##VIDEO ID:KF2FhuDYTU4## all right all right all right hello can you hear me I see Smiles I don't know okay you can hear me all right good well welcome everybody to the Wednesday September 25th 2024 City Vio Planning Commission meeting I'm half of the rest of the commission we welcome you we're grateful you're here uh say it every time but your curiosity your participation and your feedback is vital to this process as we navigate change here in Edina specifically regarding the ways in which we would like to use our land so tonight we have two public hearings uh I will go through what to expect for each of those later when they approach uh in the meantime I'll kind of give you a rundown of why feedback matters as well as the agenda first as it relates to feedback there's a lot of ways in which we get your feedback whether it's here tonight at a public hearing or through email or through our engagement website ww. better together.org anything that's shared in any way that gets its way to the planning department Finds Its way to us and we consider that feedack back before we make recommendations as we will tonight so for the agenda what to expect we'll call the meeting to order then we'll do a roll call that will be followed by the approval of tonight's meeting agenda then the prior meetings minutes then we have a community comment period and that is your chance for anyone who is here in person to speak about a matter not on tonight's agenda you'll have 3 minutes to do that and then we open it up to our public hearings again we have two and then we will finish with our reports and recommendations and that is uh something related to Tiff and then we end with chair and member comments staff comments and then adjournment so without further Ado call the meeting to order and then roll call commissioner Padia here commissioner J commissioner jonka here commissioner day here commissioner barnstein here commissioner felt commissioner hanaman here chair Bennett here uh there's commissioner felt on Q you want to just say here all right I I saw a nod anyways we have commissioner felt joining too uh so next we have the approval of tonight's meeting agenda there's any proposed changes I like to yeah I do have a proposed change um so I would motion to remove uh item 8.1 from the agenda the resolution B2 2409 um I don't believe that this item is really in the purview of the Planning Commission um and to be honest we're not trained on Tiff we're not members of the H um the Planning Commission does not have the power of the purse so I don't find this discussion to be relevant um to our our goal for the city um we've already voted on whether 72nd in France development conforms to the general plans for development and Redevelopment of the city as a whole um so I mean this seems redundant and to be honest a bit of a waste of our time and City Planning time and resources um and then the last piece of this would be um in our packet uh Pro provided for this item there's a report of inspection procedures and results for determining qualifications of a tax financing District uh this proposal or report should I say was put together by lhb which I believe if I my memory serves correct um was awarded the contract for the proposed tunnel under France um and if that's incorrect can be corrected by the city um but they have a vested interest in this becoming a tiff District so I I don't see how we can consider that report as a piece of this yeah this is an interesting topic as car other planning Commissioners know anytime Tiff ends up being used it is a separate meeting later after we've made our approvals and I think others probably feel the same way as commissioner D just about why we are making those decisions I think since it's on the agenda we still proceed and let Bill nondorf maybe address why it's on our agenda but I think the points Ryan brings up are maybe the first things that we expect Bill to address and then if that's something that we can potentially remove in the future like we're always trying to improve the process so do you have any feedback Carrie yeah part of the issue is I believe when it went to the Planning Commission not sure exactly of the timing whether a tiff application was actually made but once the Tiff application is made state law does require you to pass a resolution saying that the development plans are consistent with the comprehensive plan so there is a resolution that you're asked to pass this evening and so because it relates to land use in general correct and it's required by state law for the Planning Commission to make that finding in regard to the development plans being consistent with the with the comprehensive plan okay well noted but I would think that the so I would well we can get to it at that point too but I wouldn't be prepared to vote on it um until an alternative in until I guess a separate entity other than lhb prepared um a statement on the qualifications for the tax increment financing District because I consider this to be a pretty clear conflict of interest based on their contract that they have for the bridge or tunnel should I say maybe keeping in mind that the the time and the clock that you mentioned does anyone else want to remove this or feel like proceeding with it still on the agenda I would I would encourage us to keep it on the agenda but then address those points right away sound good so I guess do we have a different motion I don't believe there was a second this is just for tonight's meeting agenda so you need a motion to approve tonight's meeting agenda as y as written motion to approve tonight's meeting agenda second all those in favor say I I oppos I so that carries we will address that later but thank you for bringing that up uh next we have the approval of the prior meeting's minutes from September 12th if there's any proposed changes welcome a motion with modifications or just as it stands motion to Second all those in favor say I I motion carries all right so next we have the community comment period but before we do that we have a new phase up here we have a new student commissioner so one thing that's really cool that the city does is gives the opportunity for two students in the community to serve up on the Planning Commission with us and it's quite a remarkable commitment in the fact that you're aware enough to want to join so I'd like you to give you an opportunity just introduce yourself tell us a little bit about why you wanted to join and what you're interested in thank you hi everyone uh I'm Ben I'm a junior ID downa High School uh I play soccer I run track um I'm part of the business club and I joined uh the Planning Commission to just learn a little bit more about our city I wanted to be uh part uh kind of of like what happens and know what goes on in my town and I'm excited to be here and I'm H to give a student uh point of view to the commission thank you awesome thank you very much all right that's great so now we'll go to the community comment period this like a public hearing but is only for people who are here in person you have 3 minutes you can come up to one of the podium when the light turns green State your full name address and you have 3 minutes to speak about whatever you'd like that's not on tonight's agenda is anyone here that would like to do that see none we will close that part of the meeting tonight and move right to the public hearings so just for those who'd like to get ready to participate that are tuning in remotely again there's two public hearings uh if you'd like to provide testimony remotely you're going to follow probably the prompts on the screen uh you're going to call the following number 312 535 8110 and enter access code 2630 75111 96 the password is 5454 and then when it's your time you'll press star three on your keypad to get in the to speak but you don't need to do that right yet uh so what to expect for a public hearing this one is a 3ot height variance from the maximum height requirements of 6 ft to allow for 9ft tall fence or long France Avenue the process for a public hearing is an applicant or a developer resident whoever applies for something that doesn't really conform staff puts together a report and they then put together a present ation based off of that report and provide that to us tonight we ask questions have some back and forth then we open it to the applicant team to give their own presentation if they'd like answer questions back and forth then we open it to the public hearing and then that is your chance as a citizen or anyone tuning in remotely to testify about the matter you have three minutes to do that once we close a public hearing it comes back to the Planning Commission we deliberate and we make a recommendation for approval or denial and then we move on to the next public hearing so for the first one planner roer take it away thank you chair members of the Planning Commission um this is a request for a three- foot height variance for a 6 foot maximum height allowed uh for a fence to replace um four existing 6ft tall fences The Proposal is for solid wall 8ft fences with the TR top for a total of 9 ft um of height along France Avenue for four properties at 4701 4703 4705 and 4707 metal Road these are four properties that front metal Road and then there's an additional five other properties that also front metal Road and this is between uh 47th and 48th along France Avenue the back of their Lots um back up to France uh most of the homes are at a lower elevation and their backyards slope up towards France Avenue this is the view um that's currently there along most of the properties or the affected properties um the solid wall six- foot fence that's currently there is right up against or very close to the edge of the sidewalk with the exception of the southernmost of the four properties has this indentation where um there's a utility pole now the replacement fence would be um in front of the utility pole so it wouldn't look like this it would just be solid wall 9ft fence uh in front of the utility pole and another view of the fence as uh it exists along France Avenue so um the purpose of the fence is to replace the six foot fences at the intersection of 47th and France Avenue there's going to be um it's to screen the 9 foot tall fences are to screen and buffer uh four properties from the brte line intersection improvements um I'm sure you've noticed there's been a lot of construction along France Avenue and that's a lot of it um in this particular situation they have two stations on both the East and West sides of the the street the 4700 block of France Avenue will have two stations directly from across from each other so um on the west side and then on the east side um rather than the diagonal situation that usually occurs at an intersection um given uh engineering uh I guess they needed to do it uh across from one another um the other the stations themselves include bus shelters which are 12 ft long with sloping roofs the front of the shelters are 12 1/2 ft tall uh the backs are about 8 and 1/2 ft the shelters are lighted and heated the stations will have 14t tall LED illuminated pylon sign and the station will include talking Fair card machines bike racks trash and recycling receptacles as part of the Eline project henpen county is installing a median strip and um will in include crosswalks on the south side of the intersection and then also um it will have the flashing lights and then there will be um a new 30 foot tall street light um on the corner so this is a rendering and it's showing a six foot vence it does not show this was um I believe uh done by uh Metro Transit but it gives you an idea of how that will look and it includes that crosswalk sign can't really see the top of the new light and then this is um just a typical um one of the bus uh stations so evening also lit up this is the proposed fencing product that they are proposing on the 8ot section and then um there would be a 1ot Topper um that would increase the height to 9 ft which would be a trellis top it um encompasses the four homes just south of West 47th Street um each have approximately a 60 foot wide lot that backs up to France Avenue you're not seeing this southermost property um all the way um um so it would be 4701 0305 and uh 07 with a 65t length um along their rear property boundary 8ft solid wall and then a 1ft Topper with the trellis top is what they are proposing it should be noted that there are other intersections along the E Line and um so this is France a Avenue and West 58th Street and it's not north south so you have to look at um it's um North is this way so the property on the northeast corner will have a uh station in their front yard um at 5733 France and then also at 5729 it's sort of uh between the two um and that this particular intersection will have them in a diagonal fashion and then there will be one along the sidey yard of 3901 West 58th Street so this is the side of their house um house fronts house fronts and they will have you know some of the same typical uh station features that are going going to be at the 47th and France Avenue intersection there's also going to be a stop um or station at West 62 and France um and again this is not running north south um so West 67th which is on the West Side the station will be located in front of 6129 um with a rendering of that location in context so there can be a case made for both approval and denial of the request um denial request for 3-ft fence sight variance for properties located at 4701 4703 4705 and 07 meal Road um could be based on the following findings that the proposal does not meet the standards for a variance with no circumstances unique and specific to the lot there are other properties located along France Avenue equally affected by improvements of the brte line next to their property the properties currently have reasonable use with an existing 6-foot fence uh located the L of France Avenue between 47th and 48th um approval could promote requests for similar variances to fence height and set a precedent so um there's four that are being requested for that portion of of France Avenue um but it this could possibly set up um I guess opportunities for others to ask for the same thing the property owner situation is not unique to other properties along France Avenue with the same or possibly more severe impacts to the front and sidey yards of properties and could promote requests that are similar and the four properties might provide a disjointed fence height along France Avenue um which may in introduce some aesthetic concerns there's also a case for approval um approval of the request for a 3ft height variance to allow 9ft tall fence for all four properties long meal Road um could be based on the following findings that there is a practical difficulty caused by the required brte line improvements including the lighting noise a crosswalk with impacting bus stops directly across U from each other on the south side of 47th Street in France Avenue intersection as opposed to staggered like um most intersection situations they do have a lot more going on um in terms of that intersection um for improvements and impact um the unique circumstance includes the new crosswalk improvements again flashing lights new street lights uh the proposal would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood a 9-ft tall fence would offer screening for neighboring properties from improvements at the intersections and would help to maintain neighborhood character any uhu approval should be subject to the following conditions the plans and Survey date stamped August 21th 2024 and subject to engineer staff Melo um dated September 13 2024 engineering memo does support the request um staff did um recommend denial given the fact that um even aside from looking along France Avenue there are other conflicting land uses um and it may be um a more appropriate way to look at it holistically and not to um have individual variant has come forward for the Planning Commission to consider if there's some way to address our current code um um that would certainly be helpful and uh with that I will stop and answer any questions you may have we do have some of the neighbors um that have applied for the variance here and um are ready for presentation with that I will stop and answer any questions you may have thank you Chris any questions for Chris commissioner felt um honor AER what is the current width of the sidewalk 8 ft uh probably I'm thinking it's probably close to that and that um and what is the width of the sidewalk at the bus station do you know I don't know but it does if you you can see from from this it it comes out so it's probably you know at least two three more feet um I also have noted that in the in the um applicant narrative uh the fence is actually the existing fence that you see here is actually further back from their lot line and they are planning on adjusting it right up to their lot line which may impact exactly where some of that sidewalk will go it's very minimal but um it's closer than where the fence is thank you they lot lines one quick question is like hopen County or Metro Transit have they provided any guidance of how they plan to kind of mitigate these visual or auditory or other concerns throughout this process I think that's an excellent question for the property owners because they have been actively um in contact with them okay I just didn't know if maybe one of their representatives were here this evening I mean I don't think they're obligated to but it might just be helpful to hear okay any other questions for Chris all right thank you Chris we will give a chance to the applicant applicant team whoever wants to come forward if you'd like to present anything or just simply stand for questions that'd be great just introduce yourself name address Etc thank you U my name is Karen Willie I live at 4701 meow road which is the corner and with me is Molly well let's start with L here Robin Harman who's at 4703 and Molly rice who is at 4705 Betty Goodman who is at at 4707 is out of town tonight um I would like to say two things in my introductory remarks one is that my mother just died um 10 days short of her 99th birthday so this is not really where I want to be tonight but I thought it was important to be here and so I am and the second thing I want to say is that I would respectfully request that when a staff recommendation is made particularly when it is in opposition to the request of the residents that it appear on the website earlier than the day of the hearing which is how it worked today I did not find out none of us found out until about 4:00 this afternoon what the staff recommendation was um as the Planning Commission staff has noted we have been working with uh Metro Transit for a long time on this issue um I guess I might address that first in terms of the concern from the planning staff of about perhaps the fact that consistency would be helpful in something like this that may be but the city has known about this project for a long long time I have been working with the city on this project for literally two and a half years probably uh and to your question about Metro Transit mitigation the answer is none they they do nothing um they purport to have public hearings you can submit comments but they don't really listen to anything and they're really going to do what they want to do so what I'd like to do briefly and then f m your Robin have additional comments there hopefully they can make them um is kind of walk through this staff recommendation and share the concerns that we have um on the first page where the the question is the variance would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance as the staff report says screening is appropriate between conflicting and impacted land uses and supports protecting Residential Properties which is what we're trying to do of the four applicants they go on to say however that there are these other two other places the 58th Street stations and the 62nd Street stations that are similarly circumstan that's not the case as the staff person indicated this is the only residential spot on the entire Eline where the stations are directly across from each other as opposed to on diagonal Corners so I in particular because it's my lot we'll be looking not at one station but two and as was always also mentioned in the report there's also going to be two flashing crosswalks on this and as as uh the assistant um city planner noted there's a lot going on at this intersection a lot um so the second concern is um that we have reasonable use with the existing six foot tall fences um that's true the problem with the existing six' tall fences is they do nothing to screen what what we're going to be looking at like was already stated these things are almost 9 ft at the back they're 12T at the front they are lighted 24 hours a day 24 hours a day and so in terms of you know apart from the fact that the buses are going to be running we're told every 10 minutes from 6:00 a.m. until 10: p.m. this is a significant change from when we bought our properties what we're used to um we've also already experienced change at the hands of the city because when all of us purchased these properties there was no sidewalk back there and there was there was a tree barrier between the back of our lots and France Avenue and about 12 years ago the city decided to put a sidewalk in that's fine but we lost our tree barrier and now we're going to be exposed to even more light noise you know I mean you name it any kind of pollution you can think of is going to happen um and the other thing I should just mention I guess is that um when the city sidewalk was put in we've learned as part of this survey that we had to do in order for our zoning application that in fact the sidewalk is on our property it infringes on my property at the corner by about 12 feet and that I mean I'm sorry 12 Ines and then it goes down from there so we have been working with the city engineer to try to deal with the uh encroachment and I think it's everybody's feeling that now is the time to remedy all of these issues and there's there are timing issues because Metro Transit has already started the construction on our side of the street so we've got to figure out what are we going to do about the easement that the city needs or some other sort of mitigation and what are we going to do about this fence and it's all going to happen this fall so there are some timing constraints um there's also a concern that's expressed in number three about a disjointed fence height and may introduce a aesthetic concerns I'm not aware of any aesthetic requirements in the zoning code but maybe there are um there's already a disjointed fence issue because when the city put in the sidewalk they had to do a sort of retaining raw wall fence for the four properties that are to the south of us so the fences already don't line up they can't line up because that is a retaining wall fence that actually sits on the sidewalk and we one of the reasons that all four of us were willing to do this together is because we thought as we said in our application that having one consistent fence built at the same time and then nicely adjoining that City Fence was a much better aesthetic than having one of us do something one year and one of us do something another year so we tried to address that as well um then there's a concern about the plight of the land owner is not apparently unique in this situation as I've already said the the other two spots 58 and 62 are not not the same because this the the shelters are not directly opposite each other behind my house the other issue is that we don't have good mitigation opportunities other than a fence because um to the question about how big is the fence I'm sorry how big is the sidewalk going to be so everywhere else Metro Transit has built these new stations they have ripped up the sidewalk they do not intend to rip up this sidewalk they want to leave two feet of it and the reason they want to do that is because they are rightly concerned that if they do pull up the sidewalk there will be significant erosion into our yards which is exactly what happened when the city built the sidewalk 12 years ago and especially in my yard more so in Rob some in Robins as well little less and Molly's the grade from France down is so steep I can't get anything to grow there so I've got some old trees planting new ones is not an option because I can't keep water there and I can't keep sunlight there so the fence is really the only way the only realistic way we have to mitigate the effects of the shelters and all our the brt stuff um and then the last concern I guess is that the additional three feet uh may seem to alter the essential character of the locality um I'm not exactly sure why that is because as I said there's no requirement now that the fences be uniform and these would be uniform they'd just be taller so going through the three reasons for denial um it says the proposal does not meet the standards with no circumstances unique and specific to the lot again I think it is unique and specific because we're the only place where both of the stations are directly across the street from each other the properties currently have reasonable use with six foot fences we do but it won't do anything for us because it's not going to help with how tall these shelters are are going to be um and the property sit owner situation is yet not unique again I would argue that it is um so I guess that's about all I have to say I apologize for my um mild crankiness it's just you know hard to have your mother die and hard to have the city engineer say that he's supporting this and that he thinks it should be fine and then learn at 4:00 this afternoon that it maybe wasn't going to be fine so I'm Haron thank you um when we did the survey and we realized that the city sidewalk encroached on our properties you know we had to start working with the city and jire to come up with an idea because um the city's going to either need to remove the sidewalk to erase the encroachment or we're going to have to give them an easement so we're kind of in the middle of all that negotiating and the city engineer is trying to figure out if he can remove it build some kind of a wall to um ensure that we don't have erosion so like now is the time you know it might be great to have a great policy on taller fences or but you know we're in this situation right now where we um kind of need to do something and just in aside the city engineer said you know he drives around all the time and sees taller fences just nobody knows that there's a limit in a Dina and you know he said good for you for going for variance but lots of people just build taller fences so we're trying to do the best thanks thank you no great job great job I appreciate your time and patience any questions for the applicant team sure i' just like to offer an apology that you that you have to be here today and um there are 9 foot fences in other parts of the city and um it's unfortunate that we're in the circumstances I appreciate the sensitivity of time um but just extending my apologies thank you all right so without further questions it is a public hearing so we will open it to that part of the meeting I gave instructions before but I'll repeat them again for anyone tun tuning in remotely and then we'll open it to people who are here in person so again please call 312 535 8110 enter access code 2630 7511 96 the password is 5454 so enter that too and then press star three on your keypad to get in the Q to speak we will turn it over to people who are here in person there's about a one minute lag so we'll return to the virtual queue momentarily is there anyone who is here that would like to testify about this particular matter you have three minutes to do so come to either Podium full name address we'll let you know when your time's up don't see anyone so we will turn to the virtual queue maybe just give it only 30 more seconds it's been about 30 we'll wait 30 seconds to see if anyone's in that ready to speak no one currently no one okay you the elevator music nobody has joined so I think it's safe to proceed have a motion to close the public hearing motion to close the public hearing second all those in favor say I I I so move the public hearings Clos now we'll take it back to the Planning Commission to deliberate looking for either a recommendation to approve the variance or Deny It ultimately yeah commissioner Pia um I'd like to thank everybody for their presentation I'm also very sorry for your loss I know it's a difficult time for you and I understand this is the last place you want to be um not for that reason but for many of the others that you addressed um I am in favor of this variance I think this is a very unique set of C circumstances um and the idea that you'd have a light 24 hours and a talking sign um you know right right above the fence uh adjacent to your property um is certainly a unique circumstance I do think without going through you know I have them all written down and and uh I differ from the staff in terms of of feeling that it's Unique circumstance and there are practical difficulties and there's impact of land use um I also think it's very admirable that you are coming to the Planning Commission together um as four homes and that you are trying to do this and make you know at least um have some uniformity in the change that you're looking for um I think just looking at this fence um 3 feet is not going to impact aesthetically um the street at all so I am um in favor of this variance thank you yeah commissioner today all right so thank you for being here tonight um agree with what commissioner Pia basically said and I just wanted to get into the the technical details of the variance a little bit um because I'm usually as an engineer pretty stickler for for variance requests but um this one I think is is pretty reasonable in terms of you know going through the so I'm going to step through these um the first one the variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance well we have the the fence ordinance um and here in the packet we say you know the uh purpose of the intent of the fence sight ordinance is to provide reasonable fence sight to allow privacy okay that's important and provide a consistent height standard well there's no minimum to the height to the height standard so you know I think about my yard that I have and my neighbors all have different height the different heights of fences all around and made of different materials so there's really no consistency there I think it's the ordinance is there to make sure we don't get 12ft tall fences um so I can see why we put a cap um but I think this is you know in harmony with the general purpose of of having this fence this fence site ordin uh getting down to the consistent with the comprehensive plan um this one's pretty easy you know it's our one District not really much to comment on that and then the Practical difficulties um right so the owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable Banner not permitted by the zoning ordinance I think it's pretty reasonable they want a bigger fence in order to provide some privacy from uh you know constant light and traffic um on this this stretch of stretch of road um the plight of the land owners due to circumstances unique to the property it's not necessarily unique to your property but you're being impacted in a unique way um by the changes being made and then you know the last piece here the variance of granted will not alter the essential character of the locality um again I I don't think the fence determines the essential character of the neighborhood and to have an you know a uniform fence along four different Lots made of the same material at the same height I think um certainly wouldn't alter any kind of character of the neighborhood um so you know I see all the criteria being met for variance here um I think it's a very reasonable request uh and you know as we were going through this I thought to myself you know how can we potentially look to change this ordinance um for future properties right because we as a city want to be moving towards this type of development with Rapid Transit and whatnot um so other residents will have this concern and I think it would be people would be more receptive to some of these changes if they knew that they could have um additional screening and and whatnot if they were you know if we were proposed route changes you know through next to their backyard and whatnot so yeah it's me thank you commissioner Boren F others yeah we can just go down the line I suppose um I'm on the other side of this one I'm I tend to agree more with the staff recommendation for these reasons the the fending structures that relief is that are causing light and and noise and just visual obstruction are all above 9 ft there's a 14 there's a 14t LED sign a 12T roof station and a 30ft street light um I don't think this fence is going to mitigate the effects of those uh because they're also substantially taller than the fence being proposed I think this type of improvement is relatively normal for a Transit Corridor like France and I do think that granting I I acknowledge that there's a there's a station on the opposite side of this one but I don't think that materially changes the type of a type of effect that would probably happen at the other places in the city where it's just aligned slightly differently um I do have a concern that if we were to Grant this variance we'd have a precedent where we' need to Grant it for the other proper properties where there are um also Transit stations and probably for everyone who's got a backyard or their neighbor has some structure in their backyard they don't want to look at like an Adu or anything um that is just something that's visually unappealing and so for those reasons I don't think the standards are met and would probably recommend denial although I do appreciate all the applicants coming and asking for permission it's much better to do that than um than ask asking for forgiveness later which is something we also see so thanks m f thank you for coming in tonight and thank you for your presentation your and all the work that you've put into this so far um I agree with everything um commissioner Bornstein has said I live in the Morningside area and I walk from morning side down to 15 in France um probably once a week and um I find this section with the sidewalk right next to the street and the fence the least pedestrian friendly section of that entire walk and My worry is a 9- foot fence rather than a six- foot fence is going to be more even more unfriendly um and so and so that when you're walking with a friend down that street it it just does not feel wide enough so I'm thrilled that that at the station the sidewalks going to get wider that we feel more comfortable um and I also think you had mentioned not doing trees but I think really looking into the idea of a living fence a green fence aret or something like that if you can figure out some way to do that they can grow taller than the 9ot fence and it would help muffle noise and would also be green year round cuz in this image that's up right now during the winter time there's no leaves and those things that are taller than the 9ft fence the talking sign and The Pedestrian Crossing are always going to be there and if you can get a blue spruce and some AR arbuti in there that would really help screen it and muffle the noise so I think those things are probably a better option for blocking um this distraction and it' probably be a little friendlier too as a pedestrian so I to um going to vote against this and one of this one of the reasons we have the six foot height limit is because that's the tallest we want our fences and um like you said just because someone builds a fence taller than that doesn't necessarily make it right but I do appreciate you coming um to us and and asking for this so I think it was last year um the City built a 9- foot fence on Valley View uh adjacent to the sidewalk between 69th and 70th because the neighborhood neighbors directly affected um directly behind the fence I'm sorry were impacted by the change of use of the building across the street to a more um high-intensity use and so to accommodate uh that change um and impact to the neighbor's property the city paid for and put in a 9 foot fence your neighbors to the South had a 6-ft fence and a retaining wall put in because of the drainage and struggle there um I completely agree that uh trees would be a better option here for your guys' comfort it sounds like maybe trees are not growing um I sure do wish the city would um do right by you all because if we've taken the trees down to add a sidewalk and now we're adding more to me we haven't helped mitigate those impacts on your property and I understand that this is not a city road but you're still a dino residence and so I think we what we can do to accommodate that impact is allow a 9-ft fence and um I don't know if you've talked to the um City Arborist or Forester but I'm hopeful he could have some recommendations or some be able to offer you some assistance cuz oh sure so I was a really unhappy camper when all those trees got cut down and the fence went in I mean the sidewalk went in 12 years ago I can't tell you how many gardeners experts people I have talked to and how much money I have spent on trees in that backyard that have died and part of the the problem is that there are a few large trees so I have to plant something that will tolerate shade because otherwise I have to cut down another tree to do like an arbor by Def fence which I can't do anyway because as I said the grade is so steep you can't plant right up along France because there's nothing to put the roots into so and I did talk to Luther I was actually at Weber park with my Garden Club on Monday so I had a pretty extensive conversation with Luther about a lot of things I I am confident after 12 years of trying I I cannot plant trees back there that will grow I love Arbor Vitas I love Evergreens but it's not going to happen other comments guess it leaves it to me yeah this is a tough one I think just in general we we set a standard for a maximum for some sort of consistency and just and and I'm not as worried about a precedent that's getting set I think we keep that at six feet and we leave it for one off cases like this where we look at all of the details like this is very unique even compared to the other two locations that were shown they're different in a number of ways um is this as obtrusive as it appearing in your front yard no but those lots and it being a front yard versus a backyard the grade there's a lot that's different so I appreciate that there is a standard and we're trying to keep it at 6 ft um but I'm on I'm on the I'm in favor of supporting this one for the reasons mentioned uh and and again this I I don't need to belor why the reasons that were mentioned to support I support those more than the ones for denial I see both sides for sure um but this just doesn't seem like it's going to make that big of an impact on literally anyone um except provide a lot of benefit to the homeowners and that's that's ultimately like what we're trying to balance when it comes to offence ordinance it this seems like an easy ask but any other comments welcome a motion motion to approve the request is outlined in the staff report second let's do a roll call vote sorry is there any discussion after those two okay uh commissioner podo I commissioner day I commissioner barnstein he commissioner felt nay commissioner Henman I chair Bennett I so that's four to two motion carries good luck with the rest of your approvals thank you for coming all right we have another public hearing Chris are you taking this one too okay so similar process to the previous one this is for a conditional use permit at 5208 Philbrook Lane for a stem wall with Phill pad for new home to be compliant with FEMA and with zoning variances that include a 4.09 ft setback variance from the 10t requirement for a 5.91 foot side yard setback on the west side of the property and for a 22.7% variance from the 50% maximum for exterior basement walls to be 72.7% above grade and therefore counted as a third story that might be one of the longest we've had in a while so thank you chis take it away no thank you um this request is for a conditional use permit with variances to tear down the existing home and build a new home at 4208 Philbrook Lane the property is located in the northeast corner of Philbrook you can see here it backs up to um portion of Pamela Park and where the um minha Creek overflow is this is um a photograph of the existing home that's currently there the existing home is um currently located in the floodway the original home was built in 1960 and it predates the flood insurance study conducted in the late 1970s so there's a lot of homes uh especially on the east side that were built prior to the flood study and unfortunately some of them ended up being in the flood zone this one happens to be in the floodway and you can see where the property and the home is bisected um by that Contour grading and fill are restricted in the floodway after conducting a site and structure study the homeowner established that renovation or addition to the current structure is not possible given the floodway designation and their family needs and the next slides I have are uh the proposed survey of what they're proposing to replace the existing non-conforming home that has a basement that's lower than the flood elevation the hous is in the flood zone um it is a goal of the city when whenever we have an opportunity to lift those properties out of the flood zone um to do what we can in order to accomplish that because currently um this property is in the flood way um and there is really virtually nothing that they can do to improve the property um short of trying to lift it out so this is the new home um that's being pro proposed it's uh sort of the magenta color underneath you can see the existing home uh the setbacks are the lines in yellow the existing home is non-conforming for a side yard setback on both the right and left sides uh the footprint of the home is larger um they couldn't get any closer to the front um lot line they had to maintain the front yard setback um they also were trying to maintain the sidey guard setbacks as much as possible uh what they ended up doing is shortening up the right side of the home um and with the left side of the home they would maintain the existing non-conforming setback that's currently there so the house that they're proposing is more conforming to our current code or will be um and the floods it will be taken out of the flood uh way um then the existing home so this is the setback compliance table meets front yard setback um again they're increasing the proposed um side yard setback on the right side the left side they're going to just match the existing non-conforming setback um they're well within the setback for rear lot line they can't go any further back it just based on fact that there is floodway behind it the building height is lower than the um required or city standard um that they could go up to um and that's measured from existing grade so um when I talk about the two and a half story piece that's the um maximum number of stories this house has to be considered a three-story home because more than 50% of that basement level is exposed so it's considered a three-story home so they're trying to get a variance from that because they can't move any fill around because of the flood zone um however if you're measuring it according to the building height requirement it's lower than the maximum they could be so whether they had a basement below or not they're still not pushing it up any higher than what the maximum would be allowed they're well within the structure and impervious Service uh coverage requirements this is the proposed home in context with the proposed conceptual floodway boundary so it would be pulled out of the flood zone um and they would be putting the new home on fill and they will have a stem wall so the conditional use permit is actually to um allow the fill and the stem wall um on the property so a bit of background of the design and location um um that was determined to be possible after extensive coordination with our engineering department the DNR and the Watershed district and so those are the local controls that are looking at this project in order for them to actually build it they will have to get a letter of map Amendment through FEMA so if they can get all of the local approvals then they'd have to request a letter letter of map um revision through FEMA um and there is no guarantee that they will necessarily approve that um but these are the first steps in order to achieve bringing the house up um out of the flood zone even with achieving those approvals there is no guarantee a FEMA will approve the project um this property is a third generation owned property that has always been held in the family the owners are invested um and have PL and have spent a lot of time and upfront resources for just the possibility to rebuild on the lot so here is the lower level of the pro of the plan um main floor plan second floor plan and then the home um in elevation and you can see that the overall height is lower than the maximum that would be allowed even given the fact that you have um some exposed basement wall area and then the front elevation and the home in context with some of the neighboring homes so regarding the conditional use permit um it does not have an un have an undue adverse impact on government facilities utility services or existing or proposed improvements the proposed project is located within an established neighborhood and will be rebuilding on a former home site with pre-existing governmental facilities use utilities and services so there will be no impact um in addition to the um what was already existing will it generate traffic within the capacity of the street serving the property yes there will be no change to that um does not have an undue adverse impact on public health safety or welfare um again it's a rebuild one uh house one house for one house staff does not believe the project will have any adverse impact on public health safety or welfare it will not impede the normal or orderly development or Improvement of other properties in the vicinity staff believes the proposed new home will enhance the property and will fit the fit well within the site the proposed use is allowed in the R1 zoning District the proposed project does not impede any normal or orderly development or Improvement of surrounding property it conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located as imposed by this section the proposed project has been designed to satisfy all city code Provisions with the exception of the variances that are required and those are all based on the existing conditions that are currently on site um and also subject to the approval of FEMA is it consistent with the comprehensive plan no amendment is needed um from the comprehensive plan um the house is permitted in the R1 Sony District um Minnesota state statutes um requires the following conditions must be satisi satisfied affirmatively for the variances that are being requested will it leave practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use the left side yard setback variance of 4.09 Ft from the 10 foot requirement for a 5.91 ft sidee your setback at the front South corner of the home matches the existing non-conforming sidee setback of the original home and they have very limited opportunity in order to fit a home on the lot given uh the flood zone constraints the new home will maintain existing non-conforming setback on the right side while shifting the footprint to adhere to the current setback requirements on the left side the applicant has indicated multiple scenarios were studied um and while the home width could be reduced or the front yard setback increased this would increase the amount of fill and impact in the floodway neighboring home side yard setbacks are consistent also with the 5- foot side yard setback throughout the throughout the block most most of the homes were built in the 60s and they had um similar setbacks as the existing house does will it correct or extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other properties in the vicinity the floodway designation is an extraordinary circumstance affecting and driving all aspects of the Home Design the proposed 4.09 foot setback variance is reasonable the property has extraordinary circumstances given the LI limited opportunities and the base is limited in ability to comply with the zoning ordinance while complying with the flood plane ordinance you can't put that basement any lower it actually had to be raised up 2 feet above the flood elevation there are circumstances that are unique to the property not common to similarly zone property that are not self-created the circumstances related to the proposed project in both requested variances are unique to the property lot given the lot configuration flood zone elevations and impacts that are specific and unique to the site that are not like um other similarly zon properties will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood um the granting the variances will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood that subject property is currently used for a single dwelling unit it will continue to be used for that the size location and scale of the proposed structure is similar to other existing buildings in the neighborhood and the location of the structure was chosen to comply with um the Fe of flood plane ordinance staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit request and for the 4.09 Ft sitb back variance um and for the exterior basement walls uh to be more than 50% above uh grade to construct a new home at 4208 Philbrook approval is subject to the following findings the proposed project meets the conditional use permit standards of chapter 36 as I indicated previously the proposed project meets the criteria of the minnesot Minnesota state statutes in the zoning ordinance to Grant both variances requested the property is currently located in a FEMA flood plane designation of floodway it is a goal of the city to remove structures from the flood zone represented with the opportunity this proposal will achieve that goal the project presents opportunity to correct flood plane designation which is a practical difficulty that is unique and extraordinary um and is a circumstance of the property the proposed project will not alter the essential care character of the neighborhood any approval is subject to the following conditions the construction plans must be consistent with the proposed survey and plans date stamped August 15 2024 compliance with all the conditions outlined in the city Engineers memo dated September 16th 20 excuse me 2024 ad excuse me administrate of exception to the first floor requirement excuse me a successful letter of map revision or lar from Fina FMA which moves the floodway designation demonstrated no increase in or transfer in flood risk to others certified by a licensed engineer uh proposed stem wall must be certified by a licensed structural engineer the permit issued by the minw Creek Watershed district and an elevation certificate will be required before issuing a certificate of occup upon uh the building completion um also compliance with the tree protection ordinance in accordance with the city Forester with that I will stop and answer any questions you have and um we do have the homeowners and the representative here um as well all right thank you Chris mouthful questions for Chris Hanan um it's contagious um I'm I have a couple of questions for you Chris sorry and maybe I just wasn't following the home can't be remodeled in its current shell why because if you have a u existing non-conforming structure in the floodway it's considered an obstruction so you're limited to 50% of the value of the structure not the entire property and most of the value is in the lot um in order to make any sort of improvements and to some degree just um code improvements like new windows that sort of thing um and that the goal of that I believe is that FEMA doesn't want to continually have these non-conforming properties have to make claims after and they've continually been improved over time so their value has increased um so so and is that like a cumulative running total so if you're pulling permits to redo your kitchen for 80 and then you do your windows for 40 like does it does accumulate but it can reset I have yes I have Jessica Wilson who is our water resource manager with the engineering department and she is very well versed in that did I get any of that right you're doing great Chris you're doing so great um just to kind of like the spirit of the zoning code with you know when you have a building that's in the floodway you can't make a change to the envelope of the structure so it's not even just a a horizontal expansion you can't expand vertically either and then uh so it's not they're not one and the same as kind of two things if you're in the flood way there's that no expansion of the envelope and then there's also that substantial Improvement limit 50% of the building value and the whole purpose of that is to kind of allow a property owner to to maintain and stay in that home over time but the idea is that on a on a generational time frame that these houses get to a conforming state so I think it's meant to make it then you kind of make that calculation which these owners have done to say you know we're not going to have the home that we need here and so then you you reconstruct it and it's elevated so and in this circumstance they're going to bring it pretty close to conforming but then they still have to get this letter of map revision yep so they've got a the the floodway designation we will not permit a new home in a floodway um but I think what's unique here is that floodway designation doesn't seem to be true it seems like more of a a modeling error than a real floodway risk there and so that's why we're helping kind of uh them navigate this process of getting that kind of that error fixed with FEMA and because it's a a map that we update into the adopt into zoning code we have to use that map as it is so they're going to have to go through this formal revision process through FEMA update it in that zoning code before we can permit a building in a uh on this slot because of the current floodway but isn't the minihaha Creek Watershed districts s come up with very similar numbers to FEMA or they off the same so there's kind of two there's the flood plane that's like where the still water is going to be when you're experiencing that Peak event and then the floodway designation is that area where you know the velocity of water is rushing through so think of like a river or a creek where water is really moving through I don't think that's going to be the case for this particular property because they're actually pretty far removed from the creek proper but they will still have flood exposure uh so they're in the flood plane and I I think actually you know that's not going to change the um mini haa Creek Watershed District actually has more modern uh elevation model and predicts that it's probably actually going to go up a little bit uh if they have more modern information than FEMA which is very very old data um and then the floodway designation is kind of a a separate additional layer that's independent of that flood plane um but I think what H what you see and I have a map here if I could maybe share it um Lauren are you able to uh display something if I put it on the mat here I think that's great that looks great thank you um so I think what happened was when uh the modelers were putting together you know what's the elevation going to be along minihaha Creek uh there's this huge story area this flood plane area actually extends all the way down to Pamela Park and then they just kind of broad stroke called all of it flood way uh so that in their model they could uh account for that storage this shape here that appears on the flood insurance rate maps and the flood insurance study has not changed in a really long time um but what has changed with the maps that were updated in 2016 is we essentially put um a digital image behind it so now you can see that it actually crosses over the structure which is problematic for permiting there so I think it's just a combination of um just some course modeling that makes it really problematic for this house uh for this parcel but I don't think this is an actual floodway designation I think it was the modelers just kind of called this entire area which reaches all the way down to Pamela Park just broad brush stroke said this is all going to be floodway for that model uh calibration have many uh letters of map provision been submitted uh from ADV residents and have we had generally good success with getting those designations altered there will be the first I think it's very to for uh to come from um like a um residential property owner typically it's something that happens on a Community scale or there's a big project the one that is in my mind from in the miniot Creek Watershed district is when Methodist Hospital did a huge project and then they remapped a whole panel and that's what they're going to propose to do here this is the only path they have with FEMA we've kind of exhausted all the other uh potential revision pathways through FEMA that are more just based on um an error in uh the elevation or in the the topography uh this letter of map revision process where they have to revise an entire panel is really the only process available and they can't go get that unless we approve a plan they could I think they were looking for some assurance that a new house could be built here before they go on that Journey which is going to be long and expensive so um when I've talked to other um people who have helped do this on behalf of a community or a you know property owner that's not a residential property owner um we're talking five figures um budget and one or two years long process with FEMA where you're kind of going back and forth on the modeling and the you know your Consulting Engineers are talking with FEMA Engineers as you try to resolve uh this model update so I think um before they went on that process they wanted to know you know can we even build the house we're thinking of before before we go down that path how many houses would be impacted by the remodeling that they go for uh for the letter of maper vision y um I don't remember exactly where the boundary of this panel is but like the house just to the South here looks like it might get caught up in the exact same thing yep these two directly south would be in that same exact position and I think there's you know I can count on my on one hand the others in the entire community that are in the same position where that floodway designation probably was just kind of a broad brush stroke rather than a real measure a real indication of actual risk there's definitely flood exposure here but not that flood way of like the velocity of water rushing by this property so I think it's still appropriate that elevation standard because there's going to be exposure but the floodway designation seems to not be real got it and um okay I think that's all for now thank you any other questions for staff no all right so I guess we'll give an opportunity to the applicant team if they'd like to provide their own presentation or just stand for questions either or both works you um I'm Heather monum I'm 2 295 saddle book Circle in minetonka and I'm an architect who's been working with the Mike and Courtney who are here this evening for several years now to try to kind of see it started with kind of seeing how we could remodel the home and then kind of went down this road here and uh Chris did a great job of presenting the unique challenges of this site and so I thank staff for their guidance and their work on this um so I'll try to be really brief because they kind of covered it all um but I wanted to at least introduce myself and then allow you guys to ask any questions if you may have any as Chris kind of covered earlier what we're trying to do um is elevate as well as reduce the footprint we're actually um reducing the impervious surface coverage on this site in an effort to um pull out of that floodway zone um this is just a quick look these aren't exact but it's kind of just giving you an idea of the the character of the neighborhood and kind of the respect were paying to the the sidey guard setbacks there and trying to um fit in with the neighborhood while still conforming to today's ordinances um the building elevations kind of just generally show the grades that we planned the garage is going to come in um where the existing homes garage is today kind of at the level of the other homes in the neighborhood and then you see we're lifting that main level up to adhere to that lowest floor elevation requirement um you can see we're we're we're making efforts to kind of keep that roof structure a little bit lower um as well as you know those floor to floor Heights as well too to try to be respectful of the height and again fit in with the homes in the neighborhood you know as far as the um 50% basement coverage you know we could try to bring in some additional fill but you're really working against yourself as you're trying to pull out of that floodway and my my concern is that you're impacting them the other neighborhoods while the other neighbors while kind of creating a steep slope on the side there this just kind of quickly chose the main level versus where we're going to need to lift up to on our plan for the elevation in order to adhere to that um that's kind of all I have um just kind of going to reiterate that all of the moves and kind of ask this evening are based on the efforts to pull out of that that flood way um and you know along with the city's kind of goal of removing that value that property from that risk as well too so thank you for your time and I'm here if you have any questions thank you any questions I don't see any thank you all right well this is a public hearing so we'll go through the same drill I will read off how those who might be tuning in remotely can participate and testify please call 312 535 8110 enter access code 2630 751 1196 then enter the password 5454 and press star three on your keypad to get in the Q to speak while you do that there's about a minute lag so we'll give an opportunity first for those who might be here in person that would like to testify you have three minutes to do so you can choose either Podium State your full name address it will turn green to indicate you got 3 minutes and red when your time's up anyone here that would like to testify come on forward my name is Mary Engle 4201 Philbrook Lane and and we have been there for 32 years and we've known this generational family they were the very first people in the neighborhood who came with a plate of chocolate chip cookies and I know this family their character their commitment to the environment and to the health and safety of the community and I can't wait for them to be my neighbors again the house has been empty for some time which has been kind of sad but I see the family there often and I appreciate the hard hard work that they are doing I know that they will be a blessing to the neighborhood and to the city of udina that's all I have to say thank you very much appreciate the kind words anyone else I'd like to say yeah come forward I just have a couple of questions this is uh this isn't a question and answer thing so if you have questions or like comments like you have three minutes to do that and then we will kind of deliberate over those and maybe we can pose those questions to City staff okay yeah I live at 56 45 Wood Crest Drive so I live behind the Bush's house my question is what's going to happen to the pool right now it is green and it's been that way for two years um and I also would like to know what's going to happen to the backyard because the backyard is all overgrown and hasn't been taken care of so those are my questions thank you anyone else anyone else who's here that like to provide testimony see none is there anyone in the queue there's not so it's safe to close a public hearing I'd welcome a motion to do so motion to close the public hearing second all those in favor say I I public hearings close thank you for coming and testifying um I guess on that note I if we have questions I guess I would have a question about what is current kind of plans and maintenance for the future backyard currently in the future if you'd like to share currently they are the Property Owners so they're going to be maintaining the the yard and the site um and you know as you know things have kind of been a little bit of leeway for them in the interim um but the plan for the yard in the future is there would be landscaping and that the pool would remain and be taken care of as well too so thank you okay all right this is our time to deliberate any comments people have or further questions even a motion uh I think this one's pretty straightforward I feel like everybody else probably feels the same way but I can certainly objective uh feel differently um but I mean planner AER went through all the different you know the conditional use permit the variance requirement everything else I think the conditions here are appropriate um this seems like an extremely painful process so I I can't say I empathize but I sympathize for you and I appreciate you guys being here tonight and going through all this um and wish you the best of luck any other comments yeah Comm hman I um didn't think it was quite as straightforward um I think my my struggle is a little bit if and maybe if the flood zone wasn't a part of this conversation I think we have previously had conver um discussions about letting uh existing um variances not be put into the new dwelling when you do a whole Remodel and here we are going to go from a single story to a twostory which is I guess I disagree a little bit it's a it's a neighborhood full of Ramblers um so so for the adjacent Property Owners it is a it is a significant difference to have somebody um closer and higher up um but I'm deeply sympathetic to the situation with the flood zone and it and I'm also sort of just wrapping my head around the fact that functionally we can't meet any of our sustainability goals or affordable housing preservation goals or anything that somehow FEMA has basically rendered some existing lots unbuildable and unimprovable to a large extent and I'm just so I I really appreciate all of that explanation I did not fully understand that and I'm just kind of processing that um but it feels like a no win situation in many ways thank you for channeling commissioner Miranda um the previous one um where there was the patio that wanted to be put in the floodway the house um had been given a variance and it had been raised up that whole kind of basement scenario was for that house was also because of the floodway so I think we've given variances for houses but not for um Hardscape I was thinking about the one where they were keeping the basement and then they ended up first floor off and we let them keep the foundation footprint that was the one in my mind where it was a lot of conversation about that that was the right way byard variant I don't think there is flooding no no there wasn't okay okay and th those are my comments any other comments or proposed motions there thought it was thoroughly treated in the staff report and commend the staff for working with the property owner to address the unique circumstances present in this case so for those reasons I would support a motion to approve for the reasons already outlined a motion um for the city council to approve of cup subject to staff findings and conditions have a second all those in favor say I I I I opposed nay motion carries congratulations good luck on your next steps all right so that concludes the public hearing portion of tonight's agenda and we move on to our reports and recommendations we have resolution b249 findings that the proposed 72nd in France number three Tiff plan conforms to the general plans for development and Redevelopment of the city as a whole [Music] uh economic development manager bill neindorf is here to present bill I don't know if you were present for kind of the beginning of this meeting where we were approving the agenda but there was conversations of of you know potentially striking this from the agenda as it feels like it's out of our purview uh Carrie kind of provided some rationale as to the timing of the Tiff application um and the development plans and that we are obligated by state law essentially to make this I mean basically declaration or finding could you kind of explain some background to that and then hopefully that simplifies and reduces the amount of conversations that typically happen around when we have to approve this just use this I guess some context for maybe residents tuning in um because there's none here present but typically when we have larger developments that ultimately pursue Tiff it's not necessarily part of those discussions early on for a variety of reasons and sometimes residents Commissioners whoever feels slighted by it then that getting played later but that's typical in the process um and that's really not that's not our purview on the Planning Commission anything to do with Tiff if that's a reason for or against a development that is beyond ours that's City Council Grounds but if you could kind of fill in the blanks with some of that and explain some of the context of why we need to do this sure happy to um uh and I think a lot of these questions will be answered as I go through my presentation um which was in your packet uh as well uh but the uh the conversation here tonight and the content of this resolution um does pertain to the use of tax increment financing as a financing tool um uh we're here this night this evening because the Minnesota state statutes says that the Planning Commission should make a determination about the plan the outcome not about the budget not about interest rates not about financial performance not about Equity or debt but about the plan that's part of this overall financing Arrangement so that that's why we're here this evening um uh I've done these presentations and requests here for several years every single time there's questions that come up so that's that's why I'm here tonight to answer those um so I think I'll walk through the presentation if that's the most appropriate then we'll get to the we'll get to the to the discussion I think that'd be fine and I know there's discussion about potential conflicts of interest with who's approving you know authoring something in favor of something else I think we can save that discussion till when we deliberate um but yeah that'd be great thank you Bill thing present away and when I present I will go through some of those matters in a little bit more detail that uh to respond to some of those inquiries let's see my equipment is different than than than I'm used to uh I didn't introduce myself uh I'm Bill Noor I'm the city of ad's economic development manager um I work in our community development department uh under carry and uh get involved in a lot of the financing programs in IND to help bring that new in investment into town um uh so the resolution tonight is b249 and ultimately we are seeking uh the planning commission's opinion as to whether or not the project that's embodied in these documents uh complies with the general plans for development and Redevelopment as applied in the city viina in non-legally speak that means is the project uh aligned with our comprehensive plan so in the presentation I'll go through a little bit of the background I'll talk a little bit about process why we're here how how your role tonight fits into the bigger bigger effort I'll walk through the proposed uh Tiff plan with specific focus on the outcomes not on the financing not on debt equity and everything else but about the outcomes I'll do a summary of our staff findings that were in the report that was attached in your packet and then finally a recommendation um so tax increment financing it's a Public Finance tool that's used in Minnesota as well as 40 eight of the other states uh uh in the US uh 49 states in total use Tiff some call it different things but it's all basically the same uh this evening we're uh we're pursuing the creation of a new Tiff District to support the investment and the Redevelopment uh by The Enclave companies at 7235 France Avenue the site that's currently occupied by the Macy's Furniture Store um and one of the steps in this process is to get your opinion from the Planning Commission commission as to uh and that's the words here on the screen in green whether the Tiff plan con conforms to the general plans for development and Redevelopment of the city as a whole a very confusing statement but that's a statement that's in Minnesota statute that we have to reply to um so there's a number of different plans that apply in the city of Adina as you are well aware um uh first and foremost I think is our 2040 comprehensive plan um that includes I think we're well over a thousand and some pages it includes many small area plans sustainability plans bike plans pedestrian plans lots of different um documents are embodied in the comprehensive plan specifically to this project we're looking at the Southdale plan the greater Southdale plan because that's the location that we're in another plan that you may not be as familiar with is the southeast Adina Redevelopment project area and plan that document was first written in 1974 um hand typed on somebody's typewriter uh in in quintuplet with with u uh with a copy paper to get it done uh and then revised every few years up to the present day so those are the three overarching plans that apply to this particular site and I've pulled just a few excerpts from some of them uh they go back to the community visioning that led to our comprehensive plan uh and a lot of these Vision uh uh Pursuits are encouraging VI liany in our neighborhoods building mixed use nodes uh that have multimodal transportation options where you can live and work and shop and eat and walk and play all at the same site or in a way that allows you to walk from one site to the next uh to do those things uh creating jobs attracting jobs uh having a a mind toward sustainability um uh promotion of energy efficient resources um and looking at the impact to our over overall environment those are all types of goals that are embodied in a lot of these plans and the site in in specific that we're looking at tonight the subject of the document that was all that's in front of us is the uh the Macy Furniture site um so right there on France Avenue between 72nd and Gallagher going into the history of that um I pulled up an old photo um from the uh early 1950s um see I don't know if this will show up very well but here's here's France Avenue um this is one Gravel Pit this is another Gravel Pit this is a third and fourth Gravel Pit here's the France Avenue dump a landscape that we might not recognize today but that was the history at least for the last 100 years of that land eventually it grew into neighborhoods into shopping centers grocery stores uh Parks malls and everything else and in 1977 the Dayton company built a furniture store they were one of the first private parties that um were able to redevelop uh the gravel the Gravel Pit as that uh uh wore down um and they open their home store eventually Macy's purchased Dayton after many Acquisitions and that's where we are today um so if you're out on the site today you'll recognize an 8 acre uh parcel uh mostly pavement couple trees along the edge uh and a large uh 2 acre footprint of a building that is um an earth shelter building uh kind of looks like a bunker with very few Windows um and not in the best of condition uh and when I say that I'm referring to the property not to the business that's successfully operating on that property um so I I I will try not to refer to this as the Macy's site because the proposal here isn't really about Macy's or about furniture it's about the future so we talked a little bit about Tiff and there's um there's many steps in this process I won't go through all of them um but this slide breaks it into three primary steps the first step is creating this District creating this financial tool that the city council can use uh there's a tiff plan that was in your packet uh and it talks about budgets and terms and qualifications and lots of other things but for the Planning Commission you're you're asked to share your expertise as to the scope of that project and the outcome um so we've already submitted the documentation to to the school district to henin County uh in the future we'll have a public hearing it'll go to the city council it'll go to the H so your input tonight is is really focus just on the outcome uh of the site uh once we get through the of creating a tiff District then it goes further down the process uh where the Planning Commission commission does not have a role um most of your role was early just getting us to this point in re rezoning the project approving the site plans and all those types of things um but there are future steps um that you will hear along the way um but those are all by the board the HRA board and our city council so the Tiff plan that's in your packet was prepared uh by Ellers and Associates they are the uh independent Public Finance company that the city of Adina uses um uh the Adina School District also uses that same firm as does the Richfield and Hopkins school district um so they have been uh serving the overall Community for for many decades and this plan um has lots of financial background and I know that gets confusing uh what we're really here to talk tonight tonight about is appendix e the actual result of this Tiff plan if you look at appendix e you'll notice two things um one that uh when at the time this was uploaded to your packet it showed showed the old version of the site plan um last week the city council approved the new version which looks very like very much like the old version with a couple little um adjustments um so just know that as this progress say the final version of the Tiff plan will include the final documents that were approved by the city council um but that plan is is uh is the same that was recommended by by this body back in May uh for uh for approval it was then approved by the city council on a preliminary basis back in June and they just secured their uh final approvals about a week ago um one additional thing to note uh the Tiff plan also potentially enables uh a funding mechanism for that France Avenue pedestrian Crossing is it an underpass is it a bridge is it a tunnel we're still going to figure that out um but this Tiff plan is uh essentially sets up a financing mechanism where if that project wants to go forward if that that passes muster and goes through the due diligence and everything else this is a this is a mechanism for the city council to finance that project I'll include just a couple uh renderings here just to refresh your memories uh this is PUD number 25 uh this is a copy of the final site plan that was approved uh last week uh it's pretty much the same as it was in June uh the the some of the on-site parking switched from head- in parking to parallel parking the public art got changed a little bit the dog area got changed a little bit sidewalks got twisted around a little bit um uh a few changes to the Building architecture and actually reducing the mass of the building in response to some concerns by the neighbors um but that's the final site plan uh updated renderings look should look very familiar to you uh the final rendering from looking to the Northwest and these are a few renderings of that future pedestrian Crossing and these might look new to you this is a concept that's just in its infancy um uh that started the conversation started with the HRA board uh because ultimately uh to finance this we need to figure out how to finance it then we have to figure out if it's something we actually want to build and and and uh and pursue so these are a couple renderings um just as a reference point in the document or actually in the report I did go through staff findings where we looked into each of these um applicable plans in more detail the the Redevelopment plan from 1974 and to 2012 and then to the present um we went through the comprehensive plan looking at how that area is guided um went through each of the key sections of the comprehensive plan as far as some of the land use goals housing goals economic goals we looked at the greater Southdale plan um looking at many of the goals there of subdividing these Big Lots into smaller Lots um the street Room concept incorporating Transit pedestrian and bicycle facilities pursuing shared parking and of course I'm happy to answer any questions about those but uh in summary um after looking at the plans that the city has adopted comprehensive plan Etc uh it's it's uh our finding and our recommendation that that this body affirm that those plans are consistent uh with the overall comprehensive plan um and the reason that I'm asking and I probably should have said this in the beginning not every Community is like a Dina there's some communities where you might have an independent uh Eda or H that doesn't think along the same lines as the Planning Commission they might bring forward a plan that meets someone else's purpose but might actually violate the comp plan in a Dina um since our HRA board is well aligned with our uh city council who's generally well aligned with our Planning Commission who's generally well aligned with our school districts um we tend to work much more cooperatively with one another to avoid those surprises but yet state law still asks that we come here tonight and have you affirm something that you've already affirmed back in May so it does seem kind of redundant probably should have opened with that now that I say it um uh but I think I touched on most of the issues if there's anything else please let me know um but certainly the in your packet there's a copy of resolution that summarizes these findings summarizes the reason we're here and what your what your uh uh what your uh findings will be used for and with that I'll turn it back to you thank you Bill any questions comments anything for Bill yeah just got a quick quick one right out of the gate about the France Avenue pedestrian Crossing project so so we so what the ask of us tonight is to find that that Concept in addition to the Macy's Redevelopment project that already is also consistent with the general plans governing development is that right that's how would you articulate that yeah that's a good question I um that's a really good question that I don't have an answer for the only reason I asked is because you said them if you know we're going through this process and maybe I can ask it a little differently or you we can just have a conversation about it um but I was I was kind of like paying more attention when you said we'll do this step and then you know this approval is one step along the way to using Tiff financing to build The Pedestrian Crossing and it sort of seemed like you know if we say yes we're saying yeah the Macy's projects consist with the development plans that we talked about but also this future pedestrian Crossing would be consistent with those and so I'm just trying to understand if that's what we'd be saying by saying yes and the reason I'm asking is because you know we've talked about this pedestrian crossing a fair amount on this body I think what people have said is uh we've never seen any concept for it it's been discussed in other you know venues but not really here when it has been discussed here folks have actually had concerns about what whether that Crossing would be consistent not the project um but whether the crossing would be consistent with the development plans and more anything beyond that whether it would actually degrade and and and devalue some of the products that are being built around this area and make them less consistent with the plans that you know we're all familiar with the projects that have already been improved so that's I'm just letting you know like The Pedestrian Crossing is a little bit of an issue and I just want more clarity about about what a yes or a no would mean with respect to that aspect of this whole project because if it would mean yes we're finding that it's consistent I think some folks here might want to know a little bit more about what that concept might look like so we can do more diligence and evaluate whether it is or isn't consistent with those other planning documents you mentioned so that's the context behind the question I think others would probably raise the same thing and I just wanted to give you an opportunity to just talk a little bit more about that so we're a little more educated a with the likelihood too I think in addition to your question the likelihood yes so I think just looking historically back to other Tiff plan approvals a future concept like that isn't part of this it it's not part of this so and that that's what we'd have to separate so like typically you don't know what Tiff could then get used for in the future but like the monies that are gained from Tiff funding can be used for certain things and I see this as an example of what it could be used for not this is what it's going to be used for and maybe that's different with this one compared to previous ones but that previously like you wouldn't know like there usually isn't something on the table does it I don't think it's I I don't know that I saw that one way or the other in the materials I'd have have to go back and look at them again I was just responding to to your presentation where I I thought I heard you say if we you know vote Yes then you know we don't have another say as as to whether this pedestrian Crossing conforms to the development plans our role is done and some other body could just decide to use Tiff Tiff financing to build that project too but so I don't I'm more just asking questions than having a strong opinion right no very fair well this was presented to the HRA was the bridge the tunnel part of the tip proposal like explicitly first time you first time you brought this to the H I'm sorry could you the tunnel was the tunnel and explicit part of the Tiff ask when you we presented this to the H uh no it was not was not okay but it is our intent I mean is it our intent to use the Tiff funds from this this Tiff plan for The Pedestrian Crossing so there were a variety of questions would you like me to answer some of those okay all right um so the the Tiff plan that's in front of you includes appendix e which describes the plan that was approved for the 7235 site it also includes a paragraph a short paragraph about public improvements that would pursue pedestrian Crossing across France Avenue so so far the preliminary looks in that is very preliminary we've looked at a tunnel under we've looked at a bridge over we've looked at an improved um atg grade uh crosswalk essentially uh looking looking at a number of different things um uh the underpass version seems to be the most likely of those three options um that being said How likely is it standing here tonight I have no idea right now it's I would lump it in the category of an interesting idea that's worth exploring to see if we should actually do something there um I do know that with the redevelop on the west side of the street and the Redevelopment on the east side of the street if we ever want to make a better connection between those neighborhoods this is a great location and a great time to do it um the history of this project dates back to 2007 uh with the Urban Design plan that um that founded the ad prominade the prominade park uh where they recommended um actually an overhead Bridge be constructed at that time um right at the corner of 72nd um in France that bridge never got funded um for a number of different reasons um but yet that laid the groundwork for gosh wouldn't it be better if we if we could cross the street without screwing across 8 to 10 Lan of traffic um so that's a little bit about the history of it but as far as likelihood timing what it looks like is it over is it under is it nothing I mean nothing is definitely an option um but we know that um bold projects like this like an underpass require financing um tax increment financing is set up and used for public infrastructure improvements whether it's under over or at grade um and so in the Tiff plan we wanted to include public infrastructure improvements as an eligible expense just frankly like we do for every one of our Tiff districts the Eden Wilson um all the road workor around around city hall is actually funded by that project um at Grand View all the road work that we did there a few years ago uh was funded by the um by the taxes from the avador property that were that was constructed there so this it's it's language that's put in in in every Tiff plan but in this case we actually put an illustration because we had one um as far as the process to actually approve any kind of public infrastructure Improvement I don't know if the Planning Commission has a role um I mean it would go through the city council through the Transportation Commission through staff um through the CP um I I don't know if it goes through Planning Commission for a public infrastructure project um uh so that's a little bit about the background and where where we are I think I hit most of your questions in that what role did lhp play or has they played in this pedestrian Crossing experim or exploration uh sure so lhb is a uh full service multi-disciplinary firm um based in either duth or Minneapolis um so they have Architects Engineers planners landscapers um roadway Engineers civil engineers building engineers um so for this project for the underpass uh we initially worked with a civil engineering firm and um uh they were responsive to our questions um but did not apply the type of creativity that we're really seeking here um and so I wanted to switch firms that could app could apply not just an engineering perspective but also to integrate that planning and that social perspective um and so we switched to lhb so they initially did just some initial visioning um about a year ago um in 2023 just to see what might this looked like and what other precedents was there around the world around the country um and then earlier this year we did sign a contract with lhb to actually pursue this a little bit further and and start doing some con Cal engineering because fundamentally we there's some big big questions um especially regarding do we go under or do we go over and a lot of that has regards with the it has to do with the water table with the elevations of the storm water with the elevations of the building the first floor how does that line up um and so the HR signed a contract with lhb I believe in February to do some of that initial work and that work is about 80% complete at this point so would it be fair to say lhb has a vested interest in seeing this pedestrian Crossing being built uh no I don't think that would be a fair statement would they be so they would give you the concept but they wouldn't be awarded any further contract to help design it Beyond or in in the upcoming months once Tiff is approved I don't know that at this point the council has the city council has urged um I think at the last city council meeting they they wanted to um get something on paper that that documents that they want to pursue this concept further um they did not specify that we use one company or the other to do that um uh and if this does turn into a real engineering project I presume we'd go out to bid I mean at this point we're just doing that preliminary exploration um if this turns into a real project I mean that design contract will be pretty large and we typically go up for bid for the big ones so I I don't know what the future holds yeah commissioner Padia thank you Bill um I just have one question uh kind of a 50,000 foot level um public benefit should be outcome the outcome of a tiff project correct uh that's how that's how our din policy is written that's not necessarily how state law is written okay but that's the intention in the city um so and then I want to go ahead and confirm that the din City Schools will not get $1 of anything in this project uh that's not correct at all okay so um I know this this is not this project is not in the D city school district oh okay you threw me on that one um so you asked will the Adina City Schools get a dollar from this project get get a benefit I I'm I'm looking for the public benefit that's to the dino City Schools sure um so this site the 7235 site is in the Richfield School District correct right um so the property taxes both today and in the future from this site will directly benefit the Richfield School District um not the Adina School District um that's the property taxes uh in August we we brought Elders in to do a joint presentation to the H board and the school folks um and they reminded us that the property taxes are just a small portion of the funding for a school most of the school funding comes from the pupils per student in the seats from the state from the state correct so the with open enrollments right now about 18 to 20% of the seats in ad schools are actually open enrolled from elsewhere including Richfield so um theoretically which is kind of where we're going I guess um um if a if a pupil lives on this site and eventually go chooses to opt into the Adina schools versus the Richfield schools they would bring the state funding that goes along with that pupil but there's a lot of hypotheticals in those assumption so I always wish there was like an easy yes or no answer in there okay it seems to me though that the the public benefit you'd have to look at greater than just the Edina area in order to see the public benefit to the schools from this from the Tiff funding when we look at the use of Tiff I I need to look at all of the school districts that serve a Dina so Hopkins serves a Dina Richfield serves serves a Dina and a Dina School serve a Dina so I um our with a tax increment plan we look specifically at the tax District that has jurisdiction there so that's why in the Tiff plan if you wanted to get into that but again we're not asking you to get into that because that's a financing type question you'll find language about the Richfield schools not about the din schools I thank you commissioner F I just wanted to respond to that a little bit I mean somewhere along the way just someone decided to Exile ize a portion of Southeast Adina into the Richfield School District rather than Adina and and I don't think that um this project is still in a Dina and um you know we can go through it in in our in our personal but the public benefit is is also in the way the project conforms to the comprehensive plan um and so the fact that this area has been excised into the Richfield School District um you know I think I think that was history that happened a long time um I don't know when it happened do you know Carrie I don't know for certain but I've heard over the years that it was based on bus routes and where bus drivers were willing to go years and years and decades ago I know our city manager has tried to adjust some of those boundaries as I think we've talked about before there's an apartment building where on one side of the hallway you go to A din schools on the other side you go to Richfield and just trying to reconcile some of those things and to no avail at this point but yes they could be moved in the future other questions okay I have a couple glad commissioner borene brought up the fact that that was that I mean I just read appendix e it is there is a paragraph about it in there and that I don't know that seems like we ought to Omit that I I don't know at the very end of appendix e there's a paragraph about the potential pedestrian Crossing and Bill I guess tied to that if that weren't mentioned in there I mean does that change anything because I know there's restricted uses for Tiff typically either depending on like Geographic bound iies Andor like specific use of funds and money so like how I read that is like it seems almost inappropriate to even have that in there like why not just omit it um or if it's in there is that now giving this extra right to use these Tiff funds that otherwise wouldn't happen if we didn't have that in there and why I want to be careful with words is one of the previous developments it was because of like an ant instead of an or we pretty much had to let them not put a restaurant on the main floor you know because of how one word got written so to commissioner boren's point like I I definitely do want to understand it by adding that paragraph are we allowing this potential for something that would otherwise be restricted well can I add to that because I know that in in some Tiff districts um Southdale pool Tiff District right you could use money on uh from the pool in different Parcels I wondered by having this Tiff District over here and you know whether or not there's a TI Tiff District on the other side of France that the lack of a broader um geog geographic area would that be further problematic for the cost for if the bridge ever were to happen if I could respond to your question first um uh so no I don't think that it would be problematic um and then in regards to the decision whether or not to fund some type of public infrastructure whether it goes under over at grade or nothing um that decision would still be made by the city council um and the general the general language in the Tiff plan references is public infrastructure which could include anything that I just described roads sidewalks Trails pipes Bridges tunnels anything um so omitting the last paragraph or the last sentence what is that change the rest of the document is that on the site neighboring the site because I I remember geography was a piece of everything so is the Costco to a component of that project that occurs on the site not outside of the site unless we mention it here I I just want to like I want to be clear on that too yeah so the boundaries are written so that um uh money uh Tiff monies collected in this District could be can be spent within the boundaries of the district and the boundaries include the private parcel as well as the adjacent public rights of way adjacent to that parcel so it could be spent on France Avenue it could be spent on the um on the prominade on the east side um uh at some point the kind of the the smell test kicks in France Avenue is a big street it goes for miles in both directions you can't use Tiff from this district four miles up the road um for this District you know to me a reasonable use of Tiff would be uh public improvements maybe from like 702 down to Gallagher in that immediate area um to pull monies out and spend it further away I don't think that would pass legal muster um especially if they break up that parcel and and I mean this project right here used Tiff right as right as a neighboring the project by City Hall used Tiff yeah so I I recall there was some Geographic consideration so it seems that even though that's in there like that's okay but it' also be okay to not have that in there and you asked us to react to exhibit e so I'm just looking at exhibit e that's in there like I would rather it not be in there um however it sounds like something like that or on any other neighboring parcel could be monies could be used to make those type of public improvements or at least contribute to them right so by writing that in there doesn't allow an exception right so adding that paragraph specific to an underpass doesn't provide that exception that would otherwise be restricted in it in this Tiff plan that's just what I wanted to make sure and it sounds like you clarified it wouldn't yeah the the terminology public infrastructure is in the is throughout the document and that's always a legitimate Tiff expense um so is there a reason why that's called out specifically in there or could that be omitted uh The Pedestrian C it's like the last paragraph of exhibit it um like does it it probably could be omitted uh until I got to the city council and they told me to write that up and include those types of those types of options at this point I get the sense that the city council wants that option um they're not sure if they're going to go there they're not sure if they're going to fund it they're not sure what it's going to look like they're not sure if it's going to go under over or through but they based on their last comments at the previous city council meeting they wanted to have a placeholder so that if it actually turns out to be a project they want to pursue they have an ability to fund it but it sounds like you don't need it in there right all right yeah commissioner felt or well can we make our recommendation just about the Macy site I think that gets back to commissioner boren's question I think that's what I understood this Tiff plan to only Encompass and not extrapolate to some potential anything specific because that just doesn't seem appropriate yeah now you could reasonably and I I wish I was more informed about all this Tiff stuff so I could see how all this was connected cuz I think it is connected somehow I don't think there' be an appendix in there for no reason um I think it's there I think it's there as a placeholder to create options later and and I think just to make a clearer record of what might be what the what type of pedestrian public infrastructure yeah to just give more more color to it um yeah I don't mind something as like there's an idea but like to label it as like a dedicated option just seems like it's unnecessary because they could do it if they wanted like there is that option so why like anything's on the table correct right so you said the right it can be go towards public infrastructure in general right so then there really needs to be no need to call out the bridge or crossing specifically right if this were amended they could still do that the city council still still can explore this option without this being called out right I think to commissioner D's point it does seem like a conflict of interest where the person issuing this Tiff plan report is the one that up with the concept with the I don't know that seems it seems like it doesn't pass a smell test but commissioner F I believe lhb was in here because they did an assessment of the existing building do you mean lhb is in this plan I'm not sure what you mean lb is in this packet because they did a review of the existing Macy's building and called it substandard correct lhb is a division that that evaluates existing buildings for compliance with the with the Tiff statute yeah I don't division wrote wrote a report that says that that building qualifies yeah I think that's the only reason lhb is in here yeah and that was an independent action of the underpass overpass they EXP the they authored this 160 page plan it's their name so I'm just referring to page 159 of 160 and 160 of 160 where it's referencing their other idea and one that it doesn't feel like we need to have it on here in any reason except there isn't a reason unless it's just transparency toward like oh here's a potential idea I would I think that's what we're all saying and and what um City staff is saying as well is that it doesn't need to be there city council might like to see it because everyone's excited about thinking about the possibility of maybe having this happen since we've been thinking about it since the 1970s some sort of Crossing so I don't to commissioner bornstein's question I think we're clear that it doesn't hamstring the use of the Tiff and it doesn't prevent us if this wasn't there we could still use it because it would be an infrastructure structure adjacent to the site so I seems like six of one have to I mean it it all works except that the idea was generated by the author the author of this report separately it seems like that there just appears to be like I don't know I mean it's jump in I sure I will happily take credit for realizing that two projects AC two properties across the street from each other we're redeveloping at the same time and this might be an opportunity to do something we we've been talking about since 2007 um I had mentioned we initially worked with a civil engineering group that's a fine firm they do very good engineering work but that group did not bring the creativity that's needed in a Dina so I made the decision to switch companies to a firm that's more comprehensive where they bring in Engineers planners Landscape Architects and Architects all together in the same room I know that those types of conversations can yield more creative results so it was my decision to switch from the standard engineering firm to pursue this idea um to make a leap that this is some kind of underhanded um conflict is a pretty tremendous leap oh it's it's just the fact that they were the ones that generated the idea and they're writing the report that then prompts that it seems kind of like circular I don't know the lhb project number 230 310.000 performance-driven design is only the report on the existing Macy's building is that what you're referring to it's for the Tiff District yeah I guess um Tiff plan 72nd France number three draft page 59 to 62 yeah I'm looking at their whole yeah theyve they've been a consultant on a lot of projects yeah it's I mean they authored the whole thing I I just wanted to make it clear like if it would make it easier to like remove any sniff of like a conflict of interest it seemed to me it be wise to just eliminate that if if it doesn't have to be there it's it seems like other Tiff plans haven't earmarked or called out a specific investment or option before that I've been aware of so this would be the first and that if you said that's okay like I trust you I'm just trying to find things that would satisfy any constituent who might be caring and wanting to make sure that we're navigating this process without conflicts without anything so we we've taken the same approach on this plan on this Tiff plan that we took on the grand V2 Tiff plan the 50th in France Tiff plan the 44th Tiff plan the Eden Wilson Tiff diff plan so there's nothing we've very we've been very consistent in how we pursue these um so I okay I don't see a conflict there here's where I'm still a little confused and I'm trying to not make it difficult I think I'm I'm less concerned about the conflict thing I I'm more focused on just the substance of what a vote would mean um if and I can't remember what language you said I'm just sorry I'm forgetting the language I think it was something like you know we find that the the project is consistent with you know the plan the general plans for development that would include improvements The Pedestrian realm or something that or improvements to the public realm or something that effect and typically you know that would be like an improvements to an ad grade crossing a sidewalk and like that wouldn't be controversial at all and I think everybody here would be like yeah the project was approved it's clearly consistent with the Southdale plan the southeast plan the comprehensive plan and of course using some funds to improve like at grade pedestrian Crossing is consistent with that I don't even think we have any this conversation it's just the fact that these specific sort of unusual um pedestrian bridge and tunnel concepts are being called out as as ones that might get like be subp Parts where I'm wondering in order to vote Yes you know knowing that those are also on on the table do we need to evaluate whether those concepts are consistent with the plans or not and and that's just where I'm getting a little bit stuck I don't know what those concepts are and whether they would be consistent with the plans or not because some of the ones we've seen sort of seem like maybe they would be less consistent with some of the plans that are in place for that area and so that is that is the only place where I'm getting a little bit hung up is is does everybody kind of see what I'm saying yeah yeah I'm not a tip expert so Bill tell me when I'm wrong but in the Pud as a condition of the proposal of the Pud the developer will have to make certain infrastructure improvements we'll have to take down a a substandard building we'll have to do environmental cleanup they'll have to do all of that as part of the guarantee to get the Tiff financing for the developer eventually the city will get dollars from that Tiff District and we're talking about how the city could spend those dollars we're still going to get all the infrastructure improvements from the developer as a condition for them getting this loan so the city then can take those Tiff dollars and do any additional infrastructure in and around the area whether it's the bridge or not the bridge but the benefit to us as a city is we have a substandard building removed from the city we have environmental cleanup and we have new infrastructure and amenities in that PUD district and what I'm also hearing is any kind of overpass or underpass or pedestrian Crossing is between the city council and the traffic commission yeah it's just mentioned in this plan so that but our ask is is this plan the Tiff plan does the Tiff plan conform and this is part of it I mean if you ask for $24 million of that Tiff to go to that undercrossing then I would say that it probably doesn't conform to the I would to the plan to Redevelopment plans and I wouldn't have seen any details on the we're not I don't think we're being asked about what the city does with the dollars on the back end of the project we're being asked if the project project and all of the things that are part of the project are in compliance with the Southdale comprehensive plan right no it's the Tiff plan not the project is the Tiff plan does a tiff plan conform basically to the compreh the Tiff plan that includes the demolition of the structure the environmental cleanup the road and this discuss and the discussion of plan perhaps I can interject yeah the plan Commission has nothing to do with how the money spent right then why are we being asked to give a being asked the plan the plan has a 10th District but but I mean it's like a revenue stream so we're being asked if the justification for the loan that the city is making in this development as fully articulated is conforming with other documents when the city gets the revenue stream from creating the ti Tiff District like when they get their loan paid back with interest how they spend that is not our purview I mean I I don't know what why is it in the project description that we have to make our perview tonight that was my question also like financials in here about how they're going to Ellers is going to EV not appendix e appendix e was the only thing we're asked to advise on so that's why I was just saying could we just remove that last paragraph of appendix that's what we're asked about right does the project as in appendix e the description as part of this Tiff plan conform to the comprehensive plan that gets back to commissioner born's question like of that nuance and it is mentioned there that's why I'm like couldn't we just not mention it there and make this a lot easier for everything we've talked about if I the last paragraph of appendix c yeah um if I could interject so part of the reason that we included it in there is um there's the southeast Aina Redevelopment plan and I've got one slide on on pulled up here um but in that plan and that actually comes way before the comprehensive plan was written um one of the fundamental goals for for creating this Redevelopment plan and then using Tiff dating back to the 70s was to quote improve access for pedestrians and bicyclists throughout that whole fraction Avenue area remember in the 1970s it was gravel pits dumps and a County highway there was no provision for people and so that was one of the fundamental Natures of that initial plan was to create those types of opportunities over the decades a has come a long way we've got bike trails we've got sidewalks we've got connections in different places um with this uh proposed hift District uh we'd like to continue to P pursue that goal of improving access by connecting neighborhoods on either side of the street um so that that's why we included it in there it seemed as I was having conversations or listening to the city council conversations that seemed like a important topic to be able to cross the street safely again whether you go under over or at grade as you know that'll be determined in the future but having some kind of improvement seem to be um of interest to folks um uh we could have ainted it it but since there's been conversation and people tended to like some type of improvement I thought it was more uh clear to include something in there that backfired on me tonight um well that's why it's in there and I I I I just personally have commissioner Bor didn't bring it up I was ready all right this is easy we'll approve it and it just added a Nuance that again like Words matter so I just wanted to make sure like we weren't un like we weren't creating an exception to otherwise a restriction which it doesn't seem like we would so I feel like we're good but it does add this weird Nuance of the project we're talking about is directly referencing another project in its description so I'll leave it at that I don't need to beat a dead horse yeah commissioner P um do you use TI for sent any lakes uh the city did use tip for Centennial Lakes uh for Edinburgh for the con for the offices I don't think for the retail um but for the park space and the office space in particular and most of the condos we use Tiff can you use Tiff for Centennial legs anymore I'd say that type of development uh um sure they're doing it in St Paul um the Highland Bridge development is using Tiff as a Public Finance tool um I don't think you could do it at Centennial Lakes today you you'd have to inspect all the buildings and call them blighted and substandard I don't think you could do that at Centennial Lakes today well before we get further I just want to say thank you you knew that why you come here is because things get all mixed up in a blender but we do like there has been things where like one word has really mattered later so we want to definitely be cautious and feel well confident about it but I mean I I feel good what do less good I hate being difficult like this is not what I want I just know this topic so this Topic's been percolating around for many many months with this group so it it just has been and this Tiff plan this Tiff plan says this under press pass or Bridge Crossing will address blah blah blah so I mean it the Tiff plan it seems includes specifically contemplating underpass or bridge and whether or not some someone thinks it's a good idea to spend money on it that's not for us to decide I get and that's not what I'm talking whether that type of built structure conforms with some of the planning documents we're talking about and impr you know it is consistent or inconsistent with them that is the only thing I'm interested in talking about and not whether it's a good idea financially but does that type of structure actually impair some of the some of the planning negatively impact some of the planning concerns that we've had I know commissioner Miranda had those concerns significantly yeah I I do as well yeah for sure you know significant concerns and so that is the that is the piece where like if I could say the whole project and public realm improvements are of course but we just I don't have enough information to know one way or the other whether the underpass or Bridge Crossing that's described in the in the Tiff plan is consistent with the planning documents it's Happ haven't done the analysis yet maybe it is so s sorry for being a stickler I think it's better for us to talk through this stuff now though than like later on which has happened with some of the other projects in this exact area like like um Jimmy was saying there was an Andor that that was basically the difference between getting a strong project and a okay project that was a little less strong so that's why our group is focused on this kind of stuff you're fine can we say this underpass at grade or Bridge [Music] Crossing I mean if we don't know what it is I'm sure it says something to that effect but if if there's a way to Wordsmith it that makes you more comfortable it say this work is intended to improve pedestrian and bicyclist routes to and from the district and I think we all agree with that um integrated site plans for the development this underpass underpass or Bridge Crossing will address existing vehicular pedestrian safety if it says is underpass at grade or Bridge Crossing I feel like you should just take that whole paragraph out and simplify it all right the very last sentence says it could be used as a funding source like it it's it's written as a hypothetical that the Tiff could be used to fund the public Crossing if directed by the H but aren't we only talking about the Macy site why I don't get it it's it's just an idea for the city staff of what they could do if they wanted to Envision what adjacent infrastructure could look like I just I don't think it's an Andor that without writing it down specifically well why do they want it in there this is like a 60-page document though the whole thing is the Tiff Plan and there's lots of words in here that we generally don't understand in a many of ways but I think the land use piece with inside the property lines isn't changing I mean all we were asked is to react to like these three pages so we as to the whole thing is the Tiff plan yeah but like appendix e specifically was our ask right right yeah the ask is we can just keep going and going and I'm not sure if it helps or not but when you all reviewed this the condition on the developer was to create a plan that could accommodate either one so there was no detail about whether we're going to go over under that was the condition of of the uh of the land use requests was this okay there was a condition even there was that the project had to accommodate either scenario so either underneath ACC that's a helpful yes okay that's help because then right then it's okay we approve that posi yeah I don't know well I was stuck on the tarmac in Tennessee during that meeting and and I wasn't here one way or the other so I might have to abstain on this one um if we're not able to take that sentence out not because I'm trying to be difficult I just don't feel like I have enough information to decide whether this Tiff plan conforms with the planning documents right now maybe maybe I could get there but I just think I've learned from past experience on this one thanks was everyone else feeling any questions any emotions I'm just going to say I'm going to abstain as well I feel the same way I don't have enough detail about the Tiff plan it's very generic statement um this early in the project and so I don't I can't give a blessing either way about whether it meets the development or redev development plan for the city as a whole are we doing our deliberations yeah this is still deliberations what I will say from K car's clarification if those were actually mentioned and conditioned in the actual development plan I feel much better about this and those words in there so if that is confirmed I'm okay with this in here I don't feel like there is a conflict between anything really yeah for and for those of you who are here it's just I was personally not at that meeting I didn't do that vote um and I didn't do that analysis so but if for those of you who were here and reached that outcome I mean you might have a different way of thinking about it so I totally understand and respect what you're saying sure Fel since we're deliberating um I am excited about this plan because um this is the first one that's going to break down a super block into four sections and have a North South Road and an East West access and the setback from the prominade um and that additional artwork I think it's super exciting that it's happening um I am for better pedestrian access and bicycle access and um so I'm all for this in support of it as I commissioner Pia um I'll be voting against it I voted against the project so I don't think in good faith if I voted against the project I can vote for the Tiff okay so just uh projecting forward if there's six of us to abstain three in favor one it still passes right just you need a majority right all right well let's are we good to just go to I guess we need a motion first motion to adopt adopt resolution the resolution I second uh we'll just do a roll call vote make it easy again commissioner Padia nay commissioner day sorry abstain commissioner barnstein yeah abstain commissioner felt I commissioner Henman I chair Bennett I resolution has been approved to be adopted thank you for that uh fun one you know it always is okay well that was painful and I'm glad we're through it but thank you for bringing up commissioner Bor every time again like Words matter they've haunted us before so I'm glad we've had these conversations tonight so we're not surprised at any point going forward thank you for the clarification Carrie thank you for the presentation Bill and on to chair and member comments any of them okay on to staff comments yeah a couple updates from city council the council at their last meeting held the public hearing on the Heritage preservation uh commission's ordinance proposal they'll take action at their meeting on October 1st as mentioned here tonight they did take final action on the Macy's project so they they did receive their final rezoning the Hankerson project the subdivision the three lot subdivision that will go to the city council October 1st and just a reminder that October 1st chair Bennett will present our work plan to the city council at the work session that's it for me anyone's welcome to join it's really fun seriously uh and I guess there's one one more order to business motion to adjourn second all in favor say I I I motion carries a meeting has been adjourned thank you everyone e