The URL can be used to link to this page

11-09-98 PC Agenda AGENDA GOLDEN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting - Council Chambers Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Monday, November 9, 1998 7pm I. Approval of Minutes - October 26, 1998 II. Informal Public Hearing - Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map - Amendment (Existing Schaper Park and property previously known as the White House Restaurant on Olson Memorial Highway) Address: Proposed property bounded by ponding and wetland to the west, the railroad tracks to the north, Olson Memorial Highway to the south, and Ottawa Avenue to the east, excluding the Golden Valley Inn site Request: Amend portions of the plan map from Public & Semi-Public -- Municipal - Parks, Natural Areas and Commercial to Public and Semi-Public - Municipal - Parks, Natural Areas and Commercial III. Informal Public Hearing - Rezoning (Existing Schaper Park and property previously known as the White House Restaurant on Olson Memorial Highway) Applicant: City of Golden Valley and the Golden Valley Housing and Redevelopment Authority Address: Proposed property bounded by ponding and wetland to the west, the railroad tracks to the north, Olson Memorial Highway to the south, and Ottawa Avenue to the east, excluding the Golden Valley Inn site Request: Rezone portions of the property from institutional (1-4) to Commercial and Commercial to Institutional (1-4). IV. Informal Public Hearing - Subdivision (Existing Schaper Park and property previously known as the White House Restaurant on Olson Memorial Highway) Applicant: City of Golden Valley and the Golden Valley Housing and Redevelopment Authority Address: Proposed property bounded by ponding and wetland to the west, the railroad tracks to the north, Olson Memorial Highway to the south, and Ottawa Avenue to the east, excluding the Golden Valley Inn site Request: To combine portions of the proposed properties and then subdivide them into two lots. VI. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council and Board of Zoning Appeals VII. Other Business VIII. Adjournment Planning COl1lltllsslon GuIdelines for Public Input The Planning Coml'l'1.i$sionis an advisorybo~y,created to advJsetheCity Council on land use. The Commission will recornmendCouncilapproval ordeniaIOfi1.land use proposal based upon the Commission's determination of Whether the proposed use is permitted under the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan,and whether the proposed use will, or will not, adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood. The Commission holdsinf()rmal public h~~rings on land use proposals to enable you to learn, first-hand, what sUCh. proposals are, .and to.perrnit you to ask questions slld offer comlTlents. Your questions anclcomments become part of the record and will be llsedbY the C()uncil, along with the Commission's recommendation, in reaching its decision. With thecornpletionofthe informal public hearing(s) there will. be a short recess before the Commission continues with the remainder .of the agenda. To aid in your understanding and to facilitate your comments and questions, the Commission will utilize the following procedure: 1. The Commission Chair will introduce the proposal and the recommendation from staff. Commission members may ask questi()lls of staff. 2. The applicant will describe the proposal and answer any questions from the Commission. 3. The Chair will open the public hearing, asking first for those who wish to speak to so indicate by raising their hands. The Chair may set a time limit for individual questions/comments if a large number of persons have indicated a desire to speak. Spokespersons for groups will have a longer period of time for questions/comments. 4. Please give your full name and address clearly when recognized by the Chair. Remember, your questions/ comments are for the record. 5. Direct your questions/comments to the Chair. The Chair will determine who will answer your questions. 6. No one will be given the opportunity to speak a second time until everyone has had the opportunity to speak initially. Please limit your second presentation to new information, not rebuttal. 7. At the close of the public hearing, the Commission will discuss the proposal and take appropriate action. ~y . . . Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 26, 1998 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, October 26, 1998. The meeting was called to order by Chair Pentel at 7pm. Those present were Chair Pentel and Commissioners Greger, Johnson, Kapsner, Martens, and Shaffer; absent was McAleese. Also present were Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development and Mary Dold, Recording Secretary. I. Approval of Minutes - September 28.1998 MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Groger and motion carried unanimously to approve the September 28, 1998 minutes as submitted. II. Informal Public Hearina - Subdivision Applicant: Honeywell, Inc. Address: 1885-1985 Douglas Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota Purpose: To subdivide the existing property into three lots Director of Planning and Development, Mark Grimes, explained Honeywell's request to subdivide its existing one lot into three lots. He reviewed a colored map and then the preliminary plat showing where the three lots would be situated. Grimes said that Honeywell's prime purpose for the subdivision is to market Lot 1 because they no longer need this portion of land. The little league field sits on proposed Lot 1. Grimes further explained that the City has entered into discussions to acquire Lot 1 or portions of this lot. If the City does not succeed in its negotiations, Honeywell can sell to a potential buyer for an industrial use. Grimes continued his review by noting that Lot 3 is for drainage purposes and that his memo noted that this lot would be deeded to the City, but after preliminary discussions with the applicant, this area of ponding would be given to the City by easement. Grimes next reviewed the northeast area excluded from the plat. He said that there are some title issues that need to be resolved before this area can become part of the plat and the City Attorney suggested that the plat go ahead without this small area, but within some set time period the plat be amended to include this area. Grimes said this area is about one acre in size and could possibly be developed, but does not believe this is Honeywell's intent. Grimes said that when the City looks at subdivisions, it is concerned with various issues such as city sewer and water readily available to the site. In this case, city sewer and water can serve Lot 1. He said when Lot 1 is developed, ponding would be required and grading plans would need to be reviewed to show that it would not have an adverse impact on the surrounding properties. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 26, 1998 Page 2 Grimes told the commission the City has submitted to the County plat information as required. He said they may ask for additional right-of-way in order to achieve a 50-foot wide Douglas Drive. Staff has not yet received these comments. . Grimes made final comments regarding staff recommendations for approval of the subdivision request. He said Condition No.1, regarding the inclusion of the northeast area onto the Honeywell plat be done at this time, can be revised to read that Honeywell amend its plat within the next year or two to include this area. Grimes commented that Sandburg Road is now shown on the plat as dedicated by easement and said all streets should be dedicated on the final plat. He reviewed Condition No.5, noting that the existing parking area on Lot 1 be removed because it would be in violation of the side yard setback. He added that there is adequate parking on the main campus now. Chair Pentel noted the applicant submitted detailed drainage for Lot 1 and a portion of Lot 2 and asked if the drainage from Lot 2 was adequate for Honeywell's current drainage needs. Grimes said that he had talked with City Engineer Jeff Oliver who felt that a detailed drainage plan for Lot 2 was not needed for this submission. Grimes added that if the Council requests this information, staff would have the information gathered, but would take a significant amount of time to prepare. Commissioner Martens asked if the existing pond would serve Lot 1. Grimes commented that Lot 1 would need its own ponding. Martens asked about regional ponding. Grimes commented that this could be looked at to determined if regional ponding could be . accomplished by increasing the depth of the existing pond. He said it is the intent of Honeywell to sell off Lot 1, and they may not want runoff from this lot going into the pond. Grimes believes there would be adequate space on Lot 1 for ponding. Commissioner Kapsner asked Grimes to expound on the City's thought for excepting the ponding area from Honeywell because it then becomes the City's responsibility. Grimes said that the City has an easement to put stormwater runoff into the pond. He said he talked with the City Engineer who said that there has not been any maintenance with this pond, but in the future the City is looking at providing stormwater maintenance. Grimes told the commission that he had learned from Mr. Rousseau, from Honeywell, that they are draining the plant's cooling water into the pond and staff will need to study this issue some more. He questioned whether the City would want to get involved in this situation with the pond and cooling water. Pentel noted that property at the northeast comer had once been a gas station and asked if the tanks had been pulled. Grimes said the tanks were pulled at the time of demolition. He said that there are test wells throughout the Honeywell site, including Lot 1 and the site is continuously monitored under MPCA order. Martens asked whether park dedication was still a necessity when the owner is also dedicating street property and pond property. Grimes said the City has the right to ask for a dedication of up to 10% of the land or 10% of the value of the undeveloped land. He said he has talked with the City Attorney and Park and Rec Director concerning the need for a park dedication and could request also a storm ponding dedication. . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 26, 1998 Page 3 . Pentel asked Grimes if he knew the size of the little league field. Grimes said he believes it is approximately 2+ acres. Commissioner Groger commented that it makes sense to separate Lot 3 (ponding) if it is given to the City. He questioned what would happen to this piece of property if it were not given to the City, could it some day be developed. Grimes commented that the City now has a perpetual easement over this portion of land and the City would have to vacate it in order for someone to develop it. The commission and staff discussed whether Lot 3 needed to exist. John Rousseau, representative for Honeywell, said because there is an existing easement over the ponding area at the southeast comer and saw no need to create a separate lot for it. He added that Honeywell does not pay taxes on this easement area. Groger asked Rousseau if he could guarantee that nothing would ever be constructed on the northeast corner of the property. Rousseau said Honeywell has not developed any plans for this site, He noted that Douglas Drive is the front door into Honeywell and if the property should be developed some day, it would be done well because it's a reflection on Honeywell. Pentel asked Rousseau if any of the parking spaces were needed on the proposed Lot 1. Rousseau said no that there are approximately 2300 parking spaces available with 2000 employees. He said that there is adequate parking now, and if needed, additional land is available that could be developed into parking spaces. . Chair Pentel opened the informal public hearing. John Marudas, 1940 Maryland Avenue North, is concerned about the subdivision and how Lot 1 could be developed to the south near the railroad tracks. Grimes explained where the lots would be created by reviewing the preliminary plat. He noted there is a significant drop at the south end of proposed Lot 1 so it would be doubtful if much land could be developed near the railroad tracks. Keith Heimer, 6405 Hampshire Place, said his property is located south of the pond and has concerns about ponding on the site. He asked what was in the cooling water and where the cooling water goes that comes from Honeywell once it leaves the pond. Mr. Rousseau said the cooling water is clean well water that is pumped out of the ground, circulated through cooling equipment and then goes into the pond. Honeywell has a permit from the MPCA and Corp of Engineers for the cooling water to go into the pond. He said that samples are taken of the water and reviewed on a yearly basis and no chemicals are in the water. Grimes said the water eventually goes into Bassett Creek. Pentel asked if the pond has been dredged or sediment removed from it. Grimes said no maintenance has been performed on this pond. Pentel commented on a Surface Water Management Plan that said this pond should be maintained so it continues to be a good holding pond. . Mr. Heimer talked about the number of ducks that habit this pond and is concerned about the amount of droppings and the environmental impact this may have on the surrounding area. He said he would like to see information on this for health concerns. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 26, 1998 Page 4 Mr. Heimer said he was concerned about the traffic that comes onto Douglas Drive from Honeywell and by adding another entrance, it would make it even worse. He was also concerned about contaminants from the old gas station and questioned if the soil had been examined. He feels that if contaminants exist, they would migrate to the ponding area. Grimes said that when the tanks on the gas station site were removed in the 1980's, he was not sure whether the MPCA monitored this. He added that Mr. Rousseau said the MPCA on a yearly basis monitors the ground water in this area. . Pentel asked if Lot 1 is created, where would the access be located. Grimes said that Honeywell would probably not want an easement over its main campus because. of security issues and that he believed access would be onto Sandburg Road. Pentel closed the informal public hearing. Pentel said she was concerned with the platting requirements regarding the boundaries at the northeast corner and then the ponding area at the southeast corner. Grimes commented that Lot 2 and Lot 3 boundaries are clear. The commission should decide whether Lot 3 be included in the platting process, it can go either way. He also said staff has not received the County's comments so these comments, along with the final park dedication comments, would need to be addressed at the council level. Grimes said the northeast corner would be made a part of Lot 2, the main campus, and a specific time should be included in the conditions as to when this should occur. He added that Honeywell has owned this property for a number of years and doubts Honeywell would develop it. He said the City does not have a limited size for . development in its Industrial district, so this piece of land could be developed, but believes an acre in size is a bit small for development, especially if the property is on a corner and the property across the street is zoned single-family. The front setback for the proposed property would be even greater. Martens asked staff if Lot 3 should be included and asked about past policy. Grimes said it doesn't make much difference and was surprised when the plat came in with the pond on its own lot because the City usually gets an easement over this type of use. Groger said it would be his preference to include the existing ponding area with Lot 2. Pentel agreed that Condition NO.6 be striked (creation of Lot 3), but questioned Condition No. 1 concerning the time frame to include the northeast corner into the Honeywell plat. Martens asked if this approach could be taken. Grimes commented that the City Attorney suggested this course of action, that it be included in the plat within a particular time period. MOVED by Martens, seconded by Groger and motion carried 6-0 (one commissioner absent) to recommend to the City Council approval of the subdivision of the Honeywell Addition with the following conditions: 1. Honeywell add the property found at the northeast corner of the plat, which measures 216 feet by 262 feet, to the final plat within one year of plat approval by the council. 2. If requested by Hennepin County, Honeywell shall dedicate additional right-of-way for Douglas Drive. . . 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission October 26, 1998 Page 5 All drainage and utility easements required by the City Engineer shall be shown on the final plat. All streets shall be dedicated on the final plat. Prior to approval of the final plat, the parking lot shown on Lot 1 shall be removed. The parking area at the west end of Lot 2 shall be modified in order to provide for the required 10-foot sideyard setback from its west property line. The subdivision is subject to park dedication requirements as outlined in the Subdivision code. The amount of the park dedication shall be determined prior to the final plat being approved by the City Council. An easement shall be shown on the final plat over the southeast corner (pond) as described in the existing easement document in the City's file. III. Reports on Meetinos ofthe Housino and Redevelopment Authoritv. City Council and Board of Zonino Appeals Director Grimes reported on the October 20 City Council meeting regarding the Xenia Avenue extension. IV. Other Business No other business was presented. V. Adiournment Chair Pentel adjourned the meeting at 7:50pm. Emilie Johnson, Secretary ... ~ . MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: November 4, 1998 Golden Valley Planning Commission Elizabeth A. Knoblauch, City Planner Informal Public Hearing - Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, Adjusting The Boundary Between Adjacent Institutionally, Industrially, And Commercially Designated Properties; Ottawa Avenue and North Highway 55 Frontage Road . This is the first of three related applications involving City-owned land often called "the Schaper area" and adjacent land that once held the old White House restaurant (location map attached). The City-owned land was acquired over a period of several years from three separate owners and is now the site of new softball fields and other open space facilities; most of it is designated for municipal open space uses, but one of the three acquisitions was never changed from its previous industrial designation. The commercially designated former White House site went tax forfeit a few years ago and has now been acquired by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) for redevelopment. The construction of a new, detached frontage road segment a couple years ago resulted in splitting off small areas of land from each of the two properties. A piece from the south end of the City's land ended up inside the new frontage road with the bulk of the redevelopment site. The northernmost tip of the redevelopment site in turn ended up outside the new road with the bulk of the Schaper area. In response, the City agreed to reconfigure the affected property lines to follow the road, basically "swapping" ownership of the two detached pieces of land. The City now needs to adjust the plan map so it, too, follows the new road alignment and so none of the remaining City-owned land is erroneously shown as industrial. This map change is largely a housekeeping matter. Staff had hoped to address it as part of the state-mandated, overall comprehensive plan update that is currently underway, but it now appears likely that action on the redevelopment site will occur before the overall plan is done; hence, this minor amendment is being processed on its own. . Attachments: . Location Map ;. .,; r. :>: 'o. n ~ o -~ ~ u. '- <i .~~'. t;t: ~ :-,~ ; (' ,,, t: Z ~ , -" ~ ~.i :!',.. ~'" a ~: N ii'i \D '" , Q ~ ~ Q Ct::' -' - ~ Ct::' <:Y <J.) ll) a :'!:: to CJ) "" "C 0 <J.) en 0 0- 0 L- a. ~ t; .. ~ . '" Y, ~\ -:~~::. '~'-b '"'Y ~ A ~ ;..- , 7A.'~'_'" U~.,~ . ';:.- C -v ~~ "1'" N: . u ~. oCt -I ::. Jrn w > a:: o ....', ~ .".'", "~4" ~ -v ~ <l~N .J d · k . . 01\' , .;- " u .- 4( . ~'!I' . i" .... t" "O~"~( I ....t'.'c 1l14l -~. II ." s), .;' ~._':J. :"Q .'~"/ i .~~' . . ; ~ c '. k"I_f:;';.~'j-/~u~,;;'.. - ~ .. S5t'.. (II ~ o " ~ '6 , , ~ " \ ::: ... .. .. ~ ':> \::". -' -II" ~r7lJ DO' ';". ~ ;:,' . :l o .. .. I , . , (~ -- ~::JA ~ '1, ''''Oil '0' ". / '" . . "" II ,. >- <t 3 I <.:l I -~\~ ~; .. " ..\ o _~:-.~,2:~,0'~": :.':':~~?~D::.'~:;,~ ," t' '( .. .0.. _\ ~. .-, -~ .; W ., . 'U" ';\'.-1 ,,: <t · I ,~.'" ., .. ~ '\" -. ......\.- \:: '. . IJJ' -.. J ., ',. ' "t1I.I,' ~.---..., "~~'~.'~~.;..- .. -:~. '.. ..~// ...:J . : C\J ' <'~t~ ,~:~ - ..- .' '~~.. ,;,... \. ~... '~,-</'~. J! ...,i"~\." "~'l)\ . z o en ...J o t [ .. lD ~; . 0 ! ~ >- 'r 0 ...J LI.. ~~ . I , . " .. . ,.-' ~ I ,." ,,. ." '1 [_ o::t ! II ,", .". L~-: '; ~~.~.\ o~'~ .~n nd ,:,.:,p" \. ..1' -, I ! ,ro . ( , .~ r ,-... .J,\ ~....."'" \" _.... I.....J l - -:. \ o 0 ~H':"rl 3:)lj-=,0 OOOMONQ. " 1>,. ~/~_ _'- ~~ \ .. ('_/ I~i . \......) l'j . --! . <u ~." ..., . --\" on . IU ". . 1(1 I" . .. ~. ~. ., . '- ,... ~. ( :. . LoeA liON MAP: Schaper Area and Former White House Site ~ North RAILROAD TRACKS . S.89- ''''E 1"'" ! ; A. Originally part of White House site; now _ I " being combined with Schaper area and re- , designated from II Commercial" to , "Municipal - Parks, Natural Areas" on I ' comprehensive land use plan map. . SCHAPER AREA . ~ : \ ~ , ~ Z ~ > <( <( . ~ ~ f- .. 0- ~ GOLDEN VALLEY INN '0 not part of current actions) 1;.1.:" f.~ 7/ 0' fi f .1,."" c/ ~ ~ of GO" "".l]'f.- II' : SCHAPER ROAD QO lQ .'. " FORMER ~.WHITE HOUSE SITE ~ ., .. . ~ ,HIGHWAY 55 , '- .... . . l'7 30130 U 4708 !4&~ "-.- . ;"~IO'" . .- . ~ , , , C. Originally part of Schaper Area; no change in City ownership, but re-designation . from "Industrial" to "Municipal - Parks, Natural Areas" to match existing zoning. B. Originally part of Schaper area' now being combined with former Whit; house site and re-designated from "Industrial" to "Co ' I" . mmercla on comprehensIve land use plan map. , " . MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: . . November 4, 1998 Golden Valley Planning Commission Elizabeth A. Knoblauch, City Planner Informal Public Hearing - Zoning Map Amendment, Adjusting The Boundary Between Adjacent Institutionally And Commercially Designated Properties; Ottawa Avenue and North Highway 55 Frontage Road This is the second of three related applications involving City-owned land often called "the Schaper area" and adjacent land that once held the old White House restaurant (location map attached; see staff memo on related comprehensive plan map amendment for more background information). Unlike the previously-discussed comprehensive plan map, the zoning map was amended several years ago to show all of the City-owned land as 1-4 Institutional. Thus, at this time, the City only needs to adjust the zoning map so the two zoning classifications follow the new road alignment, making this even more of a housekeeping matter than the related plan map amendment. Attachments: . Location Map IQ ~'f, 1:J '-z, ,,; r ct r. ~ 3 '" ';; = I ~ <.:) - ..... :I: V - ~ a:: . '*: l,... #0, i .. t" . Wi I 'ON i ,-'.' ( II I~I , .. . " . ~.. H'" - >oJ fa ; ~~ tV Q) .;:; ~ Q en ID .. ,., -0 0 Q) en 0 0. 0 L- a. ~ . ~I.l.,,.. J. ; "" ,,,., v w >- a:: o N ~ - . . U <t -I ::i Irlt ~ A ~ ;.." 7"'.I~',,,,,,, ., .... ~ ..., ~ ~ 01\1 N >01[ II 'I( , c -" ss.-.. ~ ~ <6 ~ ":) . - ~::~. '1/(/ 3r "' DO' '.:.-. ~ :;,. ~ ..., ~ , ct ~ N ~/ ~ . , J~_ " . . . ," , ..~ :;: ... i .. . \ --II; :! i on ~ . ~ l ,- III ~ I -. c I . l: 'l. ( ~ III - - ~::J l.' :: --"I--_.t :: .. .. .".,., ,. ". / , . . ':,. ~? ~~- ,.- . 't'. . . : ,:-. C.. "~ _'i".-~ :~'~/ ':~~'~.., ; WESTWOOD ... '; v;o.;r-,~-~~'y" : ::~: ( . -T - ,l.:~,q '~.-- ~:":: :ri~~-~ J.~. ..); _.,j V ., :,'1 t\J. ~~l-t- .,~:' . _4, . ., '\~.. ,,:.... \ ~,,.. .~'-....;. '. "~'l)\ . z o (Il ...J o I I U CD ~: . o r o ...J U. f: ~. . . " . f '"' ~ I , '0'- (' .'1 .. r- <e:f ! I, ,"I.'" : .. oz., o".~ ..~ nd .: ,:p I., ,~. ".-' h~ ."'j '..... -,./1 ,~- \.,.J '~..1\ . ",,'" 'i ' r"'" .... l ~J 1..._..1"- \l_--.. , : /' 0 ""'- " 'MH':'rf 3JI.::UOOOOMONQ, 1- -:- ,,. t/~_ __" I~i --...).'~ ----- / \", ("- .. ( \ ,) ['j . I"li,. . d \'-~. <-! , ' .. \ ......... ';.. i.~ , , I...... . -....J.... '>. . LoeA TION MAP: Schaper Area and Former White House Site ~ North RAILROAD TRACKS S.S9- . . ,,' G 30:30 I I f.?- 7/ . .- A. Originally part of White House site; now -:-. .,' being combined with Schaper area and , , rezoned from Commercial to 1-4 , Institutional district. I SCHAPER AREA . ~ ; , .' o .. .' ~ \ Of {i .1,....1. c/f ~ v CI~ 6,,1- . '" "'l ~ ~ A 7;(:, LLJ :J Z LLJ > < .. < . ~ ~ I- 0- . . 'SCHAPER ROAD "I'-Z]'f.-'" / .. GOLDEN VALLEY INN : (not part of current actions) 4>> :eo ~ '.""'.. . t,'i ., i : C) ~ :r- -55 ".; , --- , , , , , , . . , C. Originally part of Schaper Area; no change In City ownership, and no rezoning. FORMER ~.WHITE HOUSE SITE :)' ., , ~_. ' . '. 1" --", HIGHWAY 55 ....... - , B. Originally part of Schaper area; now being combined with former White house site and rezoned from 1-4 Institutional to Commercial district. . 4708 "''''- .' ;"~IO'" . . . MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: November 4, 1998 Golden Valley Planning Commission Elizabeth A. Knoblauch, City Planner Informal Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat of Schaper Addition - Golden Valley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), Applicant This application for subdivision is the third of three related applications involving City-owned land often called "the Schaper area" and adjacent land that once held the old White House restaurant (location map attached). The area being platted also includes the realigned Highway 55 frontage road, which was built by MnDOT but will be maintained by the City. Because the plat abuts a state highway, it must be routed to MnDOT for review and comment prior to final approval; MnDOT's response will be forwarded to the Planning Commission if available before the informal public hearing. What The Proposed Plat Will Accomplish The Schaper Addition (preliminary plat attached) covers about 16.9 acres of land. When the frontage road was realigned to provide safer access to and from Highway 55, the right-of-way was acquired by metes and bounds descriptions with the understanding that it would be platted at a later date; the proposed plat will replace the complicated property descriptions with an easy-to- read picture of the road's location. The new frontage road also cuts through existing property lines, so some of the City-owned land ended up "inside" the road's curve with the bulk of the former White House property, and vice versa; the proposed plat will adjust the boundaries of the affected areas so property lines follow street right-of-way. Finally, the former White House property consists of two currently-unplatted parcels; the proposed plat will consolidate those parcels and clear up any existing boundary problems that typically occur with unplatted land parcels. Platting Requirements Staff initially had this subdivision application scheduled for consideration some time ago. Unfortunately, the matter was held up by a lawsuit. Now that both the suit and its subsequent appeal have finally been settled, the subdivision can ~ proceed. In updating the paperwork, however, staff have instructed the surveyor to omit some of the information generally required for such applications. The City is in possession of all required data, but certain information is shown only on older versions of the preliminary plat or survey (reduced-size exhibit attached); all such current omissions will be noted in the following paragraphs. Because the Schaper Addition includes a street as well as some never-before- platted property, it is considered as a full subdivision rather than under the more streamlined minor subdivision requirements. This is the preliminary platting stage, in which City Code Section 12.11 calls for information to be provided on a variety of existing conditions, subdivision design features, and miscellaneous other characteristics, all of which can be summarized for the Schaper Addition as follows: Existing Conditions A. The boundaries of the plat are clearly indicated, as required. B. Existing zoning is 1-4 Institutional for the City-owned land and Commercial for the redevelopment property. In those areas where the realigned frontage road has cut into existing parcels, the related rezoning proposal will amend the zoning to follow new property lines. C. Total approximate area is 16.9 acres. D. The plat - or previous versions on file - provides all required information on existing streets and other public rights-of-way or easements within its boundaries and around its perimeter, as well as information on other features within and adjacent to the plat. E. Previous versions of the plat provide all required information on existing utilities within its boundaries and around its perimeter. F. Key features of adjacent properties are shown on previous versions of the plat. G. Previous versions of the plat reflect all required topographic and related data. Subdivision Design Features Much of the information required by this section of City Code is not necessary for the proposed Schaper Addition, because the improvements it refers to are already in place. A. The already-existing frontage road is shown on the plat, and its right- of-way does meet the minimum requirements for streets. B. The plat reflects standard utility easements as required along all proposed property lines of the redevelopment parcel; for the City- owned property, a drainage and utility easement is shown across the entire site. C. Street cross-sections and related runoff calculations were prepared before the frontage road was constructed, and storm water runoff can be accommodated locally. . . . 2 . D. The center line gradient for the frontage road was established prior to its construction. E. Existing sewer lines and water mains will be retained or relocated as necessary . F. Layout, numbers, and dimensions of both proposed lots are indicated on the plat, and each lot as proposed does meet the requirements of the applicable zoning district. G. Building setback lines for the redevelopment parcel are 35 feet along the frontage road and the highway itself, and 20 feet (10 feet for parking/driveways) abutting the adjacent motel site. H. There is no intention to sell or develop the City-owned land for any uses other than park/open space. In keeping with Golden Valley's standard practice when platting permanently City-owned properties, however, neither the lot nor the outlot will be dedicated as park land on the plat; in the City Attorney's opinion, such dedication is necessary. only where private land is being transferred to public use. I. Most of the redevelopment property is relatively flat. The Engineering Department will ensure that any additional site grading conforms to established street grades, and will provide for adequate site drainage as required. Other Information A. The City-owned land will remain a park. The redevelopment site will most likely be sold for as-yet unspecified commercial or office use. B. There will be some environmental restrictions recorded on the road, outlot, and park, due to on-site pollution the HRA has been working to remediate; a final decision will be made on any limitations for the redevelopment property at the actual time of development. C. As noted earlier, there will be an adjustment of existing Commercial and Institutional zoning boundaries to make them conform with the adjusted property lines. . Action Recommended at This Time Staff recommend approval of the preliminary plat for Schaper Addition, conditioned only on meeting such requirements as may be forwarded by MnDOT. . Attachments: . Location Map . Reduced-Size Older Version of Preliminary Plat . Preliminary Plat (oversized, may be enclosed separately) 3 v ~ Q) OIl ~ /i en "'C Q) W 0 a. 0 ~ a. ~ l::; :: ~ n " N Iii -:.i ~;. 0 Y, .;,.... ...... ..... .....:. ID .... , .~ ~ -~ ;':0 .~~. ~ t.- ,... . ~U" "" J. ~ ,,(. ,,,', v .. , " . ,,' -" "" .... N: w >- a: o ~",,, i t" "o~ ..., . I ......f' '" U I~I ~ .~~~ ~ ~ v . V ~ft U <t ..J ~ lrn '......1; '.-y '. ~~ \ ~ .. u OJ\' ..,.. ~ \. .~:~; '~I ' , ~ · ; J~7 ----=..:.~. u 8'). . <1..";1- ;.. Q '''fOi i .~~. . ~ < II ." . ; ~ U" ~. ___"L ; .:. -=i f.:;.~~-,.uu,.-:. ~ I . . I . .. S5.... ~ A ~ ;..0- 7".'r.._..~'" ,. .... (\j ~ .... ~ '6 ::: S - -"1- -T .t ,.' t ...., ...., ~~ ~ 'S .... ";.'~. ';". ::.. . . . .. ....,,1: "." ~ ......Il' ,.~~~ ~ ...., ...., <r.~N .J o · k : .,.. L"~ . /11. otz '0' '. / ." '.,o"~!w" .~. ~. '.. ., f., ." ~.:' II - \~~\r~' ;;:::,_-:'-,1" .. Q. " . . .:" :. . '" '.0 "" . .,', ~""',,. L.... ." :..\~" :'~~T07:\_;.. J~;l . . ..\ ~. - ~ I' .;~" ~ '..' 1-' -~, l'" ,...,. ">; " . -~~: '" ".~ //. } >- <l: 3 I <.::l I z o en -1 o lD o >- o ..J LL ...:..... ,:.~ \. '''' ~~'-<,..{ .i: (. .'~:iOl;~ . , I"~ ';. '[ \ . " . ,". ',.. ." II l- l::t !., ,'I .", Bl . 0".:. ,0 n d: .. I/. .' \-'.'\ b..:. eNJ,.... '., .f \ l.-. , r ~f 4\ :,,'" , I... _./ l.....J l - ~. , ., I~l 2 . ,(I , . ". ~ ... i . . \ --\(1 - ~ on . " I ~ 1(1 I -. c .. I . ~ '. C ~ \(1 -- ~::JA te, ../ l.j ....,.. ';. ~. o '4W;"rl 3:>ljjO OOOMONO. "'.I- 'I'll' -'- ~-'~-~-- r-/ \ '" , \ ,) ....1'.....'..':. ~ . , I~". . .'J.... . . . . . . ~ ~8 ~C) '-"" i~ i~ ~ lii:~j, Ijl!:li <"HII l'lj!;: .~!Iit! , IIJ"i! 'i J..., ! J;I!lli l ! '!~I!.l II,s .1- I ij:ll.z I 'j-j;-,i ; j -I~li. I lljl!~tl ~ I:d'm 1 - ~:ij;IPj i ~H,':ll! I; :,' I.Ll I iJi'u, i ,J'I.ljif A ; ~'!Il.l i J ! iJ;jjl!i j t U .HI1l! I j. I t i,i_! ,i . ';'..! Ii l il 'Il!. "l~' . Hi !: 1 ~ i: i Ifll' ill:!i! ~!ii :' ~ J,J; ~ I I'll 1",li /1 "~ 1.1 ~I ,I "' I, J !I~ 11!1 I! h I 'fll .I!~I ='. Jl ; "I. II. , .1-' HH H;Il! if i; : "I' 'I 1 if .1 It II - 11,.1 j' i' . I',: I "-I 'I .1 j. ,hi: H II Ji 11 .1~~1... ___ iO; '" .~~ ~-=-o--= ) . I~ I i t.l'~ ~. . ih': Jji~~ dB I , , I ! 1I I 11 I ' I ' lit. t. t J'lll.td1Ihh ~Iltfllllhihihl ; iJHIJJjjUHHHH .3. fi "t'8.;jU!"I~.IU W'AO'~q..<r"]S 1- ./ ~~~:~:~:';' u....,.. ~~~..;": ~:.... '~~:"'." i 1 I I ; . f r , I ! . i , i i t t :j :i 'l'! 'IS ii ii J' " 'j it ! .!.5 ~ ; h. i_ 'I" " ilii i 'i I q ',i ~.! .z.. ; j:I, , ';; j: ,PI! : l, !: s. . " ~j !. r'aft ,~ !r U :llt i ~ I; I. n Ij ! , !! if :!h & a. h j . . . . ~ i' I :.J t : (:, . "i, e! Ill; ,. . Ii j It ~ n. ,ft 'I. J:! l'; ..... 11: .,-_...._.~~-_..- ~ - - -,-- -~. I I I I I : I ;: I I :; ; ~:; i? I '~ --- -.~I.--..-.-_.-J.~ I ---l' , - - - 1 - ~.:.j.J I ~ I :! I ~ I : I ':.::: I ~: I . "._-.:..~~~ j." .. ....... ..K.~~ I . ! :g )... ~ ~ :t ~ ~ V) =. ;;1 ;u;: ~!~; ..,!.! ..--. ~i~ !.I, , ~!:H .. r U.t~ 'l ..., , lImlt l . MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: November 4, 1998 Golden Valley Planning Commission Elizabeth A. Knoblauch, City Planner Informal Public Hearing - Review of Draft Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan Update . Plans for Golden Valley's three redevelopment areas are not part of the City's broader comprehensive plan, but they do have to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and adopted by the City Council in order to take effect. The same is true for complete updates or minor amendments to each redevelopment plan. The main purpose of Planning Commission review is to ensure that each redevelopment plan approved by the City's Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) conforms with the comprehensive plan prior to adoption by the Council. The Planning Commission is now asked to review a draft update of the 1984 Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan and forward a recommendation to the City Council as to conformity with Golden Valley's comprehensive plan. The Commission may also suggest additional plan changes for the Council to consider. The update expands the redevelopment area boundaries to include a "Xenia Avenue Extension" sub-area, thereby allowing the HRA to finance public improvements such as the extension of Xenia Avenue, installation of sidewalk/trail improvements, and construction of a regional storm water detention pond. Elsewhere throughout the plan, changes include new summaries of activities completed to date and highlights of remaining activities contemplated by the HRA; things are happening very quickly in the West Area and are accelerating in the Central Area as well, so the draft update may already be slightly behind the times on a few points. Basic findings for establishing the redevelopment area remain the same as when the plan was originally adopted in 1984, as do general objectives to be served by redevelopment activities, though some wording has been revised for purposes of clarity and conciseness. Planned characteristics for each sub-area have undergone only minor shifts from the 1984 plan. Desired land uses as identified under "planned characteristics" are in keeping with the City's comprehensive land use plan map. Recent City Council adoption of an amendment to the comprehensive plan's transportation element ensures that the newly-proposed extension of . Xenia Avenue, and its designation as a collector route in place of Turner's Crossroad, is also in conformity. As the "youngest" of the City's three redevelopment areas, Golden Hills was established under more strict provisions of state law than the first two. Among other things, this means the Golden Hills plan must be accompanied by a detailed tax increment financing (TIF) plan instead of the more general financing discussions incorporated into both older plans. The Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan document and the Golden Hills TIF Plan document are both attached to this memo. Don Taylor, Director of Finance for the City, will attend the informal hearing to field any questions on the latter document. Action requested at this time is approval of a motion finding that the draft Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan update is in conformity with the comprehensive plan, and recommending City Council adoption of the update as drafted or upon due consideration of such other changes as the Commission may choose to suggest. . Attachments: . Draft Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan . Draft Golden Hills TIF Plan . . 2 .. . DRAFT GOLDEN HILLS REDEVELOPMENT PLAN OR1GINALL Y ADOPTED IN 1984 - HRA Approval Date (No Resolution): September 10, 1984 - City Council Approval Date (Resolution 84-120): October 16, 1984 . AMENDED IN 1998 - HRA Approval Date (HRA Resolution 98-7): September 8, 1998 - City Council Approval Date (Resolution 98-xx): xxx, 1998 ~ . ., . . . GOLDEN HILLS REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Part I: OVERVIEW Area Location and Extent The Golden Hills redevelopment area (Exhibit A) abuts Golden Valley's southerly city limits for almost a mile between Trunk Highway 100 on the east and Colorado Avenue on the west. Except for a small"panhandle" at Highway 1 00, the area lies entirely north of 1-394. As established in 1984, the northerly boundary of Golden Hills generally ran behind a row of single family houses and a nursing home on Circle Down and then jogged north to follow Laurel Avenue west from Turners Crossroad. That original redevelopment area included about 91 acres of land. The main purpose of this 1998 plan amendment is to expand Golden Hills by drawing in additional land area lying between Turners Crossroad and the Soo Line Railroad, extending northward to a point just beyond Glenwood Avenue. Because of a 1997 boundary adjustment between Golden Valley and neighboring St. Louis Park, a thirty-foot-wide strip of land running from Xenia to Colorado Avenue is also being added to Golden Hills at this time. Total land area as amended is about 129.5 acres. Golden Hills incorporates a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district. The boundaries of the TIF district are contiguous with the boundaries of the original Golden Hills redevelopment area except that the district excludes the portion of the redevelopment area lying south of 1-394. The newly added land in the redevelopment area will not become part of the TIF district. as CD .... <C ..... c::: CD E C- O - C) > CD ~ CD a: U) - - -- J: c:: CD ~ - o CJ . . <C ..... -- ..c -- -'= >< w .. . ~ , - -- - - I - ~-+6-> - .... ..- 1>' '1-.(<< 1'., ... - .-' Q Cl--"VIII _1_ ii:L-; ,11 - ii" IT~' UI .__ 4" ~ ,. .~ ~ 7 - ,.., I! _ f_~ ..._ ~ --- ........--- ~ ~~( ~~ .)~ ~~~I~ - 1 , ,.. '. -..~"-,. :> ~ 7~~d ~Jpl'~~ I~ - . · " " ,.- I,.. JL....- ~' ..JYI .. .... - r- ~...._ - " .. ... 1... &...,a. _ ..... ,- · I j:j\l- i\ .~ /( C.' .. '~""" ~... t- · ~ I\\: iii" .' -~ I ''''I' -.. . CO i~ ~ I' \ .--' ~'''''''' ~F i CD ... <( i t.4 - - - . \ ,. _ ~' CO · - - . --. ,., t . _ '~, 'C ' '!~-l- '"" ~ 'ei-n{ · bt Ill.' ,'" '0, .C ~_ ~~~I .11.~.co' 0 -~ - '~~ ~...~ "'~Jr II.. I" l .... l.---- I ~ ~ ~b . - - - I "" _/ \ - - r= .y _ ,.~'- .1'". c 'I ~ _~ ~:s Ii __/.0; ; ..~ ..... ! ~ I lit \\ I ~ ll'L ,...;; c::: jB i! I 7/--- ill ir: If- CD ~ .,....T I i ~ = to ~ .. I .... -- j I ~ ""!'iiii' ..... >< --- [r- ':.J = ~ _L ...- . lIli __ W 110_ - \ _ ..... _ II 111_ _'\..... . _ ~ f- - I.-- I - - ~ - "I . Ell - !I.... _ - ""'-! I -.. 1_ 1- ,,,Q _ GI _ Jf _ ~ ~ - .... - )A~ . dJ: ~-- I c::: - I 1 I as ~ .JlIIIIr I l~ ....'"C -, (t u : .n.rr01 - ... - , c:: I .... ........ __ _ _ '\ _ - -, --- a~ . -- \\ 1--' 'J- . 0 ~ j ~ ~ ~ I _... ,'" I - < '"1I'i,\ -- . .f".1f_ ~b ..... ~~~fJif=1 ! ~\ ~ A as M 1'- __w " n 1/ ., J .._~ ,II .. ,-- CJ o -I . . 2 . Background One of the reasons for establishing the Golden Hills redevelopment area was to provide a means for" "addressing issues and opportunities arising in connection with plans to upgrade old Trunk Highway 12 (now 1-394) to interstate highway status. Golden Valley opposed the highway upgrade for many years, but began positioning itself for dealing effectively with the accompanying land use impacts once the decision to construct 1-394 became inevitable. The City's first step was to enact a construction moratorium along the entire Highway 12 corridor from September 1979 to September 1980 while waiting for the final 1-394 design plans. Following a period of background research and documentation, Golden Valley's 1982 comprehensive plan update identified part of the highway corridor as a "study area" due to "signs of deterioration within the area and potential for redevelopment in conjunction with anticipated upgrading of Highway 12 to 1-394." Another moratorium from April 1984 to April 1985 allowed the HRA to establish the Golden Hills redevelopment area, Golden Hills TIF district, and related plan documents for both. . The original Golden Hills redevelopment plan examined then-existing land use conditions, determined appropriate long-term land use categories, and established more specific redevelopment uses that corresponded to the land use categories. The plan also defined the area to be covered by the Golden Hills TIF district, provided an outline for development or redevelopment within the TIF district, and connected proposed development or redevelopment to local land use objectives. Because the redevelopment plan indicated general land uses appropriate to replace the "study area" designation in the comprehensive plan, it was considered a base for amendment of the comprehensive plan and the related City zoning map. All of those elements have been retained with the current Golden Hills plan amendment, except for such changes as necessary or desirable to bring the plan up to date. The original Golden Hills plan anticipated programming of redevelopment activities over a period of five to ten years. A real estate market decline in the late 1980's resulted in several years of unsuccessful marketing attempts on the part of the HRA and unfeasible proposals by interested developers. The situation was exacerbated by temporary access and circulation disruptions while the new interstate highway was under construction. With 1-394 complete and the real estate market going strong again, the redevelopment plan for Golden Hills is back on track, delayed by several years but still providing a valid blueprint for successful revitalization of this area. . 3 Findings in Support of Redevelopment . To use the redevelopment powers authorized for local HRA's under state law, a city must first make certain "findings" about any area proposed for redevelopment. For the Oriainal Redevelopment Area Findings for the original Golden Hills area were outlined in summary form in the body of City Council Resolution 84-120, adopted on October 16,1984. They were spelled out more fully within the redevelopment plan itself, and consist of the following statements: · Land in the Golden Hills Redevelopment District would not be made available for redevelopment without public financial aid. Provision of redevelopment lands in the Golden Hills Redevelopment District requires removal of deteriorated and obsolete buildings, clearance of overdeveloped parcels, correction of soil conditions on vacant land, and assembly of existing lots into redevelopment parcels of appropriate size and configuration. Assembly and development of property requiring clearance or soil correction is not economically feasible for private developers without public. subsidy. . Redevelopment plans for the Golden Hills Redevelopment District afford . maximum opportunity for redevelopment by private enterprise. The Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan encourages private redevelopment in the area and promotes cooperation or participation of existing landowners in redevelopment projects. Several current property owners in the Golden Hills Redevelopment District are in contact with the City concerning cooperation with the HRA in assembly and redevelopment of land or sale of property to the HRA for assembly and redevelopment by developers. The role contemplated by the HRA in redevelopment includes acquisition, assembly, and clearance of parcels, with sites subsequently transferred to private developers, thus involving private enterprise in the construction phase of redevelopment in all cases. · The Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan conforms to the adopted City of Golden Valley Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan, adopted November 16, 1982, designates the Golden Hills area as a study area for potential redevelopment activity. The Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan outlines redevelopment uses which reflect appropriate long-term land uses for the area. Long-term land use designations shall be incorporated into the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map in an amended City of Golden Valley Comprehensive Plan. With the current amendment to the Golden Hills plan, the HRA finds each of the . above points still valid as generally applied to the redevelopment area. 4 . . . For the Added Redevelopment Area A recent traffic study by SEH, Inc., revealed a need for improved north/south access into and through Golden Hills to accommodate and facilitate the full extent of redevelopment activity contemplated in the plan. The existence of excess railroad right-of-way located just north of the Golden Hills Central Area offers an opportunity to provide such improved access by expanding overall area boundaries and undertaking certain additional activities as outlined later in this amended plan. With regard to the newly added area, the HRA finds the following: . Land in the Golden Hills Redevelopment District would not be made available for redevelopment without public financial aid. Completion of redevelopment activities requires improved north/south access. The provision of such access requires close coordination with the railroad company and substantial public investment in order to acquire the necessary right-of-way and design and build the new road. · Redevelopment plans for the Golden Hills Redevelopment District afford maximum opportunity for redevelopment by private enterprise. · The Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan conforms to the City of Golden Valley Comprehensive Plan. The Golden Hills plan contemplates no redevelopment activities that would alter long-range uses identified in the land use element of the comprehensive plan. The transportation element of the comprehensive plan has been amended to reflect the new road corridor, which is being incorporated into a new land use plan map as part of a general land use element update currently underway. Redevelopment Objectives Specific redevelopment uses and activities are identified in Part II of this plan. Broader objectives are identified in seven categories as follows: General · Create an attractive 1-394 corridor for the City of Golden Valley in the vicinity of Turners Crossroad. . Reverse deterioration and degradation of current Trunk Highway 12 frontage in the area of Turners Crossroad. . Stimulate and coordinate area redevelopment not possible without public subsidy to private development. . Provide for orderly physical and economic growth of the area through controlled development and redevelopment. . Strengthen and increase area tax base. 5 Coordination With 1-394 Proiect · Take advantage of the incentive that 1-394 construction provides for upgrading land use as a catalyst to further area redevelopment. · Coordinate the upgrading of land uses and area redevelopment with the conversion of Highway 12 to interstate status. . Minimize public costs of 1-394 right-of-way acquisition and redevelopment site acquisition through joint MnDOT/HRA purchases. · Coordinate redevelopment time schedules with 1-394 project time schedules in order to minimize construction period inconvenience. · Integrate 1-394 acquisition parcel remnants into redevelopment sites. Bliaht Removal · Remove and replace dilapidated, deteriorated, and vacant buildings which constitute a blight on the area. . Remove and replace, or rehabilitate and upgrade, obsolete and code deficient buildings which have a blighting influence on the area. · Redevelop or upgrade properties which are unsightly due to lack of aesthetic amenities including landscaped yards, paved parking areas, and curb-separation between pavement and landscaping, or due to loading docks facing the street. · Remove buildings that are overcrowded on small lots, resulting in inadequate parking, nonconforming landscaped yard areas, and lack of space for normal business expansion. · Clear and assemble overdeveloped small lots into larger redevelopment sites allowing space for adequate parking, required landscaped yards, and anticipated business expansion. · Eliminate unsightly land uses, including unscreened outside storage of equipment or materials, which constitute a blight on the area and adversely impact land value and marketability of surrounding properties. · Replace deleterious and inappropriate land uses incompatible with surrounding land uses and detrimental to area property values. · Develop or redevelop underutilized properties with potential for greater contribution to the tax base and economic welfare of the community. · Develop vacant and potentially useful land blighted by virtue of difficult physical character of the ground, including poor soil conditions. · Eliminate or correct undesirable soil or topographic characteristics, including poor soil conditions, to allow development of affected property. 6 . . . . Redevelopment Land Use . Achieve the highest and best use of Golden Valley properties bordering 1-394 in the vi.cinity of Turners Crossroad. · Assemble redevelopment sites to accommodate more intense land uses directly adjacent to 1-394. · Provide desired expansion space for the Golden Hills Shopping Center. . Assemble redevelopment sites to accommodate industrial operations with future expansion potential. . Rearrange area land uses to result in more functional and complementary land use relationships. Private Investment . Minimize public redevelopment costs by encouraging private redevelopment of the area and by promoting cooperation or participation of existing land owners in redevelopment efforts. . Encourage upgrading by owners and tenants of existing commercial and industrial buildings and properties not targeted for redevelopment. . Circulation . Redesign local traffic circulation patterns and intersections in order to eliminate existing traffic hazards and points of traffic congestion, including inadequate frontage road separations from 1-394 ramps. . Reorient building fronts to adjust to changes in street frontages resulting from the 1-394 project. . Relocation . Provide nearby sites and opportunities for expansion to existing businesses displaced by redevelopment but still compatible with designated redevelopment uses in the area. . Minimize potential hardships created by relocation of conflicting or incompatible land uses. The current plan amendment does not require the addition of any new redevelopment objectives. The HRA's aims for the expanded area are already encompassed by one or more statements in the General, Blight Removal, Redevelopment Land Use, Private Investment, Circulation, and Relocation categories above. 7 Part II: REDEVELOPMENT PLAN COMPONENTS . Golden Hills is divided for planning purposes into five sub-areas (Exhibit B). Included in the originally-established boundaries are the West Area, the Central Area, the East Area, and the South Area. The current plan amendment adds a Xenia Avenue Extension Area. The following pages describe each sub-area in turn, outlining land use characteristics and summarizing planned and completed redevelopment activities. A substantial amount of additional documentation on initial property conditions can be found in the original Golden Hills plan and in other records maintained by the HRA. West Area Although serious redevelopment activities did not get off the ground in the West Area until the 1990's, it is now closer to being completely rebuilt than any of the other five Golden Hills sub-areas. Construction on the last of its redevelopment sites is expected to be finished by the year 2000. (Exhibit C) Boundaries and Size Bounded on the west by Colorado Avenue, on the south by the adjusted city Iimitsll-394 fence line, on the east by the Soo Line railroad, and on the north by laurel Avenue. Approximately 31.7 acres in size. . Initial land Use Characteristics (1984) · large scale outside asphalt and gravel processing operations resulting in noise., dust, and odors in addition to visual blight. · Widespread, and sometimes large scale, unscreened outdoor storage of equipment, materials, and junk, often on unpaved surfaces or deteriorating paved surfaces with weedy overgrowth. · Widespread zoning nonconformities, including commercial use of industrial structures, inadequate on-site parking, inadequate or nonexistent landscaped areas, and structures too big for sites. · Increasing building and fire code violations, structural decline, and building vacancy. · Most of area never platted, some parcels with no direct street access, several parcels of inadequate size or poor configuration for optimized site use. . 8 6 i ~O. I~ll~ A~ so. G) !:l ) ~ i kEN1\lCl(y 0 II ~ .&\oC' C!'^ 0 ~an-~l - rYA~~ c. 0 s: 'c: CD ~ HAMPSHIRE Pl. . W. CORlUllN A\IE. SO. JQ)9 ClR. z ~ CD $~~: ~ IF' "-- Q - z J .~ ro P'-' .._. ~ :c rrl . .-T_ ~O. -- - 0 - ~ -~ - or )11 BRUNSWlCI< (/) m )> :u12 . ~ '}l;: A\IE. so. :::0 > ~~ 010 HIlL -C >< c C) '0 -':-f~ _ RD. rrl ~ "," - ::s- '~ ,., - r>> )> z '19m< RD. -- ~ 9Jt II lII"III_'1\~ Zr I~ II f ~!J I! ~I ~ ..... -- ~ ~~ J>I~ I ~ '~'9 ~, ~'n. [> ~l :::I OJ f\J ~ r nJRNER'S CROSSROAD . . co . . <.0 ... . I /. I I ~" ~ . \~~\\II ~ !:J~ :t" IUI'<......'''O' "'U. ~~ ~->"" ~ " en ~ ~ g:t''' ~ III .... LA..,N TERR. 0 .~<:> ') r""'.. rIr- 2 c:: )> llrnm /;- qJ I~ /lWT( \)~~ c- o ~ :::0 I ~r \ > rrl .~\, ..o~ .... (J) ~ r;f;;\ ~ 'd."I"'11n nTT.a.",.. ~ CD A' A \IE. NO. (/) OR II~ II - ~~]!l~ g~~~EJ; ~I! >r -IL ;r;TWOO~ I 7 ~~I~ Il. I ~~;#,~ I _..........~... II" r -. AR . Exhibit C: Golden Hills West Area ~~~ L j /~'. <, .OJ \ /"'-! ~. (? /,",.,j ~,..:'l'<::::;r '(:::~t~'~'::.;- (;:~}(~jlt:: )- ;~," t~;a..., ['~\ .(".., f' 'il., ,~""'\(";..,.,' ,'''If LAUREL AVE. Development Site Q . CyberOptics cr e en lC ~ . ~ ~ < GOLDEN HILLS DR. e 0 ....... c( 0 Q:: e -J 8 I JIll Development Site ~ ~ TO BE REMOVED ~ TO BE RECONSTRUCTED .... PROPOSED ROAD 1-394 -...r A'REA = 3j. 7 ACRES . . · Many parcels encumbered by numerous overlapping public and private easements for a variety of access and utility purposes. · Limited number of structurally sound buildings on sites mostly conforming with building, fire, and zoning codes. Known/AnticiDated 1-3941mDacts (1984) . Minimal, if any, permanent right-of-way acquisitions. · Substantial limiting of highway access, with nearest access point at Xenia Avenue, requiring careful attention to planning for local traffic circulation between West and Central Areas. Planned Characteristics Mix of large scale office, office/warehouse, office/ industrial, light industrial, and related service uses. Higher-density office development preferred adjacent to 1-394. Lower-impact, lower-density uses along Laurel Avenue, with adequate buffering to protect residential neighborhood to the north. Provision of adequate access and circulation system. Activities Com Dieted or Underway to Date . . Acquisition and clearance of all previously-existing West Area properties. . Platting of all previously-existing parcels to establish appropriate development sites with clear title, and to reserve rights-of-way for improved street system. . Minor adjustment of Golden Valley/St. Louis Park city limits. . Construction of regional storm water detention pond. . Construction of redesigned internal street system. . Remediation of soil and groundwater pollution generated by former uses. . Holiday Inn Express development - 83-unit motel, now expanded to 109 units, with plans for additional future expansion. . CyberOptics development - 91,000 square foot office/industrial facility. . Current Action Plan ComDonents . Completion of any necessary soil corrections as part of site development work. . Development of 70,000 to 80,000 square foot office/industrial facility on site north of Golden Hills Drive. . Development of 65,000 to 90,000 square foot office/industrial facility or office building on site south of Golden Hills Drive. 11 Central Area . This sub-area was the earliest focus of activity in Golden Hills, with proposals under consideration for today's Colonnade office tower as soon as the redevelopment plan was in place. Redevelopment efforts lost steam as the real estate market took a downturn in the late 1980's, but market recovery and the completion of 1-394 have combined to make the area very attractive to developers once again. (Exhibit D) Boundaries and Size Bounded on the west by the Soo Line railroad, on the south by the adjusted city Iimits/I-394 fence line, on the east by Turners Crossroad, and on the north by Laurel Avenue. Approximately 42.7 acres in size. Oriainal land Use Characteristics (1984\ . Mix of industrial, commercial, and hospitality/service uses, not always correctly zoned. . Numerous other zoning nonconformities, including inadequate on-site parking, inadequate or nonexistent landscaped areas, structures too big for sites, and unscreened outdoor storage of equipment or materials. . Increasing building and fire code violations, structural decline, and building vacancy. . Traffic congestion on Turners Crossroad approaching Highway 12. . Very limited east-west circulation options. . No part of area ever platted, extreme variation in parcel sizes, several parcels of inadequate size or poor configuration for optimized site use. . Known/AnticiDated 1-3941mDacts (1984) . 1-394 interchange at Xenia Avenue with associated detachment of local frontage road segment, requiring significant right-of-way acquisition. . Change in north/south traffic circulation patterns, and associated change in orientation of some building "fronts" due to highway approach route shifting from Turners Crossroad to Xenia Avenue. . Reduced traffic congestion, but potential negative impacts on businesses abutting highway, due to detached location of new frontage road. . 12 1-'" W . . Exhibit D: Golden H ills Central Area #! .~.- ~..; I.".' "'..- ~. .... ,..-:! ijf .\ ,:".~. 7 \:;;1 \:; . LAUREl ('-;'" 1"-;( ~ TO BE REMOVED ~ TO BE RECONSTRUCTED l1li PROPOSED ROAD fA./' 1!r GOlDEN ~ Devel~pment ~ Site II \\ ~ Site ~ HIUS \\. DR. () CIRCLE DDWN en ffi i F! AREA = 42.7 ACRES Planned Characteristics Mix of medium to high density office, service, and light industrial uses. Highest densities and greatest emphasis on office uses immediately adjacent to 1-394. Structured parking encouraged in order to maximize site density without compromising green space. Provision of improved access and circulation system. Some existing buildings may be suitable for retention with aesthetic and code compliance improvements. . Activities Comoleted or Underway to Date . Construction of missing Laurel Avenue segment. . MnDOT construction of 1-394 access elements. . HRA acquisition of excess 1~394 right-of-way remnants. . Minor adjustment of Golden Valley/St. Louis Park city limits. · Colonnade office development - 409,000 square feet of office and related service uses in 15-story-high building with associated parking ramp. . Current Action Plan Comoonents . Minor acquisition of additional Xenia Avenue right-of-way between detached . frontage road (Golden Hills Drive) and Laurel Avenue, plus completion of road and signalization work to accommodate new development. . Acquisition of properties in block bounded by Xenia Avenue, 1-394, the railroad tracks, and Golden Hills Drive. · Potential acquisition of properties lying north of Golden Hills Drive on both sides of Xenia Avenue. . Completion of development on Colonnade block. . Development of 200,000 to 300,000 square foot office building with associated parking deck and related service uses at southwest quadrant of Xenia/Golden Hills Drive. . Potential cooperation with owner of Olympic Printing on expansion/upgrading or demolitionlredevelopment of printing facility at northwest quadrant of Xenia/Golden Hills Drive, or redevelopment of the site by others. . Development of 130,000 to 230,000 square foot office building on the block northeast of the Xenia/Golden Hills Drive intersection. . 14 . East Area When Golden Hills was first established, and again in the late 1980's, there was some discussion of possibly expanding the East Area to take in some or all of the residential neighborhood to the north, but the idea had little serious potential. There has been almost no redevelopment activity in this sub-area to date, partly due to the impact of the adjacent 1-394 construction process. (Exhibit E) Boundaries and Size Bounded on the west by Turners Crossroad, on the south by the city limits/l-394 fence line, on the east by the Highway 10011-394 interchange, and on the north by the nursing home and row of single family lots lining the south side of Circle Down. Approximately 9.6 acres in size. Oriainal Land Use Characteristics (1984) · Golden Hills strip shopping center (source of redevelopment area name) and other commercial or service uses on poorly differentiated individual land parcels. . Two-building apartment complex containing 24 dwelling units. . . Vacant land with poor soil conditions. . Numerous zoning nonconformities, including inadequate on-site parking, inadequate or nonexistent landscaped areas, structures too big for sites, and unscreened outdoor storage of equipment or materials. . Increasing building and fire code violations and structural decline. . Traffic congestion on Turners Crossroad approaching Highway 12. Known/Anticipated 1-394 Impacts (1984) . Significant right-of-way acquisitions along south side of commercial properties. · Substantial limiting of highway access to commercial properties with shift of access route from Turners Crossroad to Xenia Avenue. Planned Characteristics Continued commercial use, including office or service facilities, with continued medium density residential use an acceptable alternative for existing apartment site. Provision of adequate buffering to protect adjacent residential neighborhood to the north. . 15 ....... en v; Exhibit E: Golden Hills East Area (f) ~ o ~ (f) (f) o GOlDEN HILLS D~.~ CIRCLE D[]WN (f) ~ w :z ~ ~IILGolden Hills Acquisition ~ 1-394 1S~;~;.~~~T' AREA 9ff ACRES . . . . Activities Completed or Underway to Date . MnDOT construction of 1-394 project elements. . Acquisition of former Emergency Veterinary Clinic property. . HRA-assisted turn-back of excess 1-394 right-of-way to owners of Golden Hills Shopping Center. Current Action Plan Components . Improvement or redevelopment of Golden Hills Shopping Center, incorporating former Emergency Veterinary Clinic property and excess 1-394 right-of-way into a Planned Unit Development with office, hotel, restaurant, and/or retail uses served by adequate and well-located public access and parking. South Area This sub-area constitutes one end of a large redevelopment site that spans the Golden Valley/St. Louis Park city limits. For many years, the entire site has been held by a developer whose long-range plans include eventual demolition of existing buildings and construction of a new office park. Discussions between the developer and both cities have been intermittent but generally ongoing since the establishment of Golden Hills. (Exhibit F) Boundaries and Size Bounded on the west and south by the city limits, and on the east and north by the Highway 100/1-394 interchange. Approximately 7.1 acres in size. Oriainal land Use Characteristics (1984) . Office uses in three buildings on poorly differentiated land parcels. . Parking area for restaurant building located in St. Louis Park. . Moderate zoning nonconformities, including inadequate on-site parking and inadequate or nonexistent landscaped areas. Known/Anticipated 1-394 Impacts (1984) . Minimal, if any, permanent right-of-way acquisitions. . Substantial limiting of highway access, with nearest access point at Xenia Avenue (known as Park Place on St. Louis Park side of 1-394). 17 ta CD ... <C .J:: ..... ::1 o en en - - -- ::c c:: CD -c - o ~ . . I.L. ..... -- .c -- .r:: >< W e~ 'OS '31\ V :::::::, IUaWlpel9a le!IU910d '. ~ ~~ ::i:{f;l\.;,:)l:!!.;:f .;:l'''~:;~-~''-''~~~:&' .,.~:,',-,~!t"::;".>i~ .it."~~~",:'" ~ W ".;j .. ~ m t") , ',' , 1 \\ ,1 i;".;;- - 18 . (f) W 0::: U <( ~ " <( W 0::: <( . Planned Characteristics Continued office use as part of larger, medium to high density office park. Activities Com Dieted or Underway to Date . 1-394 frontage road system is in place. Current Action Plan ComDonents · Coordination of redevelopment process with St. Louis Park, including possible detachment and annexation between cities. Xenia Avenue Extension Area . This new sub-area of Golden Hills, as its name implies, will allow for the extensipn of Xenia Avenue northward from Laurel Avenue to a new terminus at Turners Crossroad north of Glenwood Avenue. The street extension will alleviate a hazardous intersection at Glenwood Avenue and Turners Crossroad as well as simplifying the poorly-defined north/south access route between the Central Area and the rest of Golden Valley. (Exhibit G) Boundaries and Size Bounded on the west by a westerly branch of the Soo Line railroad, on the south by Laurel Avenue, on the east by Turners Crossroad, and on the north by Glenwood Avenue and an easterly branch of the Soo Line Railroad. Approximately 38.3 acres in size. Oriainal land Use Characteristics (1998) . Mix of low to high density residential uses, not always correctly zoned, plus a church campus and City fire station. . Unplatted and oversized single-family residential parcels, resulting in inefficient use of available land; two parcels with no street access. . Rarely-used spur segment of Soo Line Railroad located in close proximity to alternate branch of same line, with associated excess railroad right-of-way. Planned Characteristics Medium to high density residential use except for church campus, City fire station, and possible expansion of adjacent school campus. Some land may be reserved . for regional storm water detention pond to serve adjacent Central Area. 19 Exhibit G: Golden Hills Xenia Avenue Extension Area ~~' YOSE.tf/~\,-_t J~ ') N o AREA - 38.3 ACRES ~ TO BE REMOVED ~ TO BE RECONSTRUCTED .... PROPOSED ROAD -v' GLEN WOOD LAUREL Cl a::: ~ w w a::: () o z ~ . Acquisition AVE. ttr < Z LaJ X r . . . , Activities Completed or Underway to Date . Preliminary design study for Xenia Avenue alignment. . Acquisition of two single family properties. . Acquisition of excess railroad right-of-way. Current Action Plan Components . Partial or complete acquisition of other parcels as necessary to provide adequate Xenia Avenue extension corridor or to accomplish other redevelopment purposes. . Construction of Xenia Avenue extension. . Construction of regional storm water detention pond, if determined to be feasible and in the best interests of the Golden Hills area. . Partial closure of access to and from Turners Crossroad, limiting it to neighborhood use. . Potential sale of excess land to Independent School District 270 for use by Meadowbrook School. . Sale, and incorporation into appropriate adjacent sites, of any excess land not needed for public improvements or other redevelopment purposes. 21 . Part III: IMPLEMENTATION Plan Amendment The Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan may be amended from time to time as required for adjustment to changing conditions. Approval of any such amendment must be undertaken in accordance with applicable provisions of state law. A plan amendment may be made at any time before or after the lease or sale of property within the redevelopment area as long as both the HRA and City Council take formal action to approve the amendment following notice and public hearing as required for adoption of the original plan. Where the HRA determines that a change in the plan is necessary, and further determines that such change does not alter or affect overall redevelopment area boundaries, nor does it depart substantially from the general land uses established in the plan, such change shall not constitute an amendment to the approved Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan and shall not require City Council . approval. Relocation The HRA will provide relocation benefits and assistance to owners and tenants displaced by Golden Hills redevelopment activities. To ensure full compliance with applicable state and federal statutes and regulations, the HRA will secure the services of qualified relocation experts to carry out the relocation work. Relocation personnel will conduct interviews with each affected owner or tenant to determine relocation needs, and will be conveniently available to any affected owner or tenant for the purpose of providing information regarding owner and tenant rights relative to relocation services and compensation. Financing of Activities Costs incurred by the Golden Valley HRA in its Golden Hills redevelopment activities fall into several categories. These include land acquisition, building demolition, business and household relocation, environmental remediation, public . improvements such as streets and utilities, and administrative costs. The original 22 . redevelopment plan identified four funding sources that might be used to cover certain types of costs: tax increment financing, joint acquisition of properties between MnDOT and the HRA, Community Development Block Grants, and sale of land to developers. To varying extent, as discussed in the following paragraphs, most of those four sources are still available today. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) The Golden Hills redevelopment area includes a formally designated TIF district. The TIF mechanism allows Golden Valley's HRA to finance its activities throughout the redevelopment area from taxes generated by "captured" increases in taxable value. In most cases financing occurs in the form of tax increment bonds issued at the onset of any given redevelopment project. The detailed TIF plan required by state law is contained in a companion document to this redevelopment plan, but a brief explanation of TIF may be helpful here. . The taxable valuation of a TIF district is "frozen" when the district is created. Over the life of the district, taxes on this base valuation continue to be collected and distributed among all authorized taxing jurisdictions as usual. As redevelopment activities generate increased valuation for properties within the district, taxes on the amount of valuation over and above the base valuation are disbursed directly to the HRA on an annual basis. These captured moneys are known as tax increment. The debt service on the bonds issued to finance the redevelopment activities is repaid from the annual tax increment. Tax increment notneeded for debt service on the bonds can be used to directly finance additional redevelopment expenditures. When the TIF district expires, taxes on total current valuation are once again collected and distributed among all authorized taxing jurisdictions just as they were before the creation of the district. Joint Acquisition Certain properties in Golden Hills were so situated as to be candidates for both HRA redevelopment activities and MnDOT 1-394 right-of-way. During the 1-394 final design and acquisition stages, the HRA worked with MnDOT to identify such properties and acquire them jointly, with MnDOT retaining possession of the portion of each affected property needed for highway purposes and the HRA taking the remainder for assembly into suitable redevelopment sites. This coordinated approach allowed the two agencies to share costs for appraisals, relocation, site clearance, and other related activities in addition to actual land and building purchase costs. Now that 1-394 is finished, this funding source has terminated; however, the HRA and MnDOT continue to cooperate on such activities as fine-tuning the highway right-of-way limits to maximize the redevelopment potential of adjacent sites. . 23 Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) . The City of Golden Valley receives an annual allocation of federal COBG money by way of Hennepin County. Those funds can be used for redevelopment activities that serve to eliminate urban blight. Through the late 1970's and the 1980's, Golden Valley's HRA put COBG money into all three of the City's redevelopment areas. By the late 1980's, increasing regulatory strings on the use of COBG funds and ongoing federal debate over the future of the entire program caused the City to divert its annual allocation to other purposes, but the possibility of using COBG money in Golden Hills remains open today. Sale of Land to Developers In order to promote redevelopment in accordance with the Golden Hills plan, the HRA's practice is to sell assembled sites to developers at values approximating the prevailing market rate for vacant land. Although the income from such land sales does not cover all HRA costs of acquisition, clearance, and site preparation, land sales are a source of income contributing to financing of ongoing HRA activities. . . 24 '" . . .. Tax Increment Financing Plan Jor Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment FinancinB District As Amended December I, 1998 ~~'\ Q~ Minneapolis Office: 88 South Sixth Street Suite 900 Minneapolis. MN 55402-1800 (612) 333-9177 Wisconsin Office: 16655 West Bluemound Road Suite 290 Brookfield. WI 53005-5935 (414) 782-8222 Washington Office: 1850 K Street NW Suite 215 Washington. D.C. 20006-2200 (202) 466-3344 Home Office: 85 East Seventh Place Suite 100 St. Paul. MN 55101-2887 (651) 223-3000 Iowa Office: 100 Court Avenue Suite 204 Des Moines, IA 50309-2200 (515) 244-1358 Kansas Office: 7211 West 98th Terrace Suite 100 Overland Park, KS 66212-2257 (913) 345-8062 Table of Contents ..; .. Paae(s) . SECTION 1 Statutory Authority .... .......... ..................................... ................................................... I-I SECTION 2 Statement of Objectives General........... ...... ........... ...... ..... ........ ........ .... .... ..... .... ............. .... ......... ..... ............... ............ 2-1 Coordination with 1-394 Project............................................................................................ 2-1 Blight Removal........ ... ... ... ... ...... ... ........ ..................... .... ... ......... ..... .............. ..... .................... 2-2 Redevelopment Land Use...................................................................................................... 2-2.2-3 Private Investment........................................................ ......................................................... 2-3 Circulation.......................................... .................................................. ................................. 2-3 Relocation ........ ........ ............ ......... ....................... ..... ........ .......................... ...... .... ................. 2-3 SECTION 3 Development Program I. Phase I.............................................................................................................................. 3-1 2. Phase II.. ... ............... ............. ...... ... ............. ........ ............ ......... ... ..... ..... ......... ...... ............. 3-2 3. Phase III .... .................................... ...... ..... .......... .......... ............ ......... ...... ......... ............. ... 3-3 4. Phase IV ........................................................................................................................... 3-3 - 3-4 5. General.... ... ........ ...... ......................... ......... ..................... ...... .... .............. ......... ... ............. 3-4 6. Projects Reflected in Amended Budget............................................................................ 3-4 SECTION 4 Description of Property in the Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District ............................................................................ SECTION 5 . 4-1 Classification of the Tax Increment Financing District .............................................. 5.1 - 5-2 SECTION 6 Estimate of Costs ......................................................................................................... 6-1 - 6-2 Amended Budget As Adopted: December I. 1998:.............................................................. 6-2 SECTION 7 Estimated Amount of Bonded Indebtedness Section A.... ... ................ .............. ....... ..... .... .... .... ... ..... ....... ........................... ..... ...... ............. Section B - Amended Budget ............................................................................................... SECTION 8 Sources of Revenues .. ......... ....... .............. ..... .... ................ ... ....... .... ...... ....... ... ............. SECTION 9 Original Assessed Value.. .......... ......... .......... ................. ...... .......... ..... ...... ..... .............. SECTION 10 Estimated Captured Assessed Value... ................................... ................ ................. ..... SECTION 11 Duration of the District ..... ...... ..... ......... ......... .... ..... ....... ..................... .......... ........ ...... SECTION 12 Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions ........................................................ 7-1 7-1 8-1 9-1 10-1 II-I . 12-1 ~ SPRINGSTED REPORTS\MNlGOLOHIL7.TIF . . . Table of Contents SECTION 13 Modifications of the Tax Increment Financing District .............................................. 13-1 SECTION 14 Limitation on Administrative Expenses ....................................................................... 14-1 SECTION 15 Limitation on Duration o/Tax Increment Financing Districts.................................... IS-I SECTION 16 Limitation on Qualification of Property in Tax Increment District Not Subject to Improvement ..................................................................................... 16-1 SECTION 17 Limitation on the Use of Tax Increment ...................................................................... 17-1 SECTION 18 Notification of Prior Planned Improvements .............................................................. 18-1 SECTION 19 Excess Tax Increments........ .................... ............ ......... ............................... ................ 19-1 SECTION 20 Requirementfor Agreements with the Developer........................................................ 20-1 SECTION 21 Assessment Agreements.......... ... ............. ........ ..... .... ........................ ..... ... ......... .... ....... 21-1 SECTION 22 Administration of the Tax Increment District and Maintenance of the Tax Increment Account...................................................... 22-1 SECTION 23 Annual Disclosure Requirements ....... ........ ......... ........... ....... ............... ........ ............... 23-1 ~ SPRINGSTED Page ii Section 1 STATUTORY AUTHORITY The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Golden Valley (the "HRA") and the City of Golden Valley (the "City") have previously adopted the Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan for the development and redevelopment of property described therein and in Section D hereof. The Redevelopment Plan describes a redevelopment project, as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.421, Subd. 13, to be undertaken by the HRA and the City within the project area to be financed primarily by one or more tax increment financing districts to be created within the project area and the sale of tax increment bonds to be repaid by the increments generated by said districts. The City of Golden Valley is authorized to establish a tax increment district within the project area pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.71-78. The district created herein is hereinafter sometimes referred to as the "Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District." ~ SPRINGSTED Page 1-1 . . . . . . Section 2 STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES Objectives of the City of Golden Valley in undertaking the Golden Hills Redevelopment Project. to be accomplished through tax increment financing, are outlined as follows in the Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan adopted by the Golden Valley City Council on October 16, 1984: General 1. Improvement of currently unsightly Trunk Highway 12 frontage to create an attractive City of Golden Valley 1-394 corridor in the vicinity of Turner's Crossroad. 2. Reversal of deterioration and degradation of current Trunk Highway 12 frontage in the area of Turner's Crossroad. 3. Stimulation and coordination of area redevelopment not possible without public subsidy to private investment. 4. Provision for orderly physical and economic growth of the area through controlled development and redevelopment. 5. Strengthening and increase of the area tax base. Coordination with 1-394 Project 6. Taking advantage of the incentive for upgrading of land use provided by 1-394 freeway construction as a catalyst to further redevelopment of the area. 7. Coordination of upgrading of land uses and redevelopment of the area with upgrading of Trunk Highway 12 to 1-394 status. 8. Minimizing of public costs of 1-394 right-of-way acquisition and redevelopment site acquisition through joint MnDOT and City of Golden Valley HRA purchase of properties. 9. Coordination of redevelopment time schedules with 1-394 construction time schedules in order to minimize construction period inconvenience. 10. Integration of remnant parcels resulting from 1-394 project right-of-way acquisition into redevelopment parcels. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 2-1 Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District Blight Removal . 11. Removal and replacement of dilapidated, deteriorated and vacant buildings which constitute a blight on the area. 12. Removal and replacement or rehabilitation and upgrading of obsolete buildings and buildings with code deficiencies which have a blighting influence on the area. 13. Redevelopment or upgrading of properties which are unsightly due to lack of aesthetic amenities including landscaped yards, paved parking area, and curb separation of landscaped and paved area, or due to location of loading docks on building street front. 14. Removal of buildings which are overcrowded on small lots resulting in inadequate parking, nonconforming inadequate landscaped yard areas, and lack of space for normal business expansion. 15. Clearance and assembly of overdeveloped small lots into larger scale redevelopment sites allowing space for adequate parking, required landscaped yards, and anticipated business expansion. 16. Elimination of unsightly land uses, including unscreened outside storage of equipment and materials, which constitute a blight on the area and surrounding areas and adversely impact land values and marketability of surrounding properties. . 17. Elimination and replacement of deleterious and inappropriate land uses.incompatible with surrounding land uses and detrimental to surrounding property values. 18. Redevelopment or development of underutilized properties which have potential for greater contribution to the tax base and economic welfare of the community. 19. Development of vacant land blighted by virtue of difficult physical character of the ground, including poor soils conditions, resulting in stagnant and unproductive condition of land potentially useful. 20. Elimination or correction of difficult physical character of the ground, including poor soils conditions, allowing development of vacant land and making the land useful and valuable. Redevelopment Land Use 21. Realization of highest and best use of properties bordering 1-394 in the vicinity of Turner's Crossroad in the City of Golden Valley. 22. Provision of assembled redevelopment sites to accommodate more intense land uses appropriate directly adjacent to the 1-394 freeway. 23. Provision of desired expansion space for the commercial center located to the east of . Turner's Crossroad. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 2-2 . . . Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District 24. Provision of assembled redevelopment sites to accommodate industrial operations with future expansion potential. 25. Rearrangement of land uses in the area resulting in more functional and complementary land use relationships. Private Investment 26. Minimizing of public redevelopment costs by encouraging private redevelopment in the area and by promoting cooperation or participation of existing landowners in redevelopment projects. 27. Encouragement of upgrading by owners and tenants of existing commercial and industrial buildings and properties not targeted for redevelopment. Circulation 28. Redesign in conjunction with the 1-394 project of local traffic circulation patterns and intersections in order to eliminate existing traffic hazards and points of traffic congestion, including inadequate separation of frontage road intersections from Trunk Highway 12 intersections. 29. Reorientation of building-fronts to adjust to changes in street frontages resulting from the 1-394 project. Relocation 30. Provision of relocation sites and opportunities for expansion to existing businesses within the redevelopment area which are displaced by redevelopment and which are compatible with designated redevelopment uses for the area. 31. Minimizing of potential hardships created by relocation out of the area of conflicting or incompatible land uses. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 2-3 Section 3 . DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM The Golden Hills Redevelopment Project, to be financed with tax increment financing, encompasses an area of approximately 83 acres located to the north of proposed 1-394, currently Trunk Highway 12, in the vicinity of Turner's Crossroad. The total project is scheduled for accomplishment in four phases as follows: 1. Phase I The Phase I project area, consisting of approximately 18 acres, is the portion of the tax increment financing district located between Turner's Crossroad and Xenia Avenue South. A. Current Land Use Existing land uses include a vacant former restaurant building, a print shop in a former residential structure, and a veterinary hospital, all fronting on the Trunk Highway 12 service road. A convenience food store and gasoline station are located in two separate buildings on a small parcel to the north and fronting on Turner's Crossroad. A multi-tenant office warehouse building and two single occupant office warehouse buildings occupy the remainder of the area to the north. . B. Proposed Reuse of Land Major portions of properties fronting on the current Highway 12 service road are included in Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) acquisition plans for 1-394 right-of-way. A redevelopment site approximately seven acres in area is scheduled for acquisition, clearance, and transfer to a development partnership for redevelopment. The redevelopment site includes a remnant of the restaurant property, the multi-unit office warehouse building, one of the two single tenant office warehouse buildings, and the gas station and convenience food store property. The City of Golden VaIley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) on April 9, 1985 passed a resolution jointly designating Turner Development Corporation and United Suites of America as developers of the site. Planned land uses include a thirteen-story 259,000 square foot office building and an eleven-story 300-suite hotel with a parking ramp sized to accommodate the combined office and hotel uses. . The Phase I project schedule calls for land acquisition in 1985, construction start in 1986, and project completion by the end of'1987. ~ SPRINGSTED P~nA ~_1 Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District . 2. Phase II The Phase 11 project area, consisting of approximately 16.5 acres, is the portion of the tax increment financing district located to the east of Turner's Crossroad. A. Current Land Use The Phase 11 project area is dominated by the Golden Hills Shopping Center to the northeast of the intersection of Turner's Crossroad with Trunk Highway 12. Intruding into the shopping center property are a gasoline station on the corner of the frontage road with Turner's Crossroad and a veterinary clinic on the corner of the alley behind the shopping center with Turner's Crossroad. Buildings to the east of the shopping center along the Trunk Highway 12 frontage road include a Bridgeman Ice Cream Store and Golden Hills Drug Store housed in the same building on one parcel, a medical/dental clinic on the next parcel to the east, and a real estate office at the intersection of Trunk Highway 12 with Trunk Highway 100. Between the clinic and real estate office is an area of vacant land which remains undeveloped due to poor soils conditions. To the northeast of the shopping center is the Mayfair Manor Apartment Complex consisting of two apartment buildings. B. Proposed Reuse of Land . MnDOT plans for 1-394 construction include removal of the gasoline station and portions of properties fronting on current Trunk Highway 12. Phase 11 redevelopment project plans call for creation of one major redevelopment parcel approximately 7.5 acres in area. The redevelopment parcel is assembled from remnant parcels following 1-394 right-of-way acquisition to the east of the shopping center and from Mayfair Manor Apartment property. First priority for reuse of redevelopment lands will be expansion of the Golden Hills Shopping Center to the east with additional retail and restaurant space. Plans call for height of up to four stories with office use included on upper levels above retail use~ For planning purposes, additional new construction is expected to include approximately 35,000 square feet of additional retail space, 10,000 square feet of additional restaurant space, and 60,000 square feet of office space. The Golden Valley HRA on March 12, 1985 heard proposals from two potential developers for the Phase II redevelopment project. The Phase 11 project schedule calls for land acquisition in 1986, construction start in 1987, and project completion by the end of 1988. . ~ SPRINGSTED Page 3-2 Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District 3. Phase III . The Phase III project area, consisting of approximately 17.5 acres, is the portion of the tax increment financing district located between Xenia Avenue South and the railroad line. A. Current land Use Parcels fronting on the Trunk Highway 12 service road between Xenia Avenue South and the railroad fine include a furniture wholesaler, a tire service store, the Breck School Ice Arena, a vacant former farmhouse, and two small office buildings on small lots. The remainder of the Phase III area is occupied by four single occupant office warehouse or office manufacturing users on relatively large lots. B. Proposed Reuse of land A redevelopment site of at least four acres in area is contemplated for acquisition, clearance, and transfer to a developer for redevelopment. The redevelopment site includes properties fronting on the Trunk Highway 12 service road to the west of the furniture wholesaler. The furniture wholesale operation and other light industrial uses to the north are not included in preliminary redevelopment project planning, but may be included in a redevelopment project as necessary for project scale. For planning purposes, redevelopment use consists of approximately 160,000 square feet of office space. Anticipated building height is four to six stories. Incorporation of a restaurant into the office complex is a possibility. . The Phase III project schedule calls for land acquisition in 1987, construction start in 1988, and project completion by the end of 1989. 4. Phase IV The Phase IV project area, consisting of approximately 31 acres, is the portion of the tax. increment financing district located to the west of the railroad line. A. Current land Use Current land use in the Phase IV project area consists primarily of industrial uses. Properties fronting on the Trunk Highway 12 service road to the west of the railroad line include a building belonging to the railroad and five other buildings all crowded on parcels of inadequate size. Two major users of property in terms of acreage are Phillippi Equipment Company and the Bury and Carlson asphalt plant, both of which utilize large areas for unscreened storage of equipment and materials. B. Proposed Reuse of land Almost the entire area west of the railroad line is included in the Phase IV. redevelopment project area for acquisition, clearance and transfer to developers for redevelopment. Anticipated redevelopment uses include office development along ~ SPRINGSTED Page 3-3 . . . Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District the future 1-394 frontage with light industrial uses to the north. For planning purposes, redevelopment uses include 80,000 square feet of office building and 250,000 square feet of office/warehouse building construction. Inclusion of multiple family residential construction in the northern portion along Laurel Avenue is a suggestion under consideration. The Phase IV project schedule calls for land acquisition in 1987, construction start in 1988, and project completion by the end of 1989. 5. General The redevelopment parcels to be assembled in Phases I-IV, in whole or in part by land acquisition by the HRA, are identified on maps contained in the Redevelopment Plan, which is incorporated herein by reference. 6. Projects Reflected in Amended Budget See Golden Hills Redevelopment Plan - Part II: Redevelopment Plan Components (specifically the sections titled West Area and Xenia Avenue Extension Area). ~ SPRINGSTED Page 3-4 Section 4 . DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY IN THE GOLDEN HILLS REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT The Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District, which includes a large portion of the project area described in the Redevelopment Plan, which project area description is incorporated by reference, includes Trunk Highway 12 frontage in the City of Golden Valley from Colorado Avenue on the west to Trunk Highway 100 on the east. To the west of Turner's Crossroad, the Golden Hills Tax Increment Financing District extends north to Laurel Avenue covering an area bounded by the City of Golden Valley/City of St. Louis Park municipal boundary line on the south, Colorado Avenue on the west, Laurel Avenue on the north and Turner's Crossroad on the east. To the east of Turner's Crossroad, the Golden Hills Tax Increment Financing District includes all parcels fronting directly on Trunk Highway 12 from the Golden Hills Shopping Center to the real estate office property at the intersection with Trunk Highway 100, also the shopping center parking area to the north of the Golden Hills Shopping Center and the Mayfair Manor Apartment property to the northeast of the Golden Hills Shopping Center. Included as Exhibits IV, V, and VI are a map of the Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District, a legal description of the boundaries of the District, and a listing of the Hennepin County property identification numbers of all parcels within the District. . . ~ SPRINGSTED Page 4-1 . . . Section 5 CLASSIFICATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT The tax increment financing district will be classified as a redevelopment district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, Subd. 10, which defines a redevelopment district as: "A type of tax increment financing district consisting of a project, or portions of a project, within which the Authority finds by resolution that one of the following conditions, reasonably . distributed throughout the district, exists: (1) 70 percent of the parcels in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities or other improvements and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; or (2) 70 percent of the parcels in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities or other improvements and 20 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard and an additional 30 percent of the buildings are found to require substantial renovation or clearance in order to remove such existing conditions as: inadequate street layout, incompatible uses or land use relationships, overcrowding of buildings on the land, excessive dwelling unit density, obsolete buildings not suitable for improvement or conversion, or other identified hazards to the health, safety and general well being of the community; or (3) Less than 70 percent of the parcels in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities or other improvements, but due to unusual terrain or soil deficiencies requiring substantial filling, grading or other physical preparation for use at least 80 percent of the total acreage of such land has a fair market value upon inclusion in the redevelopment district which, when added to the estimated cost of preparing that land for development, excluding costs directly related to roads as defined in section 160.01 and local improvements as described in section 429.02 1, subdivision 1, clauses I to 7, 11 and 12, and section 430.01, if any, exceeds its anticipated fair market value after completion of said preparation; provided that no parcel shall be included within a redevelopment district pursuant to this paragraph (3) unless the Authority has concluded an agreement or agreements for the development of at least 50 percent of the acreage having the unusual soil or terrain deficiencies, which agreement provides recourse for the Authority should the development not be completed; or (4) The property consists of underutilized air rights existing over a public street, highway or right-of-way; or ~ SPRINGSTED Page 5-1 Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District (5) The property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used or infrequently used rail yards, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-ways. . 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. "Parcel" shall mean a tract or plat of land established prior to the certification of the district as a single unit for purposes of assessment." The property within the Golden Hills Tax Increment Financing District has been inspected by officials of the City, and based upon such inspection, it is determined that the district will constitute a redevelopment district pursuant to subsections (2) above, to wit: 70 percent of the parcels in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities or other improvements and 20 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard and on additional 30 percent of the buildings are found to require substantial renovation or clearance in order to remove such existing conditions as: inadequate street layout, incompatible uses or land use relationships, overcrowding of buildings on the land, obsolete buildings not suitable for improvement being of the community. . . ~ SPRINGSTED Page 5-2 . . . Section 6 ESTIMATE OF COSTS The estim3teEf tstal p~l3lic rede'lelol3ment costs will be paid frsm the proceess sf multil3le send issues, land sale rClvenbles, :Ins interest income. It is estimates the net l3~blic rese'lelsJ3ment cest will be $27,150,000, ::md 'Nil! be eXl3ended in roblr phases over a thr~e year periss from 1985 thrsblgh1987. The total estimated sssts ans seblrce sf funds is shown here3fter by Phase and by year. PHASE I L3nd Acqblisitien Reloc3tisn Demslitisn Bbll)'ing Ps'/o'er Lines Stroet Lighting Street Csnstr~stisn 1985 $4,663,200 425,000 1986 1987 $ 450,500 364, 11 0 212,000 37,100 53,000 55,840 55,840 $ 224,720 178,850 20, 170 20, 170 Remelle RailliFle - Resenstmst T~rner's Crsssrs3ds Centingencies (5 ... AEfministr3tisn 8. legal (5%) C3J3italized Interest Bend Disseblnt Less: L3nEf Sale Re'Jen~e Interest Earnings 254,410 254,410 1,3S0,880 100,000 (327, 900) (200.000) $6,550,000 (1,228,390) (443,710) Net Estim:Ited Csst (Phase 1) $ $ PHASE II 1985 19S6 $4,407,900 385,840 137,800 1iiZ. l3nd /\sq~isitien Relec3tisn Demslitien B~rying Psv..'er liFles Street lighting Street Censtrustien Centingensiee (5%) !\EfministratioFl 8. legal (5%) $ $ 246,575 246.575 $5,424,690 448,000 72,800 177,000 34,800 34.800 $767,400 S~btot31 (By Phase) ~ SPRINGSTED Page 6-1 Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District PHASE III Lana J\e(.!uisition Relocation Demolition Burying Power Lines Stroet Lighting Road Impro'Joment Contingencios (5%) Administration 8. legal (5%) Less: Re\'enblo from l:md Sales S\:ibtotal (By Phase) 1985 1986 1987 $1,611,680 151,200 191,500 148,000 72,800 S9,000 129,550 129,550 (700,000) $2,084,280 PHASE IV Land .'\c~ui&ition Relosation Demolition B\:irying Pewer lines Street Lighting Stroet Construction Utility ~xtensien Contingensies (5%) AEfministratioFl 8. legal (5%) Less: Re'/enue from land Sales S\:ibtotal (By Phase) Subtotal (.'\11 Phases) Bone Disseunt Capit:lIizedlnterest Loss: Interest Earnings 1985 1986 1987 $7,2a8,500 1,808.800 583.500 148.000 72.800 134,100 59,000 517,000 517,099 (a.OOO.OOO) $8,379,000 $11,227.980 208.000 2,919,000 (154.980) $13,900,000 $13,900,000 $5,124,690 100,000 1,407;000 (231.690) $9,700,000 $9,700,000 Net Estim3tea Costs $9,550,000 ~ SPRINGSTED Page 6-2 . . . Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District . Amended Budget As Adopted: December 1, 1998: Plus: Plus: Plus: Plus: Equals: Original Xenia Ave. Central Area Budget as Extension Restated (Outside For State TIF Southwest Northwest Northeast Amended TIF Forms District) Project Project Project Budget Sources Bond Proceeds! Tax Increment $27,150.000 $7,821.090 $ 7,162,460 $ 0 $4,550.400 $46,683,950 Land Sale Proceeds 5,700,000 75,000 3,375.000 0 1,415,000 10.565,000 Municipal State Aid (MSA) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Interest Earnings 886.370 0 0 0 0 886.370 Total Sources $33,736.370 $7.896.090 $10.537.460 $ 0 $5.965.400 $58.135.320 Uses Land/Building Acquisition $17,921.280 $2.130,000 $ 6,488,600 $ 0 $3,600.000 $30.139,880 Site Improvements (Demolition) 1,276,910 1,150,000 700,000 0 650,000 3.776.910 Installation of Public Utilities 2.691,270 3,000,000 500,000 0 100,000 6.291,270 . Administration & Legal 2,239.190 0 868,860 0 434,400 3,542.450 Relocation 3,221.340 200,000 1.000,000 0 500,000 4,921,340 Bond Issuance Costs 679,500 170,000 155.000 0 90.000 1.094.500 Capitalized Interest 5,706,880 0 825,000 0 591,000 7.122,880 Pedestrian Crossing 0 900,000 0 0 0 900.000 Contingency 0 346,090 0 0 0 346.090 Total Uses $33.736.370 $7.896.090 $10.537.460 $4,833.800 $5.965.400 $58.135.320 . ~ SPRINGSTED Page 6-2 Section 7 . ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF BONDED INDEBTEDNESS Section A It is estimated that it will be necessary to issue up to $27,150,000 of general obligation tax increment bonds to pay the net public redevelopment costs. That total amount is expected to be provided through the sale of three separate issues as follows: October 1, 1985 October 1, 1986 October 1, 1987 $ 6,550,000 6,700,000 13,900.000 $27,150,000 The actual date for sale of the bonds, their terms and estimated interest rates will be adjusted as necessary by the Authority to insure the timely availability of capital funds to defray the public redevelopment costs. A possible structuring of these three proposed issues, together with a projected total of debt service payments, is attached as Exhibits lA-D. Section B - Amended Budget . It is estimated that it will be necessary to issue up to $19,515,000 of additional general obligation tax increment bonds to pay the net public redevelopment costs for projects reflected in the amended budget. That total amount is expected to be provided through the sale of three separate issues as follows: December 1, 1998 April 1, 1999 April 1, 1999 $ 4,540,000 7,815,000 7.160.000 $19,515,000 United Properties Xenia Avenue Duke The actual date for sale of the bonds, their terms and estimated interest rates will be adjusted as necessary by the Authority to insure the timely availability of capital funds to defray the public redevelopment costs. A possible structuring of these three proposed issues, together with a projected total of debt service payments, is attached as Exhibits I through III. . ~ SPRINGSTED Page 7-1 . . . Section 8. SOURCES OF REVENUES Sources of revenues to fund the total redevelopment cost will include revenue from land sales, estimated at $5,700,000; interest income during construction, estimated at $886,370; and tax increments to be derived from properties within the redevelopment district. The total tax "increment required for the payment of net public redevelopment costs will be that amount required for debt service on an estimated $27,150,000 of general obligation tax increment bonds, and the total amount actually required will depend upon the total amount of debt incurred, the timing of the sales and the interest rate required to sell the bonds. It is expected that tax increments required to pay the redevelopment cost will be available in the following amounts by year: 1988 1989 1990 1991-2002 $ 714,856 2,581,024 3,279,880 3,733,714 - It is estimated that the total cumulative tax increment required for debt service on bonds will be $45,692,720. A sche_dule of projected tax increment revenue is attached as Exhibit 11. EXHIBIT IV IS AN ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECTED CASH FLOW OF THE GOLDEN HILLS DISTRICT INCLUDING ALL PROJECTS INCLUDED IN THE AMENDED BUDGET. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 8-1 Section 9 ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE Pursuant to Minnesota Statute 273.76, Subd. I and Subd. 4, the original assessed value for the Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District is $6,522,778. The original value includes the assessed value placed on the property by Hennepin County as of January 2, 1984 with adjustments required by Minnesota Statute 273.76, Subd. 4. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 9-1 . . . . . . Section 10 ESTIMATED CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subd. 1, the estimated captured value will total $38,737,100, based on completion of initial improvements to private property planned within the district. The estimated captured value will be available on the following schedule: January 2, 1987 January 2, 1988 January 2, 1989 January 2, 1990 $ 7,416,600 26,778,000 34,028,600 38,737,100 A schedule of the composition and timing on this estimated captured value is attached as Exhibit 111. ESTIMATED CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE INCLUDED IN MODIFIED BUDGETS: See Exhibits: V, V-A, VI, VI-A ~ SPRINGSTED Page 10-1 Section 11 DURATION OF THE DISTRICT The duration of the Golden Hills Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District may be twenty-five (25) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment, which is expected to be received in July, 1988. Therefore the district may remain in place until July, 2013. However, it is expected that any public redevelopment costs required to finance the public redevelopment may be fully recovered and paid prior to that time. Unless additional redevelopment costs are incurred over and above the type and level outlined in this tax increment financing plan, it is the intention of the Authority to terminate the district upon final payment of all initial redevelopment costs, after which time the tax proceeds from the captured valuation will become available to all taxing jurisdictions within the district. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 11-1 . . . Section 12 . ESTIMATED IMPACT ON OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS The impact of foregoing potential taxes generated by private investment within the tax increment district over the period of tax increment collection can be estimated by calculating the increase in mill rates needed to generate an equivalent amount of taxes as those potentially generated by the new development within the tax increment district. The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions in which the tax increment district is located is presented in the following table. Impact on Tax Rate 1984/85 Assessed Value Captured Valuation - Percent of District to Entitv Entitv Hennepin County City of Golden Valley ISO 270 (Hopkins) -ISO 287 (Vo-Tech) Metropolitan Council Metropolitan Transit District $8,044,844,074 251,532,811 603,213,947 5,064,024,055 15,160,850,205 13.944,295,586 $38,737.100 38,737,100 38,737,100 38.737,100 38,737,100 38,737,100 .004815 .154004 .064217 .007649 .002555 .002778 . Captured Value Impact on Mill Rate 1984/85 Mill Rate Entitv Mill Rate Potential Taxes(a) Increase(b) Hennepin County 29.262 $1,133,525 .14 City of Golden Valley 16.886 654,1 14 2.60 ISO 270 (Hopkins) 42.567 1,648.922 2.73 ISO 287 (Vo-Tech) 1.490 57,718 .01 Other(c) 5.181 200,696 Varies With Unit (a) Represents potential tax income if the current mill rate was applied to the maximum anticipated captured value to be available for taxes collected in 199 1. (b) Represents mill rate increase necessary on the current assessed value of each entity to recover potential taxes from the maximum anticipated captured value in 1991. (c) Includes special districts of Metropolitan Council, Metropolitan Transit. Metropolitan Mosquito Control, County Park Museum, and Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority. ESTIMATED IMPACT ON OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS FROM PROJECTS INCLUDED IN BUDGET MODIFICATION. . See Exhibit VII ~ SPRINGSTED Page 12-1 Section 13 MODIFICATIONS OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subd. 4, any reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the project or tax increment financing district, increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred, including a determination to capitalize interest on the debt if that determination was not a part of the original plan, or to increase or decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized, increase in the portion of the captured assessed value to be retained by the Authority, increase in total estimated tax increment expenditures or designation of additional property to be acquired by the Authority shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original plan. The geographic area of a tax increment financing district may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original assessed value by the County Auditor. The tax increment financing district may therefore be expanded until 1990. ~ SPRINGSTED P~ne 1~-1 . . . . . . Section 14 LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, Subd. 13 and Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subd. 3, administrative expenses means all expenditures of an authority other than amounts paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the district, relocation benefits paid to, or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the district, or amounts used to pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount, bonds issued pursuant to Section 273.77. Administrative expenses include amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, financial consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. No tax increment shall be used to pay any administrative expenses for a project which exceeds ten percent of the total tax increment expenditures authorized by the tax increment financing plan or the total tax increment expenditures for the project, whichever is less. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 14-1 Section 15 LIMITATION ON DURATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subd. 1, "no tax increment shall be paid to an authority three years from the date of certification by the County Auditor unless within the three-year period (1) bonds have been issued pursuant to Section 273.77 or in aid of a project pursuant to any other low, except revenue bonds issued pursuant to Chapter 474, prior to the effective date of the Act; or (2) the Authority has acquired property within the district. . ." The Authority must therefore issue bonds, or acquire property, or construct or cause public improvements to be constructed by 1988 or the Office of the County Auditor may dissolve the tax increment financing district. ~ SPRINGSTED P~nA 1~_1 . - . Section 16 . LIMITATION ON QUALIFICATION OF PROPERTY IN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NOT SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENT . . Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subd. 6, "if, after four years from the date of certification of the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district. . .. no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of parcel or other site preparation including improvement of a street adjacent to a property but not installation of utility service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district by the Authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel and the original assessed value of that parcel shall be excluded from the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district. If the Authority or the owner of the parcel SUbsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel, including improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the Authority shall certify to the County Auditor in the annual disclosure report that the activity has commenced. The County Auditor shall certify the assessed value thereof as most recently certified by the Commissioner of Revenue and add it to the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district." ~ SPRINGSTED Page 16-1 Section 17 LIMITATION ON THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT All revenues derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the tax increment financing plan. The revenues shall be used to finance or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent existing levy limit low. No revenues derived from tax increment shall be used for the construction or renovation of a municipally owned building used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of the municipality; this provision shall not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure, a commons area used as a public park or a facility used for social, recreational or conference purposes, and not primarily for conducting the business of the municipality. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 17-1 . . . . . . Section 18 NOTIFICATION OF PRIOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subd. 4. the Authority has reviewed and searched the properties to be included in the tax increment district and has identified those properties for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months preceding approval of the tax increment district financing plan, and has attached as Exhibit VII a list of such properties for which permits have been issued. It has been assumed in computing the estimate of original value that the County Auditor shall increase the original value by the assessed value of the improvements for which the permits were issued. During the search of the properties, it was determined that no building permits have been issued during the three-month period preceding approval of the tax increment financing plan. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 18-1 Section 19 EXCESS TAX INCREMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subd. 2, in any year in which the tax increment exceeds the amount necessary to pay the costs authorized by the tax increment plan, the Authority, in any order it shall determine, shall use the excess amount to: I. Prepay the outstanding bonds; 2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment therefore; 3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of such bonds; 4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their mill rate. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 19-1 . . . . . . Section 20 REQUIREMENT FOR AGREEMENTS WITH THE DEVELOPER Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subd. 5, no more than 25 percent by acreage of the property to be acquired by the Authority in the district shall be owned by the Authority as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to section 273.77 without the Authority having prior to acquisition of in excess of25 percent of the acreage, concluded an agreement for the redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the Authority should the redevelopment not be completed. The Authority will have such an agreement for the redevelopment of the property. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 20-1 Section 21 ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subd. 8, the Authority may, upon entering into a redevelopment agreement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subd. 5, enter into an agreement in recordable form with the redeveloper of property within the tax increment financing district which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the tax increment district. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the City Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears in the judgment of the Assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the Assessor may certify the minimum market value agreement. The Authority may negotiate such assessment agreements on portions of the development which are expected to take place within the tax increment financing district. .~ SPRINGSTED Page 21-1 . . . . . . Section 22 ADMINISTRATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TAX INCREMENT ACCOUNT Administration of the tax increment financing economic redevelopment district will be by the Authority. through an agreement with the City Manager's Office. The tax increment received as a result of increases in the assessed value of the tax increment district will be maintained in a special account separate from all other accounts and expended only upon sanctioned activities identified in the finance plan. ~ SPRINGSTED Page 22-1 Section 23 ANNUAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subd. 5, an authority must file an annual disclosure report for all tax increment financing districts. The report shall be filed with the school board, county board and the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development. The report shall include the following information: 1. The amount and source of revenue in the account; 2. The amount and purpose of expenditures from the account; 3. The amount of any pledge of revenues, including principal and interest on any outstanding bonded indebtedness; 4. The original assessed value of the district; 5. The captured assessed value retained by the Authority; 6. The captured assessed value shared with other taxing districts; 7. The tax increment received. The Authority will maintain the necessary records and submit the required reports. ~ SPRINGSTED P.:anA ?~_1 . . . . . . Original Exhibits City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Proposed General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1985A DATED; 10-I-BS MATURE: 2-1 LEVY PAYMENT 9.007- CAPITALIZED NET INCREMENT ANNUAL YEAR YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST TOTAL INTEREST DEBT INCOME SURPLUS (I) (2) (3) (4 ) (5) (6) (7 ) (8) (9) 19B5 19B7 0 7B6,000 7B6,000 7B6,000 0 0 0 19B6 1988 0 589,500 589,500 589,500 0 0 0 1987 1989 130,000 589,500 719,500 5,380 71 4 , 120 714,B56 736 1988 1990 710,000 577,800 1,287,BOO 0 1,287,800 2,581,024 1,293,224 19B9 1991 280,000 513,900 793,900 0 793,900 3,279,880 2,485,980 1990 1992 420,000 48B,700 908,700 0 908,700 3,733,714 2,825,014 1991 1993 450,000 450,900 900,900 0 900,900 3,733,714 2,832,814 . 1992 1994 500,000 410,400 910,400 0 910,400 3,733,714 2,823,314 IV w 1993 1995 540,000 365,400 905,400 0 905,400 3,733,714 2,B28,314 . 1994 199i1 585,000 316,800 901,800 0 901,800 3,733,714 2,B31,914 1995 1997 640,000 264, 150 904,150 0 904,150 3,733,714 2,829,564 1996 1998 700,000 206,550 906,550 0 906,550 3,733,714 2,827,164 1997 1999 760,000 143,550 903,550 0 903,550 3,733,714 2,830,164 1998 2000 8.30,000 75, 150 905,150 0 905,150 3,733,714 2,828,564 1999 2001 5,000 450 5,450 0 5,450 3,733,714 3,728,264 2000 2002 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2001 2003 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2002 2004 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2003 2005 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2004 2006 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2005 2007 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2006 2008 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2007 2009 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2008 2010 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 6,550,000 5,778,750 12,328,750 1,380,880 10,947,870 77,516,326 66,56B,456 ~ :r e """i . . > . . . . City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Proposed General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1986A DATED: 10-1-86 MATURE: 2-1 REMAINING LEVY PAYMENT 9.007- CAPITALIZED NET INCREMENT ANNUAL YEAR YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST TOTAL INTEREST DEBT INCOME SURPLUS (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) 1985 1987 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1986 1988 0 804,000 804,000 804,000 0 0 0 1987 1989 0 603,000 603,000 603,000 0 736 736 1988 1990 690,000 603,000 1,293,000 0 1,293,000 1,293,224 224 1989 1991 265,000 540,900 805,900 0 805,900 2,485,980 1,680,080 1990 1992 400,000 517,050 917,050 0 917,050 2,825,014 1,907,964 1991 1993 440,000 481,050 921,050 0 921,050 2,832,814 1 ,911 , 764 1992 1994 475,000 441,450 916,450 0 916,450 2,823,314 1,906,864 I 1993 1995 520,000 398,700 918,700 0 918,700 2,828,314 1,909,614 ~ 1994 1996 565,000 351,900 916,900 0 916,900 2,83t,914 1,915,014 I 1993 1997 620,000 301,050 921,050 0 921,050 2,829,564 1,908,514 1996 1998 675,000 245,250 920,250 0 920,250 2,827,164 1,906,914 1997 1999 735,000 184,500 919,500 0 919,500 2,830,164 1,910,664 1998 2000 800,000 118,350 918,350 0 918,350 2,828,564 1,910,214 1999 2001 515,000 46,350 561,350 0 561,350 3,728,264 3,166,914 2000 2002 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,133,114 2001 2003 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2002 2004 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,133,114 2003 2005 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2004 2006 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2005 2007 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2006 2008 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,133,714 2007 2009 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2008 2010 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 6,700,000 5,636,550 12,336,550 1,407,000 10,929,550 66,568,456 55,638,906 ~ NOTEIRemaining Increment Income is net of debt service on 1985 issue. :r a; =i a; City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Proposed General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1987A DATED: 10-1-87 MATURE: 2-1 REMAINING LEVY PAYMENT 9.007- CAPITALIZED NET INCREMENT ANNUAL YEAR YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST TOTAL INTEREST DEBT INCOME SURPLUS (I) (2 ) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7 ) (8) (9) 1985 1987 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1986 1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1987 1989 0 1,668,000 1,668,000 1,668,000 0 736 736 1988 1990 0 1 ,25 1 ,000 1 , 25 1 , 000 1 ,25 I, 000 . 0 224 224 1989 1991 425,000 1 ,251 ,000 1,676,000 0 1,676,000 1,680,080 4,080 11190 1992 695,000 1,212,750 1,907,750 0 1,907,750 1,907,964 214 1991 1993 760,000 1 , 150, 200 1,910,200 0 1,910,200 1,911,764 I ,~64 1992 1994 825,000 I , 081 ,800 1,906,800 0 1,906,800 1,906,864 64 I 1993 1995 900,000 1,007,550 1 , 907 ,550 0 1,907,550 1,909,614 2,064 D: 1994 1996 985,000 926,550 1 , 911 ,550 0 1 ,91 I ,550 1,915,014 3,464 I 1995 1997 1,070,000 837,900 I ,907 , 900 0 I , 907 , 900 1,908,514 614 1996 1998 1,165,000 74 1 ,600 1,906,600 0 1,906,600 1,906,914 314 1997 1999 1,270,000 636,750 1,906,750 0 I ,906, 750 1,910,664 3,914 1998 2000 1,385,000 522,450 1,907,450 0 1,907,450 1,910,214 2,764 1999 2001 2,765,000 397,800 3,162,800 0 3,162,800 3,166,914 4,114 2000 2002 1,655,000 148,950 1,803,950 0 1,803,950 3,733,714 1,929,764 2001 2003 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2002 2004 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2003 2005 0 0 0 0 0 3,7.33,714 3,733,714 2004 2006 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2005 2007 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2006 2008 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2007 2009 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2008 2010 0 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 13,900,000 12,834,300 26,734,300 2,919,000 23,815,300 5:5,638,906 31,823,606 m X NOTE: Remaining Increment Income is net of debt service for 1985 and 1986 issues. :r 6i =i - n . . . . . . City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Preparedl OB-May-B5 Proposed General Obligation TaK By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Increment Bonds, Series 1985-1987 I Series 1985A Series 1986A Series 19B7A Series 19B5-7 $6,550,000 $6,700,000 $13,900,000 $27,150,000 TOTAL LEVY PAYMENT NET NET NET TOTAL INCREMENT ANNUAL YEAR YEAR DEBT DEBT DEBT DEBT INCOME SURPLUS (I) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6 ) (7) (8) 1985 1987 0 0 0 0 0 0 1986 1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 1987 1989 7 1 4 , 1 20 0 0 71'1,120 714,856 736 1988 1990 1,287,800 1,293,000 0 2,580,800 2,581,024 224 1989 1991 793,900 805,900 1,676,000 3,275,800 3,279,880 4,080 1990 1992 908,7QO 917,050 1,907,750 3,733,500 3,733,714 214 1991 1993 900,900 921,050 1,910,200 3,732,150 3,733,714 1 ,564 1992 1994 910,400 916,'150 1,906,800 3,733,650 3,733,714 64 ~ 1993 1995 905,400 918,700 1,907,550 3,731,650 3,733,714 ~,064 <<r' 1994 1996 901,800 916,900 1,911,550 3,730,250 3,733,714 3,464 1995 1997 904,150 921,050 1,907,900 3,733,100 3,733,714 614 1996 1998 906,550 920,250 1,906,600 3,7."33,400 3,733,714 314 1997 1999 903,550 919,500 I ,906, 750 3,729,800 3,733,714 3,91'1 1998 2000 905,150 918,350 1,907,450 3,730,950 3,733,714 2,764 1999 2001 5,450 561,350 3,162,800 3,729,600 3,733,714 4,114 2000 2002 0 0 1,803,950 1,803,950 3,733,714 1,929,764 2001 2003 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2002 2004 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2003 2005 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2004 2006 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2005 2007 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2006 2008 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2007 2009 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 2008 2010 0 0 0 0 3,733,714 3,733,714 TOTALS 10,947,870 10,929,550 23,815,300 45,692,720 77,516,326 31,823,606 ~ J: Net Debt payments shown are net of Capitalized Interest. m - -f a EXHIBIT II GOLDEN V ALLEY , MINNESOTA GOLDEN HILLS PHASES I-IV REVENUE PROJECTION . Assessed Value Increments Levy/Collect Levy/Collect Levy/Collect Levy/Collect I 98711 988 1988/1989 1989/1990 199011 991 PHASE I $8,170,000 $25,800,000 $27,950,000 $27,950,000 Less: Demolition (753,400) <753,400) <753,400 ) (753,400) PHASE " $ 2 , I 41 ,000 $ 4,291 ,000 $ 4,291,000 Less: Demolition (409,600) (409,600) (409,600) PHASE III $ 2,055,000 $ 4,119,000 Less: Demolition (1,143,300) (/,143,300) PHASE IV $ 2,635,500 $ 5,280,000 . Less: Demolition (596,600) (596,600) Net Projected Captured Value $7,4/6,600 $26,778,000 $34,028,600 $38,737,100 Times Current Mill Rate .096386 .096386 .096386 .096386 Projected Tax Increment $ 714,856 $ 2,581,024 $ 3,279,880 $ 3,733,714 Year of First Collection /988 1989 /990 1991 . -27- EXHIBIT III . GOLDEN V ALLEY, MI~ESOT A GOLDEN HIlLS - PHASE I-IV REVENUE PROJECTIOI\I ASSUMPTIOI\IS Phase I Office Complex Estimated Market Value Assessed Value @ 43% 40% Complete by 1/2187 100% Complete by 1/2188 $25,000,000 $10,750,000 Hote' Estimated Market Value Assessed Value ~ 43% 30% Complete by 1/2187 100% Complete by 1/2188 $30,000,000 $12,900,000 . Parking Ramp Estimated Market Value Assessed Value '0> 43% 100% Complete by 1/2/88 $ 5,000,000 $ 2, 1 50,000 Common Construction (Arcade, etc.) Estimated Market Value Assessed Value '0> 43% 100% Complete by 1/2189 1/2/87 Value 1/2/88 Value 1/2/89 Value $ 5,000,000 $ 2,150,000 Total Assessed Value Less: Demolition AIV $ 8,170,000 17,630,000 2 . I 50.000 $27,950,000 (753.400 ) $27,196,600 Projected Captured Value . -28- Phase II Golden Hills Shopping Center Estimated Market Value Assessed Value 28% First $60,000 43% Over $60,000 50% Complete by 1/2/88 100% Complete by 1/2189 1/2188 Value 1/2189 Value Total Assessed Value Less: Demolition A/V Projected Captured Value Phase III Office Facility Estimated Market Value 50% Complete by 1/2/89 100% Complete by 1/2190 1/2189 Value 1/2190 Value Total Assessed Value Less Demolition A/V Projected Captured Value Phase/v West Area Office and Office Warehouse _ Estimated Market Value 50% Complete by 1/2189 100% Complete by 1/2190 1/2189 Value 1/2190 Value Total Assessed Value Less Demolition Value Net Captured Value -29- EXHIBIT 1/1 (Continued) . $10,000,000 $ 2,141,000 2 , I 50 ,000 $ 4,291 ,000 (409,600) $ 3,881, 400 $ 9,600,000 -- $ 2,055,000 2,064.000 $ 4, I I 9,000 ( I , 143.300) $ 2,975,700 $12,300,000 $ 2,635,500 2,644.500 $ 5,280,000 (596.600) $ 4,683,400 . . "I ~ 1 J;. ~=~ f' I =-- .. IJ . t- (,) - a: t- en - Q W (,) Z < Z - U. t- Z W ~ w IX.. (,) Z I . 1 . . . :.~I: ,.. . - .- , I I I i .. x < t- en ~ ~ - J: Z W Q ~ o ~ ..... ~ - . i i! I- I . . ... .. .. e.. . -30- EXHIBIT IV EXHIBIT V . LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE GOLDEN HILLS TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT All that part of Section 4, Township 117, Range 21 and Section 30, Township 29, Range 24 described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of the north 1/2 of said Section 4; thence westerly along the south line thereof to the centerline of Colorado Avenue South; thence northerly along said centerline to the centerline of Laurel Avenue; thence easterly along said centerline to the east line of said Section 4 (centerline Turner1s Crossroad); thence southerly along said east line to its intersection with the westerly extension of the south line of Lot 1, Block 2, Spring Green South; thence easterly along the south line of Lots 1 through 4, Block 2 to the southwest corner of Lot 5, Block 2, Spring Green South; thence northwesterly along the westerly line of said Lot 5 to the northwest corner thereof; thence easterly along the north line of said Lot 5 to the northeast corner thereof; thence southerly along the east line thereof to the southeast corner of said Lot 5; thence easterly and southeasterly along the south lines of Lots 6 through 17, Block 2, Spring Green South to the most southerly corner of said Lot 17; thence southwesterly to the most easterly corner of Lot 18, Block 2, Spring Green South; thence southwesterly along the southeasterly line of said Lot 18 to the south line thereof; thence westerly along said south line . to the southwest corner of said Lot 18; thence continue westerly along the south line of RLS. No. 106 to the east line of said Section 4; thence northerly along said east line to the point of beginning. Also, the south 15 feet of Lots 6 and 7, Block 2, Spring Green South; the south 11.5 feet of Lot 8, Block 2, Spring Green South; and the south 9.75 feet of Lot 9 and 13, Block 2, Spring Green South. . -31- . . . Property ID # * 04-117-21 23 0008 04-117~21 23 0009 04-117-21 23 0010 04-117-21 23 0011 04-117-21 23 0012 04-117-21 23 0013 04-117-21 23 0014 04-117-21 23 0015 04-117-21 23 0016 04-117-21 23 0017 04-117-21 23 0018 04-117-21 23 0019 04-117-21 23 0020 04-117-21 23 0021 04-117-21 23 0022 04-117-21 23 0023 04-117-21 23 0026 04-117-21 23 0027 04-117-21 23 0028 04-117-21 23 0029 04-117-21 23 0030 04-117-21 23 0031 04-117-21 23 0032 04-117-21 23 0033 04-117-21 23 0038 04-117-21 23 0039 04-117-21 24 0001 04-117-21 24 0005 04-117-21 24 0006 04-117-21 24 0007 04-117-21 24 0008 GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA GOLDEN HILLS TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT LISTING OF PARCELS 04-117-21 24 0009 04-117-21 24 0012 04-117-21 24 0013 04-117-21 24 0014 04-117-21 24 0015 04-117-21 24 0016 04-117-21 24 0017 04-117-21 24 0018 04-117-21 24 0021 04-117-21 24 0022 04-117-21 24 0024 04-117-21 24 0025 04-117-21 24 0026 30-029-24 23 0001 30-029-24 23 0002 30-029-24 23 0003 30-029-24 23 0004 30-029-24 23 0006 30-029-24 23 0007 30-029-24 23.0008 30-029-24 23 0009 30-029-24 23 0011 30-029-24 23 0012 30-029-24 23 0013 30-029-24 23 0014 30-029-24 23 0015 30-029-24 23 0016 30-029-24 23 0017 30-029-24 23 0050 30-029-24 23 0057 30-029-24 24 0018 *Hennepin County property identification # per County land records. -32- EXHIBIT VI EXHIBIT VII . GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA GOLDEN HILLS TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED DURING PREVIOUS 18 MONTHS Property 10 # Buildinq Building Permit Date Assessed Value Purpose of Improvements of Permit on Permit 30-029-24 23 0004 Rupert's Restaurant 5410 Wayzata Blvd. March 20, 1984 New Incomplete as of Construction this date 04-117-21 24 0009 Tires Plus, Ltd. 5760 Wayzata Blvd. March 14, 1985 Remodeling $25,000 . . -33- . . . Modification Exhibits EXHIBIT I Projected Bond Cash Flow Report . City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment District) District No. 1503 Golden Hills TIF Project Northeast Scenario. United Properties Annual Annual Period Taxable Capitalized Net Annual Cumulative Ending Principal Rate Interest P&I Interest Revenue Balance Balance (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) 02101/99 0 5.70% 0 0 0 0 0 0 02101/00 0 5.80% 307.317 307.317 307,400 0 83 83 02101/01 0 5.90% 283.678 283.678 283.600 0 (78) 5 02101/02 340,000 5.95% 283.678 623.678 0 568.226 (55,452) (55.447) 02/01/03 365.000 6.00% 263.448 628.448 0 568,226 (60.222) (115,669) 02101/04 385.000 6.10% 241,548 626.548 0 568,226 (58.322) . (173.991) 02/01/05 405,000 6.15% 218,063 623.063 0 568.226 (54,837) (228.828) 02101/06 435,000 6.20% 193.155 628,155 0 568.226 (59.929) (288,757) 02101/07 460.000 6.25% 166.185 626.185 0 568.226 (57,959) (346.716) 02101/08 490,000 6.30% 137,435 627,435 0 568,226 (59,209) (405.925) 02101/09 520.000 6.35% 106,565 626,565 0 568,226 (58.339) (464,264) 02101/10 555.000 6.40% 73.545 628,545 0 568,226 (60.319) (524,583) 02101/11 585.000 6.50% 38.025 623,025 0 568.226 (54,799) (579,382) 02101/12 0 6.55% 0 0 0 0 0 (579.38_ 02101/13 0 6.60% 0 0 0 0 0 (579,382 $4,540,000 $2,312.642 $6,852.642 $591,000 $5,682.260 ($579,382) Bond Issue Summary Purpose I Amount I % Dated Date 01/01/99 Eligible Project Costs $3,869,400 85.23% Bond Years 36,673.33 Capitalized Interest 591,000 13.02% Average Maturity 8.08 Underwriters Discount 45,400 1.00% Costs of Issuance 34,200 0.75% Annual Interest $2.312.642 Other 0 0.00% Discount 1.00% $45,400 Other 0 0.00% Net Interest Cost $2.358.042 Net Interest Rate 6.430% Total Bond Issue $4,540,000 100.00% . Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (printed on 11/5/98 at 8:18 AM) TiCne2.xls EXHIBIT II . Projected Bc;md Cash Flow Report City of Golden Valley Xenia Avenue Extension G.O. Bonds, Series 1999 Annual Annual Period Tax-Exempt Capitalized Net Annual Cumulative Ending Principal Rate Interest P&I Interest Revenue Balance Balance (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) 02101/00 550,000 3.80% 274,788 824,788 0 0 (824.788) (824,788) 02101/01 535.000 3.90% 308,845 843,845 0 0 (843.845) (1.668,633) 02101/02 555.000 4.00% 287.980 842.980 0 0 (842.980) (2,511.613) 02101/03 580.000 4.05% 265.780 845.780 0 0 (845,780) (3.357,393) 02101/04 605,000 4.10% 242,290 847.290 0 0 (847,290) (4.204,683) 02101/05 625,000 4.20% 217,485 842,485 0 0 (842.485) (5.047,168) 02101/06 655.000 4.25% 191.235 846,235 0 0 (846,235) (5.893,403) 02101/07 680,000 4.30% 163.398 843.398 0 0 (843.398) (6.736,801) 02101/08 710.000 4.35% 134.158 844,158 0 0 (844,158) (7.580.959) 02101/09 740.000 4.40% 103.273 843,273 0 0 (843.273) (8.424,232) 02101/10 775,000 4.45% 70.713 845,713 0 0 (845.713) (9.269,945) 02101111 805,000 4.50% 36.225 841,225 0 0 (841 ,225) (10.111,170) . 02101/12 0 4.60% 0 0 0 0 0 (10.111.170) 02101/13 0 4.65% 0 0 0 0 0 (10.111,170) 02101/14 0 4.70% 0 0 0 0 0 (10.111,170) $7.815,000 $2.296,170 $10.111,170 $0 $0 ($10.111.170) Bond Issue Summary Purpose I Amount I % Dated Date 04/01/99 Eligible Projed Costs $7,652.532 97.92% First Interest Date 02101/00 Capitalized Interest 0 0.00% Bond Years 53.077.50 Underwriters Discount 117,225 1.50% Average Maturity 6.79 Costs of Issuance (Adm;) 45.243 0.58% Other 0 0.00% Annual Interest $2.296.170 Other 0 0.00% Discount 1.50% $117.225 Net Interest Cost $2,413.395 Total Bond Issue $7.815,000 100.00% Net Interest Rate 4.547% . Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (printed on 11/5198 at 8:30 AM) Xenia.xls EXHIBIT III Projected Bond Cash Flow Report . City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment District) District No. 1503 Golden Hills TIF Project Southwest Scenario - Duke Annual Annual Period Taxable Capitalized Net Annual Cumulative Ending Principal Rate Interest P&I Interest Revenue Balance Balance (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) 02101/99 0 5.70% 0 0 0 0 0 0 02101/00 0 5.80% 374,515 374,515 374,600 0 85 85 02101/01 0 5.90% 449,418 449,418 449,400 0 (18) 67 02101/02 60,000 5.95% 449,418 509,418 0 509,766 348 415 02101/03 570,000 6.00% 445,848 1,015,848 0 1,019,533 3,685 4.100 02101/04 600.000 6.10% 411,648 1,011.648 0 1,019,533 7.885 11.985 02101/05 640.000 6.15% 375.048 1,015.048 0 1,019,533 4.485 16,470 02101/06 680,000 6.20% 335.688 1,015,688 0 1,019,533 3.845 20,315 02101/07 815.000 6.25% 293.528 1.108,528 0 1,019,533 (88.995) (68.680) 02101/08 865.000 6.30% 242.590 1.107,590 0 1,019,533 (88.057) (156.737) 02101/09 920.000 6.35% 188.095 1.108.095 0 1.019.533 (88.562) (245,299) 02101/10 975.000 6.40% 129,675 1.104.675 0 1.019.533 (85.142) (330,441 ) 02101/11 1.035,000 6.50% 67,275 1 ,102.275 0 1,019,533 (82,742) (413.183) 02101/12 0 6.55% 0 0 0 0 0 (413.183. 02101/13 0 6.60% 0 0 0 0 0 (413.183 $7,160,000 $3,762,746 $10.922.746 $824,000 $9.685,563 ($413,183) Bond Issue Summary Purpose I Amount -I % Dated Date 04101/99 Eligible Project Costs $6.182,460 86.35% Bond Years 59.516.67 Capitalized Interest 824,000 11.51% Average Maturity 8.31 Underwriters Discount 107.400 1.50% Costs of Issuance 46.140 0.64% Annual Interest $3.762,746 Other 0 0.00% Discount 1.50% $107,400 Other 0 0.00% Net Interest Cost $3,870,146 Net Interest Rate 6.503% Total Bond Issue $7.160,000 100.00% . Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (printed on 11/5/98 at 8:18 AM) TiCsw.xls . . City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Projected Cash Flow Schedule - Existing Increment & Bonds Existing Increment & Bonds + Central Are~ Project Increment and Bonds Golden Hills Tax Increment Financing District (County TIF #1503) . ---B.evenues Expenses Central Annual Existing Area MEPC Interest MnDOT 1991 TIF 1997 TIF 1997 1997 1998 1999 1999 Annual Ending Collect Period Tax Tax , Tax Earnings @ Bldg& Refunding Refunding Tax-Exempt Taxable TIF Bonds TIF Bonds Xenia Ave. Surplus Cash Year Ending Increment Increment Increment 4.50% HRA Adm. Bonds Bonds Bonds Bonds NE SW Bonds (Delicit) Balance (a) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) '. 1997 2/1/98 2,144,512 1998 2/1/99 2,277,374 '.' 0 0 96,503 560,000 707,080 0 174,623 564,342 0 0 0 367,832 2,512,344 1999 2/1/00 2,610,436 0 0 113,055 0 711,280 0 154,870 487,865 307,317 374,515 824,788 (137,143) 2,375,201 2000 2/1/01 2,610,436 0 87,000 106,884 0 0 676,919 152,845 484,865 283,678 449,418 843,845 (87,250) 2,287,951 2001 2/1/02 2,610,436 1,059,790 87,000 102,958 0 0 679,577 280,795 931,865 623,678 509,418 842,980 (8,129) 2,279,822 2002 2/1/03 2,610,436 1,569,557 87,000 102,592 0 0 680,715 278,145 936,365 628,448 1,015,848 845,780 (15,716) 2,264,107 2003 2/1/04 2,610,436 1,569,557 87,000 101,885 0 0 680,350 280,190 933,195 626,548 1,011,648 847,290 (10,343) 2,253,764 2004 2/1/05 2,610,436 1,569,557 87,000 101,419 0 0 683,277 281,659 937,883 623,063 1,015,048 842,485 (15,002) 2,238,762 2005 2/1/06 2,610,436 1,569,557 87,000 100,744 0 0 664,528 282,536 934,767 628,155 1,015,688 846.235 (4,171) 2.234,590 2006 2/1107 2,610,436 1,569,557 87,000 100,557 0 0 0 277,861 934,128 626,185 1,108,528 843,398 577,450 2,812,040 2007 2/1108 2,610,436 1,569,557 87,000 126,542 0 0 0 282,851 935,607 627,435 1,107,590 844,158 595,894 3,407,934 2008 2/1/09 2,610,4~6 1,569,557 87,000 153,357 0 0 0 281,924 933,845 626,565 1,108,095 843,273 626,648 4,034,583 2009 2/1/10 2,610,436 1,569,557 87,000 181,556 0 0 0 280,287 938,410 628,545 1,104,675 845,713 650,920 4,685,502 2010 2/1/11 2,610,436 1,569,557 87,000 210,848 0 0 0 277,919 938,960 623,025 1,102,275 841,225 694,437 5,379,939 33,602,610 15,185,803 957,000 1,598,900 560,000 1,418,360 4,065,366 3,286,505 10,892,097 6,852,642 10,922,746 10,111,170 3,235,427 (a) Cash balance on 2/1/98 equals 1997 year-end balance provided by City ($2,700,000) less 2/1/98 debt service on 1991 TIF Refunding Bonds ($555,488). Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (11/5/98) m X :r: m -I < Cf4.xls(Exisl) EXHIBIT V Assumptions Report . City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment District) District No. 1503 Golden Hills TIF Project Northeast Scenario - United Properties Type of Tax Increment Financing District Maximum Duration of TIF District Redevelopment 25 years from 1 st increment Certification Request Date Decertification Date 11/01/98 12/01/10 (10 Years of Increment) Base Estimated Market Value Times: First $150,000 Excess Original Net Tax Capacity 2.45% 3.50% 1998/1999 $1.233.600 3.675 37,926 $41,601 Assessment/Collection Year 1998/1999 1999/2000 2000/2001 2001/2002 Base Estimated Market Value $1.233,600 $1.233,600 $1,233,600 $1.233.600 Increase in Estimated Market Value 0 0 11,875.400 11,875,400 . Total Estimated Market Value $1.233,600 $1.233,600 $13,109,000 $13,109,000 Times: First $150,000 2.45% 3.675 3.675 3.675 3.675 Excess 3.50% 37,926 37,926 453,565 453,565 Total Net Tax Capacity $41,601 $41,601 $457,240 $457.240 Base Inflation Factor Local Tax Capacity Rate Fiscal Disparities Contribution From TIF District Administrative Retainage Percent (maximum = 10%) Pooling Percent City Tax Rate (Only if Local-Effort TIF) NA 137.054% 0.0000% 0.00% 0.00% NA a.amm Bonds Dated First Interest Date Underwriters Discount 01/01/99 02/01/00 1.00% Note (Pay-As-You-Go) Note Dated Note Rate NA NA LGAlHACA Loss' Will Annual Local Contribution Be, Made (Yes or No)? 1.5.0 #270 Equalized Tax Capacity Rate 1.5.0 #270 Sales Ratio City Sales Ratio & Taxable Net Tax Capacity Present Value Date & Rate No N/A N/A NA 11/01/98 NA 5.00% . Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (printed on 11/5/98 at 8: 18 AM) TiCne2.xls . . I Projected Tax Increment Report I . City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment District) District No. 1503 Golden Hills TIF Project Northeast Scenario - United Properties Less: Less: Retained Times: Less: Less: Plus: Annual Total Original Fiscal Captured Tax Annual State Aud. Admin. Annual Local Annual Period Net Tax Net'Tax Disp.@ Net Tax Capacity Gross Tax Deduction Retainage Net Tax Contribution Net Ending Capacity Capacity 0.0000% Capacity Rate Increment 0.25% 0.00% Increment 0.00% Revenue (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11 ) (12) 12/31/98 41 ,601 ~ 41,601 0 0 137.054% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/31/99 41,601 41,601 0 0 137.054% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/31/00 41,601 41,601 0 0 137.054% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/31101 457,240 41,601 0 415,639 137.054% 569,650 1,424 0 568,226 0 568,226 12/31/02 457,240 41,601 0 415,639 137.054% 569,650 1,424 0 568,226 0 568,226 12/31/03 457,240 41,601 0 415,639 137.054% 569,650 1,424 0 568,226 0 568,226 12/31/04 457,240 41,601 0 415,639 137.054% 569,650 1,424 0 568,226 0 568,226 12/31/05 457,240 41,601 0 415,639 137.054% 569,650 1,424 0 568,226 0 568,226 12/31/06 457,240 41,601 0 415,639 137.054% 569,650 1,424 0 568,226 0 568,226 12/31/07 457,240 41,601 0 415,639 137.054% 569,650 1.424 0 568,226 0 568,226 12/31/08 457,240 41,601 0 415,639 137.054% 569,650 1,424 0 568,226 0 568,226 12/31/09 457,240 41,601 0 415,639 137.054% 569,650 1,424 0 568,226 0 568,226 12/31/10 457,240 41,601 0 415,639 137.054% 569,650 1,424 0 568,226 0 568,226 12/31/11 457,240 457,240 0 0 137.054% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/31/12 457,240 457,240 0 0 137.054% 0 0 0 0 0 0 $5,696,500 $14,240 $0 $5,682,260 $0 $5,682,260 m >< J: CD -t < I )> Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (printed on 11/5/98 at 8:18 AM) TiCne2.xls EXHIBIT VI Assumptions Report . . I City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment District) District No. 1503 Golden Hills TIF Project Southwest Scenario - Duke Type of Tax Increment Financing District Maximum Duration of TIF District Redevelopment 25 years from 1 st increment Certification Request Date Decertification Date 11/01/98 12/01/10 (10 Years of Increment) Base Estimated Market Value Times: First $150.000 Excess Original Net Tax Capacity 3.50% 3.50% 1998/1999 $2.764.200 5.250 91.497 $96.747 Assessment/Collection Year 1998/1999 1999/2000 2000/2001 2001/2002 Base Estimated Market Value $2.764.200 $2.764.200 $2.764,200 $2,764.200 . Increase in Estimated Market Value 0 0 10.653.650 21.307,300 Total Estimated Market Value $2.764,200 $2,764,200 $13.417,850 $24,071.500 Times: First $150.000 3.50% 5.250 5,250 5.250 5.250 Excess 3.50% 91.497 91.497 464.375 837,253 Total Net Tax Capacity $96.747 $96.747 $469,625 $842,503 Base Inflation Factor Local Tax Capacity Rate Fiscal Disparities Contribution From TIF District Administrative Retainage Percent (maximum = 10%) Pooling Percent City Tax Rate (Only if Local-Effort TIF) NA 137.054% 0.0000% 0.00% 0.00% NA ~ Bonds Dated First Interest Date Underwriters Discount 04/01/99 02/01/00 1.50% Note (Pav-As-You-Go) Note Dated Note Rate NA NA LGAlHACA Loss' Will Annual Local Contribution Be"Made (Yes or No)? 1.5.0 #Xxx Equalized Tax Capacity Rate 1.5.0 #Xxx Sales Ratio City Sales Ratio & Taxable Net Tax Capacity Present Value Date & Rate No N/A N/A NA 11/01/98 NA 5.00% . Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (printed on 11/5/98 at 8:18 AM) TiCsw.xls '. . . I Projected Tax Increment Report I , City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment District) District No. 1503 Golden Hills TIF Project Southwest Scenario - Duke Less: Less: Retained Times: Less: Less: Plus: Annual Total Original Fiscal Captured Tax Annual State Aud. Admin. Annual Local Annual Period Net Tax NelTax Disp.@ Net Tax Capacity Gross Tax Deduction Retainage Net Tax Contribution Net Ending Capacity Capacity 0.0000% Capacity Rate Increment 0.25% 0.00% Increment 0.00% Revenue (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11 ) (12) 12/31/98 96,747 _ 96,747 0 0 137.054% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/31/99 96,747 96,747 . 0 0 137.054% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/31/00 96,747 96,747 0 0 137.054% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/31/01 469,625 96,747 0 372,878 137.054% 511,044 1,278 0 509,766 0 509,766 12/31/02 842,503 96,747 0 745,756 137.054% 1,022,088 2,555 0 1,019,533 0 1,019,533 12/31/03 842,503 96,747 0 745,756 137.054% 1,022,088 2,555 0 1,019,533 0 1,019,533 12/31/04 842,503 96,747 0 745,756 137.054% 1,022,088 2,555 0 1,019,533 0 1,019,533 12/31/05 842,~03 96,747 0 745,756 137.054% 1,022,088 2,555 0 1,019,533 0 1,019,533 12/31/06 842,503 96,747 0 745,756 137.054% 1,022,088 2,555 0 1,019,533 0 1,019,533 12/31/07 842,503 96,747 0 745,756 137.054% 1,022,088 2,555 0 1,019,533 0 1,019,533 12/31/08 842,503 96,747 0 745,756 137.054% 1,022,088 2,555 0 1,019,533 0 1,019,533 12/31/09 842,503 96,747 0 745,756 137.054% 1,022,088 2,555 0 1,019,533 0 1,019,533 12/31/10 842,503 96,747 0 745,756 137.054% 1,022,088 2,555 0 1,019,533 0 1,019,533 12/31/11 842,503 842,503 0 0 137.054% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/31/12 842,503 842,503 0 0 137.054% 0 0 0 0 0 0 $9,709,836 $24,273 $0 $9,685,563 $0 $9,685,563. m >< :J: CD -i < I )> Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (printed on 11/5/98 at 8:18 AM) TiCswxls I Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions Report I City of Golden Valley I Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment) District No. 1503 Golden Hills Taxing Jurisdiction Without Project or TIF District With Project and TIF District Projected 1997/98 1997/98 Retained New Hypothetical Taxable 1997/98 Taxable Captured Taxable Adjusted Net Tax Local Net Tax Net Tax Net Tax Local Capacity (1) Tax Rate Capacity (1) + Capacity = Capacity Tax Rate (*) 22,643.342 30.122% 22.643,342 1.129,380 23,772,722 28.691 % 936,486.071 38.386% 936,486.071 1.129,380 937.615,451 38.340% 76.733.133 61.063% 76.733.133 1.129,380 77.862.513 60.177% 7.483% --- 1.129,380 --- 7.483% 134.691% City of Golden Valley Hennepin County ISO #270. Hopkins Other (2) Hypothetical Decrease In Local Tax Rate (*) 1.431% 0.046% 0.886% * Statement 1: If the projected Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity of the TIF District was hypothetically available to each of the taxing jurisdictions above, the result would be a lower local tax rate (see Hypothetical Adjusted Tax Rate above) which would produce the same amount of taxes for each taxing jurisdiction. In such a case. the total local tax rate would decrease by 2.363% (see Hypothetical Decrease in Local Tax Rate above). The hypothetical tax that the Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity of the TIF District would generate is also shown above. Statement 2: Since the projected Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity of the TIF District is not available to the taxing jurisdictions. then there is no impact on taxes levied or local tax rates. (1) Taxable net tax capacity = total net tax capacity - captured TIF - fiscal disparity contribution. (2) The impact on these taxing jurisdictions is negligible since they represent only 5.46% of the total tax rate. prepare,. Springsted Incorporated (11/5/98) . Hypothetical Tax Generated by Retained Captured N.T.C. (*) 324,030 433,002 679,630 m >< I [D :::j < . '" . MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: November 4, 1998 Planning Commission Mark W. Grimes Director of Planning and Development Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to Allow Auto Dealership at 905 Hamphire Avenue - Borton Volvo, Applicant RE: . Borton Volvo has entered into an agreement to purchase the property at 905 Hampshire Avenue South for the purpose of operating a car dealership. In order to operate a car dealership in the Industrial zoning district, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required from the City of Golden Valley. Borton's plan is to renovate the existing restaurant building (former Cactus Creek building) and add a new service addition to the east side of the existing building. The existing cell tower site would remain as indicated on the site plan. The property is currently zoned industrial and designated on the Comprehensive Plan map for industrial uses. The City has historically considered automotive sales and service as a use well suited for industrial areas. Therefore, this type of use is considered consistent with both the zoning and comprehensive plan. The site is about 2.63 acres in size. The existing building is about 6,600 sq.ft. in area. This building would be renovated for inside car display and offices. A 7,600 sq.ft. addition would be constructed onto the east side of the existing building. This addition would be used for the service and parts departments. The parking areas would be brought up to required standards. The lot would have the necessary curb and gutter with proper drainage to the existing storm sewer system. The site would meet the setback requirements for both parking and building. In 1994, the owner of the site was granted a setback variance of 2 feet off the required 35 foot setback for the existing building in order that a conforming entry addition could be constructed on the building. This variance remains valid today, therefore, the existing building is considered legally non-conforming and it may be added to without further Board of Zoning Appeals action. The proposed parking area for the car dealership meets the required setback of 10 feet from all side and rear property lines and 35 feet from Hampshire Avenue. The parking areas will have curb and gutter as required by the City Code. The existing cell tower lease site also meets the City setback requirements. It is located on the site in a manner that will not disrupt the dealership. Access to the cell site will be from the . ? parking lot. The cell tower provider needs to get to the site on an infrequent basis. The cell tower provider is aware of the plan for Borton Volvo. . The City Engineer has reviewed the site plan. Since this is a small redevelopment site, there is no requirement for on-site ponding for either water quality or quantity purposes. Drainage from the site must be directed to the existing storm sewer system in Hampshire Avenue. In order to insure that there is proper drainage for the site and that there is no adverse impact on surrounding properties, the City Engineer, prior to any building permits being issued for the site, must approve a grading and drainage plan. The proposed auto dealership with service bays will meet the parking requirements set out in the Industrial section of the zoning code. The code requires that there be one parking space for each 3 employees and one parking space for each 1,000 sq.ft. of indoor and outdoor display area. In addition, there must be four outside parking spaces provided for each service stall and one parking space for each company vehicle, such as a tow truck and/or service vehicle. You will note on the site plan that the applicant did not provide 40 parking spaces for the requirement of service stalls. This was an oversight by the architect and they will provide an updated site plan that shows a decrease in the number of inventory stalls in order to accommodate the required stalls. This plan will be available the night of the Planning Commission meeting. The lease space to the cell tower site allows for the parking of one vehicle, which is adequate. The site will have two driveways from Hampshire, the same as the existing site. The north driveway may be moved several feet further north. A driveway permit will be required from the City of Golden Valley. Traffic from the site will be greater than from a restaurant; however, there is adequate capacity on the existing street . system to handle this small auto dealership. The internal circulation system appears to work well. Borton has not submitted a preliminary landscape plan with the CUP application. They have assured me that they will meet or exceed the requirements of the Building Board of Review for landscaping. Borton suggests that the landscape plan be subject to approval by the Planning staff. The surrounding uses are either fast-food restaurants or industrial uses. The Planning Commission may want to give guidance to the Building Board of Review and staff regarding landscape requirements. The applicant has submitted building elevations for your review. The proposed building and addition appear to be attractive with typical finishes for auto dealerships. The Building Board of Review will review these plans. The applicant has not included a lighting plan for the site. Such a plan should be submitted prior to review by the City Council. The plan shall indicate the location of light standards and the type of lighting to be used. Also, the hours of lighting should be addressed. The hope is that the lighting would be directed on the site as much as possible and not spill over to adjoining uses. DCA, Architect for Borton, has submitted a narrative of the proposed site for your review. It outlines the hours of operation and describes the proposal. . 2 . . Analysis of Ten Factors Required by Planning Commission for Any Conditional Use Permit The Planning Commission is required to make findings and recommendations to the Council on the following factors. Staff comments are as follows: 1. Demonstrated need for the proposed use. Generally, the City has let the marketdetermine if there is need for a specific use. Borton Volvo has determined that there is adequate demand for a Volvo dealership at this location. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. An auto dealership with service is consistent with the other uses found within the Industrial designation on the Comprehensive plan map. 3. Effect on property values in the neighborhood. The uses of this site for a car dealership with service should not have a negative impact on property values in the area. There is other similar auto uses in the immediate area. 4. Effect on any anticipated traffic generation upon the current traffic flow and congestion in the area. The use of this site for a car dealership should have some increased traffic compared to a restaurant. However, the traffic will span the entire work day rather than only at peak hours or at noon. There is adequate capacity in the existing street system to handle the proposed dealership. 5. Effect of any increases in population and density upon surrounding land uses. The car dealership will not increase population in the area. 6. Increase in noise levels to be caused by the proposed use. The car dealership should not create a noise problem in the area. The CUP will require that there be no outside speaker systems and that the doors to the service area remain closed during working hours. 7. Any odor, dust, smoke, gases, vibration to be caused by the proposed use. The proposed use should not cause any of these problems if properly operated. The City has not received complaints regarding this matter on other car dealerships in the City. 8. Any increase in flies, rats, or other animals in the area to be caused by this proposed use. A car dealership should not cause any of these animal problems. An enclosed dumpster will be provided on the site as shown on the site plan. 9. Visual appearance of any proposed structure of use. The applicant has submitted a site plan and building elevations. The building appears to be a good design and similar to other high quality auto dealerships. This plan must also meet the strict standards of Volvo. With proper landscaping along the property lines and around the building, this will be an attractive site. 10. Other effects upon the general public health, safety, and welfare of the City and its residents. Staff does not believe there are any other negative effects of this proposed use. . 3 RECOMMENDED ACTION The staff recommends approval of the CUP for the operation of an auto . dealership with service bays at 905 Hampshire Avenue. The proposed use is consistent with the other uses in the area. The improvements that are proposed for' the site will enhance the area and bring additional, high quality jobs to the City of Golden Valley. The approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The site plan prepared by DCA Architects (Sheet A-1) shall become a part of this permit. 2. Parking on this site shall meet the requirements of the City Code. 3. A lighting plan shall be submitted for review prior to issuance of any building permits. The Director of Inspections shall approve the lighting plan. 4. No outside microphone systems shall be used on the site. 5. Any other local, state or federal agencies shall issue all necessary permits. 6. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan to be approved by the Director of Planning and Development. At a minimum, it shall meet the requirements of the City's landscape standards for new development. 7. All signage shall meet the requirements of the City's sign code. 8. A drainage and grading plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to City Council approval of the CUP. Attachments: . · Site Plan · Narrative dated October 19, 1998 · Oversized plans (attached) . 4 ~ ~. " "'I .., '", ... ~ <...0',.... >- '0 ~ .... ,~ ~1t '-)... .,. ~~~/ r-'GN r.{)_~ _ . ~ ~ "I . '" '. .. ,~ ~. .... ~ -'0 -,3980, sa,' J9J,'.: 'J:8 3.2 .A....a;~Qfs 2.: ':-- ~ - - - LAUREL AVENUE ~~ (:ec' 8-; _ . o ~ . ~ ~ 6J)J ~ - SS~'4J SE 61.1 -~ ~.-.~...- ~~ ~ VE, CO" ,6 -J,'il' ~ ~ g: ,0" ., -, . ~ : -':. 6'0 ~b~4- ... c; ~: '38~'4()!5-E Z-"'l[ - I. I ! ., I Proposed Site of '"C'r- - I Bolton Volvo :" w I ::> <\, I Z t. ~ A w , . ~"': ,~ " ~4~ <t- \ "" ;: <:> "t- o<, 7 -4 IS', ... " f' o~, ,- N V) ~' ~ ... II · & ~; .,.'-" .... '" .~ PART or ': ~ ~ REGiSTERED LAf\Ju .:., ::: '" - I SUR\/LY ~. .~ :-; NO 648 . ~ Qrl ~ E S? " li-, .... '" " or, .... " oJ " ., 'r) ., . t, 2 2 :n ('.) w a:: t-- :r '><l en '0 a.. N ~ ..... q. ~ <t C> :r f I 0.: , .r ., !~'.;: ,...: . 5 ~4:6 ~~ ., '" 't MENARDS . 18'. .-; .. 'a.JJ L j .. .' .----.- -- --'- . IC';.~5 . 6100-685C :; .., l . C.p~<b ei. ~u :;.' 4.$0) . ;J, ~ V r-. f. ~ , . '-~" ::; 1-394 \Q~ o~ . ~~s ~\; ~~ ~~\) , ~~s l\o~ <;) \ "\ I . ~'V . 2 6440 I '. 6400 " .. f" /1'. 6G50 ~,8 45 :'J' _ 5~5 ~__ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - -=- - 230 Z Y ~~_';/'t;~: ~ _ 1-394 tL.;'~ r . 03. !q'~". ; .3' 7" J' "100' C. ,1 or " . .... 5 . /50.0 ,,' '4oS5 Lc' 11"-1& es, I'", 300', ~ .', " ~ - I~ /.( -1' _ .~ EY iK ,Q1, c; ., IS' . ,., S.7 . '. ~ : .......~' l,8j.JJ ..... 1"2: ~i J;:es. -----...:-.- '(,-.- DCA DAVID CONSTABLE A.IA, ARCHITECT 1250 E. Moore Lake Drive, Suite 205 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432 . tel 612 359-0600 fax 612571-3112 October 19, 1998 Narrative Description for: Borton Volvo 905 Hampshire Avenue Golden Valley, MN Background: The property has an existing structure which has been used as a restaurant for the past 20+ years. Most recently the property was remodeled in 1994. Prior to that an addition was added to the north side of the structure. The restaurant uses have not demonstrated long term viability. Proposed Use: The proposed use is for an automotive sales and service facility operated by Borton Volvo. No . body shop is planned for this site. This facility will be a new dealership site for Borton Volvo, in addition to their existing location on Lyndale Avenue in South Minneapolis. Borton's experience and longevity provide the City of Golden Valley with a stable use in contrast to the several failed restaurants. This proposed use will create approximately 20 new jobs initially. The median wages for the automotive industry and Borton Volvo will be above average. The jobs created include highly skilled service technician and sales consultants and management jobs. Approximately 20 % - 25% of the new jobs will be for entry level positions. Customers will be existing and new Borton Volvo customers. Initial projections are for 20 - 30 potential sales customer during sales hours and approximately 40 - 50 service customers after the sales have generated a service base. The anticipated hours of operation are Monday - Thursday, 9 AM - 9 PM for sales and 7 AM - 6 PM for service. When volume warrants service hours may be expanded to 12 AM. Fridays the sales hours would be 9 AM - 6 PM with service open 7 AM - 6 PM. Sales hours on Saturday are 8 AM - 6 PM. Service will be closed on Saturdays unless demand indicates a need for Saturday service. The dealership is closed on Sundays. This use as an automotive dealership facility is appropriate and consistent with the surrounding uses of retail, automotive sales and service, body shops and restaurants. . BORTON VOLVO PAGE 2 October 19, 1998 . Proposed Building and Site Expansion: The property will be paved to the setback limits for use in storing and displaying of vehicles, and parking for employees and customers. Landscaping will be worked out with the city staff to meet all city ordinances. The existing building will have a service addition consisting of a service write up drive, 10 service bays, and a small parts department with a mezzanine for additional storage and mechanical equipment. The exterior of the existing building will be refinished in smooth stucco to meet Volvo's standards. The existing tower at the northwest comer of the building will be removed. The existing sign projection over the center of the roof will be resurfaced and have the Borton Volvo signage. The exterior of the addition will be decorative concrete masonry as shown on the attached elevations. The finish will be white paint to match the stucco on the existing structure. . . L.egal description of property at 90S Hampshire . DESCRIPTION, PARCEL 11 All or Lot 1 except thct part or uta Lotl, lying northerly Cl 8 line drawn ganllel with and 335 lut southerly m.uur'd at right angles (rom the northerly llna GI uld Lot 1 ancl tlIcept that part l}'lng south.rly of I Iln. drawn parallel with ancl 170 teet northerly m.asured at rlgh1 angles from the southerly lillne of ula Lot 1 In alOtk 1. GOLDEN PLAZA 1ST ADDITION, according to the plat tlltr.Of On /lll or of rlieotd In \hil olllce oflhe Registrar of TillIS In.jlnd for HennepIn County, Together with is non-ucluslve easement for roadWllY purposes ovu, upon and .erOH the south 4Q feU of Lot 2, Block 2, GOLDEN PLAZA 1ST ADD IT ION for tne benefit of above land as shown In dted Docum.nt No. 947Q~9, Ifiles of tho Reglltrar of TIt/H. PARCEL 2: That part of Lot 1, Slock 1, GOLDEN PLAZA lST ADDITION lying south~rly or a lInt drawn parallel witt! ~nd 170 feet northerly, l:1eul,Jred it rIght angln rrom the southerly Ilno of said Lot 1. Toqethsr with. non-uclus!v' easement for roadway purposes over, upon and across the south 40 rut of Lot 2, BlOCk 2, GOLDEN PLAZA 1ST ADDITION for the benefit of the above and other land as snown In dUd OOcument No. 947059, Fllu or R.glstrar Of Titles. . .