A. c. CODE DEFICIENCIES i. The next step in evaluating a building is to determine what code deficiencies exist with respect to such building. Code deficiencies are those conditions for a building which are not in compliance with current building codes applicable to new buildings in the State of Minnesota. ii. Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), specifically provides that a building cannot be considered structurally substandard if its code deficiencies are not at least 15 percent of the replacement cost of the building. As a result, it was necessary to determine the extent of code deficiencies for each building in the proposed TIF District. iii. The evaluation was made by reviewing all available information with respect to such buildings contained in City Building Inspection records and making interior and exterior inspections of the buildings. LHB utilizes the current Minnesota State Building Code as the official code for our evaluations. The Minnesota State Building Code is a series of provisional codes written specifically for Minnesota only requirements, adoption of several international codes, and amendments to the adopted international codes. iv. After identifying the code deficiencies in each building, we used R.S. Means Cost Works 2023; Unit and Assembly Costs to determine the cost of correcting the identified deficiencies. We were then able to compare the correction costs with the replacement cost of each building to determine if the costs for correcting code deficiencies meet the required 15 percent threshold. FINDING One (1) out of one (1) buildings (100 percent) in the proposed TIF District contained code deficiencies exceeding the 15 percent threshold required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c). Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis reports for the buildings in the proposed TIF District can be found in Appendix B of this report. d. SYSTEM CONDITION DEFICIENCIES i. If a building meets the minimum code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), then for such building to be “structurally substandard” under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b), the building’s defects, or deficiencies should be of sufficient total significance to justify “substantial renovation or clearance.” Based on this definition, LHB re-evaluated each of the buildings that met the code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), to determine if the total deficiencies warranted “substantial renovation or clearance” based on the criteria we outlined above. ii. System condition deficiencies are a measurement of defects or substantial deterioration in site elements, structure, exterior envelope, mechanical and electrical components, fire protection and emergency systems, interior partitions, ceilings, floors, and doors. iii. The evaluation of system condition deficiencies was made by reviewing all available information contained in City records and making interior and exterior inspections of the buildings. LHB only identified system condition deficiencies that were visible upon our inspection of the building or contained in City records. We did not consider the amount of “service life” used up for a particular component unless it was an obvious part of that component’s deficiencies. iv. After identifying the system condition deficiencies in each building, we used our professional judgment to determine if the list of defects or deficiencies is of sufficient total significance to justify “substantial renovation or clearance.” 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 134 of 160 Macy’s Furniture Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 Page 8 of 9 Final Report FINDING In our professional opinion, one (1) out of one (1) buildings (100 percent) in the proposed TIF District are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance, because of defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. This exceeds the 50 percent requirement of Subdivision 10a(1). 3. Distribution of Substandard Structures e. Much of this report has focused on the condition of individual buildings as they relate to requirements identified by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10. It is also important to look at the distribution of substandard buildings throughout the geographic area of the proposed TIF District (Diagram 3). FINDING The parcels with substandard buildings are reasonably distributed compared to all parcels that contain buildings. Diagram 3 – Substandard Buildings Shaded yellow area depicts parcels with buildings. Shaded orange area depicts substandard buildings. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 135 of 160 Macy’s Furniture Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 Page 9 of 9 Final Report Part 5: Team Credentials Michael A. Fischer, AIA, LEED AP - Project Principal/TIF Analyst Michael has 34 years of experience as project principal, project manager, project designer and project architect on planning, urban design, educational, commercial, and governmental projects. He has become an expert on Tax Increment Finance District analysis assisting over 100 cities with strategic planning for TIF Districts. He is an Architectural Principal and Vice President at LHB. Michael completed a two-year Bush Fellowship, studying at MIT and Harvard in 1999, earning master’s degrees in City Planning and Real Estate Development from MIT. He has served on more than 50 committees, boards, and community task forces, including a term as a City Council President, Chair of a Metropolitan Planning Organization, and Chair of the Edina Planning Commission. Most recently, he served as a member of the Edina city council and Secretary of the Edina HRA. Michael has also managed and designed several award-winning architectural projects and was one of four architects in the Country to receive the AIA Young Architects Citation in 1997. Phil Fisher – Inspector For 35 years, Phil Fisher worked in the field of Building Operations in Minnesota including White Bear Lake Area Schools. At the University of Minnesota, he earned his Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology. He is a Certified Playground Safety Inspector, Certified Plant Engineer, and is trained in Minnesota Enterprise Real Properties (MERP) Facility Condition Assessment (FCA). His FCA training was recently applied to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Facilities Condition Assessment project involving over 2,000 buildings. Appendices APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet APPENDIX B Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Report Code Deficiency Cost Report Photographs 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 136 of 160 APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 137 of 160 Macy's Furniture Redevelopment TIF DistrictProperty Condition Assessment Summary SheetEdina, MinnesotaTIF Map No.PID #Property AddressImproved or VacantSurvey Method UsedSite Area(S.F.)Coverage Area of Improvements(S.F.)Coverage Percent of ImprovementsCoverageQuantity(S.F.)No. of BuildingsBuildingReplacementCost15% of Replacement CostBuilding Code DeficienciesNo. of Buildings Exceeding 15% CriteriaNo. of buildings determined substandardA 3202824230004 7235 France Avenue South Improved Interior/Exterior 347,284280,00080.6%347,2841$9,066,433$1,359,965 $2,101,83611TOTALS347,284347,284111100.0%100.0%M:\23Proj\230310\300 Design\Reports\Final Report\[Macy's Furniture Redevelopment TIF Summary Spreadsheet.xlsx]Property Info100.0%Total Coverage Percent:Percent of buildings exceeding 15 percent code deficiency threshold: Percent of buildings determined substandard: LHB Project Number 230310Page 1 of 1Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet8-29-2024 DRAFT for reviewPage 138 of 160 APPENDIX B Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 139 of 160 Macy’s Furniture TIF District Page 1 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230310.00 Parcel No. A – 7235 France Ave Edina, MN 55435 MACY’S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report Parcel A Macy’s Furniture Store Address: 7235 France Avenue, Edina, Minnesota 55435 Parcel ID: 32084230004 Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): April 26, 2023, 9:00 am Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: - Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. - Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $9,066,433 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $2,101,836 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 23.2% DEFECTS IN STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS 1. *No Defects Observed* COMBINATION OF DEFICIENCIES 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a. The drinking fountain does not comply with code. 2. Light and Ventilation a. The lighting system does not comply with code. b. The HVAC system does not comply with code. c. The electrical wiring system does not comply with code. 3. Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a. Sidewalks are damaged creating an impediment to emergency egress which is contrary to code. b. Glass doors do not have code required 10-inch kick plates. c. The concrete stoop is not compliant with code for minimum size. d. Exterior stairs do not comply with code. e. Thresholds do not comply with code for maximum height. f. Interior stairs do not comply with code. g. The electrical room does not comply with code because of obstructions to panel access. h. Door hardware does not comply with code. i. Steel beams are not fireproofed per code. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 140 of 160 Macy’s Furniture TIF District Page 2 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230310.00 Parcel No. A – 7235 France Ave Edina, MN 55435 j. Through wall penetrations should have fire caulking installed per code. k. The elevated platform in the loading area does not have a code required 4-inch toe board. l. Storeroom gyp board does not have code required fire tape on joints. m. The gas line on the roof is not properly secured per code. n. The emergency lighting system does not comply with code. o. The smoke detectors do not comply with code. p. The emergency notification system does not comply with code. q. The building sprinkler system does not comply with code. 4. Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a. Interior concrete flooring is damaged creating an impediment to emergency egress which is contrary to code. b. Interior floor tile is damaged creating an impediment to emergency egress which is contrary to code. c. The interior carpeting is damaged creating an impediment to emergency egress which is contrary to code. d. Interior walls should be repaired/repainted. e. The carpet is worn and should be replaced. 5. Exterior Construction a. Brick and mortar are damaged allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. b. Gutters are damaged and should be replaced. c. The painted metal roofing material is flaking and should be repainted. d. Painted concrete walls are flaking and should be repainted. e. The roofing material is failing, allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. DESCRIPTION OF CODE DEFICIENCIES 1. Drinking fountain should be modified to comply with code. 2. The lighting system should be modified to comply with code. 3. The HVAC system should be modified to comply with code. 4. The electrical wiring system should be modified to comply with code. 5. Sidewalks are damaged and should be repaired to comply with code for an unimpeded means to emergency egress. 6. Glass doors should have code required 10 inch kick plates installed. 7. Exterior stairs should be modified to comply with code. 8. Thresholds should be modified to comply with code for maximum height. 9. Interior stairs should be modified to comply with code. 10. The electrical room should be cleaned up to comply with code. 11. Code compliant door hardware should be installed. 12. The steel beams should be fireproofed to comply with code. 13. Through wall penetrations should have fire caulking installed per code. 14. A code required toe board should be placed on the elevated platform. 15. Storeroom gyp board should have code required fire tape on joints. 16. The gas line on the roof should be properly secured per code. 17. Install code compliant smoke detectors. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 141 of 160 Macy’s Furniture TIF District Page 3 of 3 Building Report LHB Project No. 230310.00 Parcel No. A – 7235 France Ave Edina, MN 55435 18. The emergency lighting system should be made code compliant. 19. The emergency notification system should be made code compliant. 20. The building sprinkler system should be made code compliant. 21. Concrete flooring should be repaired to create an unimpeded means for emergency egress per code. 22. Damaged floor tile should be repaired to create an unimpeded means for emergency egress per code. 23. The carpet should be repaired/replaced to create an unimpeded means to emergency egress per code. 24. Brick and mortar should be repaired to prevent water intrusion per code. 25. Failed roofing material should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per code. OVERVIEW OF DEFICIENCIES This building is currently used as a new furniture showroom. Exterior brick and mortar are damaged/missing allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. The glass doors should have code required 10-inch kick plates installed. The building has multiple levels that are accessed by stairs and an elevator. The stairs do not comply with code. The drinking fountain is not code compliant. The lighting and electrical wiring does not comply with code. The HVAC system does not comply with code. While there are life safety systems none of them fully comply with code. Flooring is damaged/missing creating an impediment to emergency egress which is contrary to code. The interior walls should be repaired/repainted. The carpet should be cleaned. The gas pipeline on the roof is not properly secured per code. The roofing material has failed allowing for water intrusion which is contrary to code. ENERGY CODE DEFICIENCIES In addition to the building code deficiencies listed above, the existing building does not comply with the current energy code. These deficiencies are not included in the estimated costs to correct code deficiencies and are not considered in determining whether or not the building is substandard. - M:\23Proj\230310\300 Design\Reports\Building Reports\7235 France Ave Building Report Redevelopment District.docx 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 142 of 160 APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Report Code Deficiency Cost Report Photographs 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 143 of 160 Replacement Cost Report Square Foot Cost Estimate Report Date:4/26/2023 Estimate Name:7235 France Ave Building Type: Store, Department, 1 Story with Face Brick & Concrete Block / Rigid Steel Location:EDINA, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):18 Floor Area (S.F.):76600 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2023 Quarter 1 Cost Per Square Foot:$118.36 Building Cost:$9,066,433.96 Quantity % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost A Substructure 9.89% $10.18 $780,097.34 A1010 Standard Foundations $2.85 $217,975.90 A10101051560 Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick 1120 $1.45 $110,882.24 A10101102500 Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 5.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 3 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide 1120 $0.80 $61,053.44 A10102107250 Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 75K, soil bearing capacity 3 KSF, 5' ‐ 6" square x 13" deep 69.64 $0.60 $46,040.22 A1030 Slab on Grade $6.98 $534,291.13 A10301202240 Slab on grade, 4" thick, non industrial, reinforced 76600 $6.98 $534,291.13 A2010 Basement Excavation $0.36 $27,830.31 A20101106911 Excavate and fill, 100,000 SF, 4' deep, sand, gravel, or common earth, on site storage 76600 $0.36 $27,830.31 B Shell 34.17% $35.17 $2,694,056.26 B1010 Floor Construction $0.55 $42,497.53 B10107203550 Fireproofing, gypsum board, fire rated, 1 layer, 1/2" thick, 14" steel column, 2 hour rating, 18 PLF 1208.89 $0.55 $42,497.53 B1020 Roof Construction $13.52 $1,035,508.67 B10201124500 Roof, steel joists, beams, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns, 30'x30' bay, 28" deep, 40 PSF superimposed load, 62 PSF total load 76600 $11.87 $908,960.11 B10201124600 Roof, steel joists, beams, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns, 30'x30' bay, 28" deep, 40 PSF superimposed load, 62 PSF total load, add for column 76600 $1.65 $126,548.56 B2010 Exterior Walls $10.42 $798,433.98 B20101321240 Brick wall, composite double wythe, standard face/CMU back‐up, 8" thick, styrofoam core fill 18144 $10.42 $798,433.98 B2020 Exterior Windows $2.53 $194,047.87 B20202101450 Aluminum flush tube frame, for 1/4"glass, 1‐3/4" x 4‐1/2", 5'x6' opening, 1 intermediate horizontal 2016 $1.29 $98,837.83 B20202202300 Glazing panel, plate glass, 3/8" thick, tinted 2016 $1.24 $95,210.04 B2030 Exterior Doors $0.67 $51,192.07 B20301105850 Doors, stainless steel & glass, balanced, standard, premium, 3'‐0" x 7'‐ 0" opening 1.39 $0.51 $39,416.69 B20302203450 Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" opening 2.79 $0.15 $11,775.38 B3010 Roof Coverings $7.25 $555,103.59 B30101203300 Roofing, single ply membrane, EPDM, 60 mils, fully adhered 76600 $3.33 $255,078.00 B30103203090 Insulation, rigid, roof deck, composite with 2" EPS, 1" perlite 76600 $3.07 $235,253.92 B30104201400 Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face 1120 $0.66 $50,447.94 B30106305100 Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick 1120 $0.19 $14,323.73 B3020 Roof Openings $0.23 $17,272.55 B30202100300 Roof hatch, with curb, 1" fiberglass insulation, 2'‐6" x 3'‐0", galvanized steel, 165 lbs 2 $0.07 $5,047.24 B30202102100 Smoke hatch, unlabeled, galvanized, 2'‐6" x 3', not incl hand winch operator 4 $0.16 $12,225.31 MACY'S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. Macy's Furniture TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 1 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Parcel A - 7235 France Ave, Edina , MN 55435 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 144 of 160 C Interiors 21.57% $22.20 $1,700,650.79 C1010 Partitions $2.69 $206,129.38 C10101265800 Metal partition, 5/8"fire rated gypsum board face, 1/4" sound deadening gypsum board, 2‐1/2" @ 24", same opposite face, no insulation 12766.67 $1.29 $98,828.30 C10107101001 1/2" fire rated gypsum board, taped & finished, painted on metal furring 18144 $1.40 $107,301.08 C1020 Interior Doors $1.90 $145,197.98 C10201022600 Door, single leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, flush, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8" 127.67 $1.90 $145,197.98 C3010 Wall Finishes $0.32 $24,166.02 C30102300140 Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, primer & 2 coats 25533.33 $0.32 $24,166.02 C3020 Floor Finishes $9.77 $748,472.01 C30204100080 Carpet tile, nylon, fusion bonded, 18" x 18" or 24" x 24", 35 oz 38300 $2.75 $210,746.52 C30204101740 Tile, porcelain type, minimum 38300 $7.02 $537,725.49 C3030 Ceiling Finishes $7.53 $576,685.40 C30302107200 Acoustic ceilings, 5/8" plastic coated mineral fiber, 12" x 12" tile, 25 ga channel grid, adhesive back support 76600 $7.53 $576,685.40 D Services 34.36% $35.37 $2,709,051.23 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures $2.66 $203,908.14 D20101102080 Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung 27.23 $1.53 $116,899.10 D20102102000 Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung 3.55 $0.08 $6,334.78 D20103101560 Lavatory w/trim, vanity top, PE on CI, 20" x 18" 10.65 $0.30 $22,772.00 D20104404340 Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 24" x 20" 4.74 $0.47 $35,892.78 D20108201880 Water cooler, electric, wall hung, dual height, 14.3 GPH 4.74 $0.29 $22,009.48 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution $0.37 $28,426.26 D20202502220 Gas fired water heater, commercial, 100< F rise, 500 MBH input, 480 GPH 1.18 $0.37 $28,426.26 D2040 Rain Water Drainage $0.94 $72,002.50 D20402104360 Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 6" diam, 10' high 13.02 $0.62 $47,241.34 D20402104400 Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 6" diam, for each additional foot add 454.03 $0.32 $24,761.16 D3050 Terminal & Package Units $10.13 $775,994.77 D30501502560 Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, department stores, 10,000 SF, 29.17 ton 76600 $10.13 $775,994.77 D4010 Sprinklers $4.35 $332,848.45 D40104100640 Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, light hazard, 1 floor, 50,000 SF 76600 $4.35 $332,848.45 D4020 Standpipes $0.46 $35,102.22 D40203101580 Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 6" diam pipe, 1 floor 0.7 $0.22 $16,878.31 D40203101600 Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 6" diam pipe, additional floors 2.79 $0.24 $18,223.91 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution $1.63 $125,213.19 D50101200480 Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 1200 A 1.25 $0.55 $42,209.31 D50102300480 Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 1200 A 100 $0.67 $50,973.00 D50102400320 Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 3 phase, 1200 A 1.2 $0.42 $32,030.88 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring $13.26 $1,015,499.77 D50201100240 Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 2.5 per 1000 SF, .3 W per SF, with transformer 51322 $1.79 $136,885.01 D50201350200 Miscellaneous power, to .5 watts 76600 $0.19 $14,853.51 D50201400240 Central air conditioning power, 3 watts 91920 $0.99 $76,005.89 D50202100520 Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 1.6 watt per SF, 40 FC, 10 fixtures @32watt per 1000 SF 95750 $10.28 $787,755.36 D5030 Communications and Security $1.53 $116,886.24 D50309100456 Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 100 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire 0.7 $0.85 $65,110.07 D50309100462 Fire alarm command center, addressable with voice, excl. wire & conduit 0.7 $0.14 $10,606.14 D50309200102 Internet wiring, 2 data/voice outlets per 1000 S.F. 53.62 $0.54 $41,170.03 D5090 Other Electrical Systems $0.04 $3,169.69 D50902100200 Generator sets, w/battery, charger, muffler and transfer switch, gas/gasoline operated, 3 phase, 4 wire, 277/480 V, 7.5 kW 1.97 $0.04 $3,169.69 Macy's Furniture TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 2 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Parcel A - 7235 France Ave, Edina , MN 55435 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 145 of 160 E Equipment & Furnishings 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 E1090 Other Equipment $0.00 $0.00 F Special Construction 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 G Building Sitework 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 100% $102.92 $7,883,855.62 15.0% $15.44 $1,182,578.34 0.0% $0.00 $0.00 0.0% $0.00 $0.00 Total Building Cost $118.36 $9,066,433.96 Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees SubTotal User Fees Macy's Furniture TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 3 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Parcel A - 7235 France Ave, Edina , MN 55435 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 146 of 160 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel A - 7235 France Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55435 Building Name or Type Parcel ID 320284230004 Macy's Furniture Store Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Drinking Fountain Install a code compliant drinking fountain 0.29$ SF 76,600 22,214.00$ Structural Elements *No Deficiencies Observed*-$ Exiting Sidewalks Repair/replace damaged sidewalks to create a code required unimpeded means for emergency egress 5.00$ SF 2,000 10,000.00$ Glass Doors Install code required 10-inch kick plates on glass doors 100.00$ EA 12 1,200.00$ Concrete Stoop Modify concrete stoop to comply with code 1,500.00$ Lump 1 1,500.00$ Exterior Stairs Modify exterior stairs to comply with code 1,500.00$ Lump 1 1,500.00$ Thresholds Modify thresholds to comply with code for maximum height 500.00$ Lump 1 500.00$ Interior Stairs Modify interior stairs to comply with code 5,000.00$ Lump 1 5,000.00$ Door Hardware Install code compliant door hardware 250.00$ EA 10 2,500.00$ Elevated Platform Install a 4-inch toe board on elevated platform to comply with code 500.00$ Lump 1 500.00$ Emergency Lighting Install a code compliant emergency lighting system 0.15$ SF 76,600 11,490.00$ Emergency Notification System Install a code compliant emergency notification system 0.14$ SF 76,600 10,724.00$ Concrete Flooring Repair damaged concrete flooring to create a code required unimpeded means for emergency egress 1.00$ SF 500 500.00$ Floor Tile Repair damaged/missing floor tile to create a code required unimpeded means for emergency egress 9.00$ SF 250 2,250.00$ Carpet Replace damaged floor tile to create a code required unimpeded means for emergency egress 2.75$ SF 1,000 2,750.00$ MACY'S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT Macy's Furniture TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 Page 1 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel A - 7235 France Ave, Edina, MN 55435 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 147 of 160 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Fire Protection Exposed Steel Beams Install code required fire proofing on exposed steel beams 0.35$ SF 76,600 26,810.00$ Gypsum Board Install code required fire tape on gyp board seams 2.00$ SF 500 1,000.00$ Gas Lines on Roof Properly secure gas lines on roof per code 3,500.00$ Lump 1 3,500.00$ Smoke Detectors Install code compliant smoke detectors 0.25$ SF 76,600 19,150.00$ Building Sprinkler System Modify building sprinkler system to comply with code 0.15$ SF 76,600 11,490.00$ Through Wall Penetrations Install code required fire caulking at all through wall penetrations 0.10$ SF 76,600 7,660.00$ Exterior Construction Brick and Mortar Repair/replace damaged/missing brick and mortar to prevent water intrusion per code 3,500.00$ Lump 1 3,500.00$ Roof Construction Roofing Material Replace failed roofing material to prevent water intrusion per code 3.33$ SF 76,600 255,078.00$ Mechanical - Electrical Mechanical Install a code compliant HVAC system 10.13$ SF 76,600 775,958.00$ Electrical Install a code compliant electrical wiring system 1.79$ SF 76,600 137,114.00$ Install a code compliant lighting system 10.28$ SF 76,600 787,448.00$ Remove unnecessary items from electrical room to comply with code 500.00$ Lump 1 500.00$ Total Code Improvements 2,101,836$ Macy's Furniture TIF District LHB Project No. 230310.00 Page 2 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel A - 7235 France Ave, Edina, MN 55435 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 148 of 160 20230426_083320.jpg 20230426_083340.jpg 20230426_083359.jpg 20230426_083428.jpg 20230426_083502.jpg 20230426_083323.jpg 20230426_083344.jpg 20230426_083414.jpg 20230426_083431.jpg 20230426_083325.jpg 20230426_083352.jpg 20230426_083421.jpg 20230426_083442.jpg 20230426_083535.jpg MACY'S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT | PARCEL A: 7235 FRANCE AVENUE 20230426_083504.jpg Page 1 of 8 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 149 of 160 20230426_083552.jpg 20230426_083651.jpg 20230426_083818.jpg 20230426_083847.jpg 20230426_084129.jpg 20230426_083618.jpg 20230426_083715.jpg 20230426_083822.jpg 20230426_084049.jpg 20230426_083635.jpg 20230426_083719.jpg 20230426_083828.jpg 20230426_084104.jpg 20230426_084203.jpg MACY'S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT | PARCEL A: 7235 FRANCE AVENUE 20230426_084138.jpg Page 2 of 8 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 150 of 160 20230426_084217.jpg 20230426_084304.jpg 20230426_084350.jpg 20230426_084506.jpg 20230426_084610.jpg 20230426_084241.jpg 20230426_084329.jpg 20230426_084427.jpg 20230426_084511.jpg 20230426_084302.jpg 20230426_084340.jpg 20230426_084432.jpg 20230426_084555.jpg 20230426_084624.jpg MACY'S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT | PARCEL A: 7235 FRANCE AVENUE 20230426_084614.jpg Page 3 of 8 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 151 of 160 20230426_084714.jpg 20230426_085108.jpg 20230426_085313.jpg 20230426_085420.jpg 20230426_085525.jpg 20230426_084753.jpg 20230426_085115.jpg 20230426_085321.jpg 20230426_085456.jpg 20230426_084757.jpg 20230426_085131.jpg 20230426_085358.jpg 20230426_085516.jpg 20230426_085532.jpg MACY'S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT | PARCEL A: 7235 FRANCE AVENUE 20230426_085528.jpg Page 4 of 8 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 152 of 160 20230426_085558.jpg 20230426_085624.jpg 20230426_085653.jpg 20230426_090031.jpg 20230426_090200.jpg 20230426_085603.jpg 20230426_085629.jpg 20230426_085715.jpg 20230426_090040.jpg 20230426_085606.jpg 20230426_085639.jpg 20230426_085813.jpg 20230426_090045.jpg 20230426_090224.jpg MACY'S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT | PARCEL A: 7235 FRANCE AVENUE 20230426_090216.jpg Page 5 of 8 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 153 of 160 20230426_090242.jpg 20230426_090350.jpg 20230426_090440.jpg 20230426_090718.jpg 20230426_090945.jpg 20230426_090308.jpg 20230426_090352.jpg 20230426_090624.jpg 20230426_090733.jpg 20230426_090340.jpg 20230426_090409.jpg 20230426_090702.jpg 20230426_090827.jpg 20230426_091336.jpg MACY'S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT | PARCEL A: 7235 FRANCE AVENUE 20230426_091330.jpg Page 6 of 8 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 154 of 160 20230426_091353.jpg 20230426_091517.jpg 20230426_091658.jpg 20230426_091832.jpg 20230426_091947.jpg 20230426_091438.jpg 20230426_091531.jpg 20230426_091812.jpg 20230426_091844.jpg 20230426_091456.jpg 20230426_091551.jpg 20230426_091819.jpg 20230426_091916.jpg 20230426_092034.jpg MACY'S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT | PARCEL A: 7235 FRANCE AVENUE 20230426_091955.jpg Page 7 of 8 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 155 of 160 20230426_092113.jpg 20230426_092228.jpg 20230426_092452.jpg MACY'S FURNITURE REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT | PARCEL A: 7235 FRANCE AVENUE Page 8 of 8 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 156 of 160 Prepared by: 701 Washington Avenue North, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55401 LHBcorp.com LHB Project No. 230310.00 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 157 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District Appendix E: Project Description Project Overview: Redevelopment of the 8-acre commercial site located at 7235 France Avenue consisting of a 89,782 square foot (sq ft) retail building and associated surface parking lot. After the 45 year-old furniture store is cleared and soil corrections completed, four new building pads will be constructed. New public realm amenities to split up the existing “super-block” will include an east-west promenade, a north-south roadway, east-west fire access route, bicycle trail, street parking, public sidewalks and landscaping all secured by permanent public easement. The new roads and sidewalks on the site will be privately built and privately maintained. In total, 68,000 sq ft of new office space, 21,300 sq ft of new commercial space, 523 rental apartments and 49 condominiums for ages 55+. Each property will be professionally managed. Northwest building - 7-story building (5 levels wood frame over 2 levels concrete) - 21,000 sq ft office space - 7,600 sq ft retail space - 124 market-rate rental apartments with 10% leased as affordable at 50% Area Median Income (AMI) - 3 levels of internal parking. Northeast building - 7-story building (5 levels wood frame over 2 levels concrete) - 223 market-rate rental apartments, 10% leased as affordable at 50% AMI - 3 levels of internal parking. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 158 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District Southeast building - 7-story building (5 levels wood frame over 2 levels concrete) - 4,100 sq ft retail space - 176 market-rate rental apartments, 10% leased as affordable at 50% AMI - 3 levels of internal parking. Southwest building - 11-story high rise building - Concrete or steel construction - 47,000 sq ft office space - 9,600 sq ft retail space - 49 luxury condominiums for ages 55+; 5 units (10%) restricted for affordability at 80% AMI - 3 levels of internal parking Overhead view of Proposed Site Plan Related to the redevelopment of this site, the City is also exploring creating a public non-motorized crossing of France Avenue to extend the pedestrian Promenade to better serve the adjacent neighborhoods and overall 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 159 of 160 Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority 72nd and France #3 Tax Increment Financing District community. This work is intended to improve pedestrian and bicyclist routes to and through the TIF District and integrated into the site plans for the development. This underpass or bridge crossing will address existing vehicular and pedestrian safety, traffic and connectivity concerns. Tax increment generated from the TIF District could be used as a funding source for the public crossing if directed by the HRA. 8-29-2024 DRAFT for review Page 160 of 160