The URL can be used to link to this page

11-28-2017 Complete AgendaS P E C IAL J O IN T C ITY C O U N C IL, H O U S IN G AN D R ED E V E L O P ME N T AU T H O R IT Y, AN D P L AN N IN G C O MMIS S IO N W O R K S E S S IO N R IC H F IE L D MU N IC IPAL C EN TER, B AR T H O L O ME W R O O M N O V E MB E R 28, 2017 5:45 P M C all to order 1.D iscussion regarding a revised proposal to redevelop the C edar P oint Housing area. A djournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager November 23, 2017 Council Memorandum No. 111 HRA Memorandum No. 32 The Honorable Mayor Housing and Redevelopment and Authority Commissioners Members of the City Council City of Richfield Subject: Cedar Point Housing Redevelopment Council Members and Commissioners: A joint work session of the City Council, Housing and Redevelopment Authority, and Planning Commission has been scheduled for Tuesday, November 28 , at 5:45pm. At this meeting, the Cedar Point II LLC developers will present a revised proposal to redevelop the Cedar Point Housing area. The preliminary development agreement between the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) and Cedar Point II LLC to rede velop the Cedar Point Housing area expired last spring. Since that time, staff has met with several developers to discuss redeveloping the area, purchased the house at 6409 16 th Avenue, and commissioned a market study to explore other development options for the site. The Cedar Point II LLC developers have also continued to work on finding a viable development proposal for the site. They believe they have come up with a feasible project by adding a development partner, finding a source to fill the funding gap, and adjusting the project phasing. Respectfully submitted, Steven L. Devich City Manager SLD:ju Email: Assistant City Manager Department Directors Planning Commission S P E C IAL C IT Y C O U N C IL W O R K SESSIO N R IC H F IE L D MU N IC IPAL C EN TER, B AR T H O L O ME W R O O M N O V E MB E R 28, 2017 6:15 P M C all to order 1.Update to the B lue C ross B lue S hi eld D emonstration project and discussion of the crosswalk policy. 2.D iscussion regarding a public art policy. A djournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager November 23, 2017 Council Memorandum No. 112 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Subject: November 28, 2017, City Council Work Session Items Council Members: The following items will be presented and discussed at the upcoming City Council work session: Blue Cross Blue Shield Project and Pedestrian Master Plan 1. Blue Cross Blue Shield Demonstration Project Review a. Statistical results b. Public input 2. Crosswalk Policy Update and Pedestrian Master Plan a. Current crosswalk policy review b. Future City-wide evaluation Public Art Staff will present the attached draft public art policy for implementation of art throughout the city within in the public right-of-way. Staff will discuss the following regarding the policy and seek feedback:  Previous projects  Future projects  Funding source(s)  Other policy details Please contact Kristin Asher, Public Works Director, at 612 -861-9795 with questions. Respectfully submitted, Steven L. Devich City Manager SLD:tab Email: Assistant City Manager Department Directors Attachment RIGHT-OF-WAY PUBLIC ART POLICY Purpose The City of Richfield believes that planning and development decisions should include aesthetic and social value with any project’s functional and economic values. Public art strengthens the experience of public places, enhances, and promotes Richfield, and identifies the city as a livable, creative city that is a desirable place to live, work, and visit. The Richfield City Council desires policies and procedures to encourage the display of art within the city and to involve artists in the design, implementation, and integration of public art in public projects. In order to facilitate and encourage the inclusion of public art in planning and development, the City Council finds that: (a) Identification of opportunities at the earliest stages of conceptual planning and continue through project design and implementation. (b) When possible, sufficient resources should be committed to sustain an innovative public art and design program that is distinguished by its high quality. (c) Policies and procedures should be administratively developed, which will facilitate and support creation and implementation of a public art plan. Policy Definitions The following words, terms and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: “Artist” shall mean an individual who creates original art and is recognized as a practitioner of the visual, craft, literary, musical, and conceptual or performing arts, as judged by the quality of that practitioner’s body of work and experience. “Construction project” means any capital project paid for wholly or in part by the City to construct or remodel any structure, park, utility, street, or sidewalk, or any portion thereof, located within the limits of the city and the city right-of-way and to be operated by the City, including redevelopment projects. “Public art” shall mean publicly accessible original art that enriches the city and evokes meaning. It may include permanent visual art, performances, installations, events and other temporary works, preservation or restoration of unique architectural features, ornamentation or details. It may also include the artist-designed infrastructure and structures themselves. Public Art should consider the site, its context, and audience. Public Art may possess functional as well as aesthetic qualities and it may be integrated into the site or a discrete work. “Public art opportunities” shall mean an annual plan that identifies opportunities for inclusion of Public Art within the City. Public Works department shall be responsible for the inclusion of Public Art as part of the City’s Capital Improvement Budget/Plan. “Public place” shall mean publicly accessible landscapes, structures, and infrastructure within the city right-of-way as defined by ordinance Section 802. Public Places include, but are not limited to public parks, plazas, streets, boulevards, bridges, and stairways. Planning and Design All public art relating to this policy is strictly limited to that in the public right -of-way and public spaces and does not pertain to art that is considered under Richfield Zoning Code, Section 544. Art considered under that code is not subject to this policy. The Community Services Commission may review the public art plan and provide a recommendation to the Mayor and City Council. The Community Services Commission will review each submittal and make a recommendation to staff as to their artistic choice. If the public art project is less than the amount in which council approval is not required, staff will take the Community Services Commission’s recommendation and implement the project. Council will be notified time to time with updates regarding public art. Types of Projects Public Art may be commissioned by the City or donated to the City by private individuals or companies. Maintenance Costs of on-going maintenance and repair anticipated through the lifespan of any artwork will be an important consideration during the acceptance process. Costs for such activities must fall within the City’s budgeted funding sources and the City must have availability to meet the maintenance needs. In the event any proposed artwork exceeds the City’s capacity for maintenance or repair, the donating person or entity may assume responsibility to include resources for maintenance and repair, as necessary and agreed to in writing. R EG U LAR C IT Y C O U N C IL ME E TIN G R IC H F IE L D MU N IC IPAL C EN TER, C O U N C IL C H AMB E R S N O V E MB E R 28, 2017 7:00 P M IN TR O D U C TO RY P R O C E E D IN G S C all to order Open forum (15 mi nutes maximum) E ach speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. C omments are to be an opportunity to address the C ouncil on items not on the agenda. I ndividuals who w ish to address the C ouncil must have registered prior to the meeting. P ledge of A llegiance P R E S E N TATIO N S 1.S wearing-in of C ity of Richfield P olice Officers L ukas E itreim and Michael A nderson 2.2016 A nnual Health Report to the C ommuni ty 3.A nnual meeti ng with the Transportation C ommi ssi on 4.A nnual meeti ng with the A rts C ommission C O U N C IL D IS C U S S IO N 5.Hats Off to Hometown Hits C onsider a motion to cancel the second C i ty C ouncil meeting in D ecember (D ecember 26) AG E N D A AP P R O VAL 6.A pproval of the A genda 7.Consent C alendar contains several separate items, which are acted upon by the City C ouncil in one motion. Once the C onsent Calendar has been approved, the individual items and recommended actions have also been approved. No further Council action on these items is necessary. However, any Council Member may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the regular agenda for C ouncil discussion and action. All items listed on the C onsent C alendar are recommended for approval. A .C onsi deration of the approval of an amendment to the Hennepin C ounty C ost P articipation A greement for the acquisition of right-of-way for the 77th S treet Underpass of Trunk Highway 77 P roject. S taff Report No. 194 B .C onsi deration of the approval of a resoluti on to accept a grant of $4,027.92 from the Office of J ustice P rograms for bullet proof vests. S taff Report No. 195 C .C onsi deration of the approval of a fi rst reading of a transitory ordinance vacating a portion of 67th S treet E ast ri ght-of-way and a storm sewer easement within The C hamberlai n development area and schedule a public hearing and second reading for D ecember 12, 2017. S taff Report No. 196 D .C onsi deration of the approval of a fi rst reading of an ordinance authorizi ng the conveyance of vacated ri ght- of-way owned by the C ity of Richfield to the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment A uthority. S taff Report No. 197 E .C onsi deration of the approval of a fi rst reading of an ordinance amendi ng the C ity's Zoning Ordinance related to construction standards to mi ti gate the impact of airport noise and schedule a public hearing and second reading for D ecember 12, 2017. S taff Report No. 198 F.C onsi deration of the approval of setti ng a public hearing to be held on J anuary 9, 2018, for the consideration of the issuance of new On-S ale Wine and 3.2 Malt L iquor licenses, with outside service, for L RF C , L L C d/b/a L ocal Roots F ood & C offee located at 817 66th S treet E ast. S taff Report No. 199 8.C onsideration of items, if any, removed from C onsent C alendar R E S O L U T IO N S 9.C onsideration of the approval of a resolution amending a P lanned Unit D evelopment, C onditional Use P ermit, and F inal D evelopment P lan to allow a daycare facility (P rimrose S chools) at C edar P oint C ommons. S taff Report No. 200 P U B LIC H EAR IN G S 10.P ublic heari ng and consideration of the approval of resolutions related to the establishment of a new Tax Increment F i nancing D istrict for the C hamberlai n development. S taff Report No. 201 PR O P O S E D O R D IN AN C ES 11.C onsideration of a variety of land use approvals related to a proposal for construction of a new auto dealership at 1550 78th S treet E ast. S taff Report No. 202 C IT Y MAN AG E R ’S R E P O R T 12.C ity Manager's Report C L AIMS AN D PAYR O LL S 13.C laims and P ayrolls Open forum (15 mi nutes maximum) E ach speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. C omments are to be an opportunity to address the C ouncil on items not on the agenda. I ndividuals who w ish to address the C ouncil must have registered prior to the meeting. 14.A djournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. R equests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the C ity Clerk at 612-861-9738. AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM #7.A. STAFF REPORT NO. 194 CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING 11/28/2017 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J eff P earson, C ity E ngineer D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: K ristin A sher, P ublic Works D irector 11/20/2017 O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager 11/20/2017 I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N: Consideration of the approval of an amendment to the Hennepin County Cost Participation Agreement for the acquisition of right-of-way for the 77th Street U nderpass of Trunk Highway 77 Project. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: Hennepin County allocated $1,500,000 in cost participation funds for the use in 2016 and 2017 on the 77th Street Underpass of Trunk Highway 77 Project. The funds are for appraisal fees, land acquisition, and reloc ation costs required for c onstruc tion of the project. The funds are provided to the C ity through an invoic e reimbursement process. The original agreement commenced on J une 1, 2016, and was to terminate on December 31, 2016. A first amendment extending the agreement through December 2017 was passed on February 28, 2017. The attac hed sec ond amendment extends the agreement to December 31, 2018. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N: By motion: Approve a second amendment to the Hennepin County Cost Participation Agreement for the construction of the 77th Street Underpass of Trunk Highway 77. B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT Agreement City C ounc il approved the original agreement on April 26, 2016. Due to delays in the release of state funds, full right-of-way acquisition c ould not be c ompleted in 2016 or 2017, whic h prevented the City from alloc ating all of the Hennepin County funds prior to the D ec ember 31, 2016, and December 31, 2017, termination dates, respectively. The first amendment to the agreement was approved by City Council on February 28, 2017. Costs The c ost estimate to c omplete the 77th Street Underpass, including design, right-of-way, and construction is $25.5 million. The 77th Street Underpass has rec eived $2.1 million for full design through the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnD OT) Local Road I mprovement P rogram. The 77th Street Underpass has also rec eived $10 million in State funds for "right-of-way acquisition and c onstruc tion." The projec t was selec ted for Regional S olicitation Funding (Federal Funding) in the amount of $7 million for c onstruc tion y ear 2020. The remaining funding gap on the project is approximately $4.5 million. B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc): I nc reasing c apac ity of the I -494 c orridor and the 77th Street crossing of TH 77 are identified in the C ity's C omprehensive Plan (C hapter 6 - Transportation). C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S: The agreement c urrently expires on D ec ember 31, 2017. Design and right-of-way acquisition are fully funded and both elements are in progress. D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: The Hennepin County funds will be used towards right-of-way acquisition. E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION : The C ity Attorney reviewed the Amendment and will be available to answer questions. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S): None P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: None AT TAC H ME N TS : D escripti on Type S econd A mendment to A greement C ontract/A greement Hennepin County Contract No. A165300 SECOND AMENDMENT TO COST PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 77TH STREET UNDERPASS OF TRUNK HIGHWAY 77 (CEDAR AVENUE) This Second Amendment made and entered into by and between the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the “COUNTY”, A-2300 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, on behalf of the Hennepin County Department of Community Works, 701 Fourth Avenue South, Suite 400, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415-1843, and the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as the “CITY”, 6700 Portland Avenue, Richfield, Minnesota 55423, on behalf of the Richfield Community Development Department. WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 10847 and Ordinance No. 2013-24, the CITY approved the construction of a roadway underpass to allow 77th Street to travel under Cedar Avenue (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the parties entered into Contract No. A165300 (the “Agreement”) as authorized by Hennepin County Board Resolution 15-0336R2; and WHEREAS, the Agreement between the parties provides for the COUNTY to contribute to the Project for right-of-way acquisition; and WHEREAS, the parties entered into First Amendment to Contract No. 165300 effective December 13, 2016 as authorized by Hennepin County Board Resolution 16-0338R1 to extend the term of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the parties agree the term of the Agreement should be extended further to allow for the completion of the right of way acquisition phase of the 77th street underpass project; and NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree to amend Section 1 of the Agreement to read as follows: 1. Term and Cost of the Agreement. The CITY agrees to furnish services described in Section 2 during the period commencing January 1, 2016 and terminating June 30, 2019, for an amount not to exceed $1,500,000.00. There is no change in total NTE. This Second Amendment shall become effective December 31, 2017. 2 Except as amended by the First Amendment and as herein amended, the terms, conditions and provisions of the original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. THIS PORTION OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK [Signature Page Follows] 3 COUNTY BOARD APPROVAL CITY, having signed this Second Amendment, and the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Second Amendment on the ____ day of ___________, 2017 and pursuant to such approval, the proper County officials having signed this Second Amendment, the parties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ATTEST: By:________________________________ By: ________________________________ Deputy/Clerk of the County Board Chair of Its County Board Date: ________________________ Date: ________________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM: And:________________________________ County Administrator By:________________________________ Date: ________________________ Assistant County Attorney Date: ________________________ And: ________________________________ Acting Assistant County Administrator, Public Works Date: ________________________ APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL By:________________________________ By: ________________________________ Assistant County Attorney Director, Department of Community Works Date: ________________________ Date: ________________________ CITY OF RICHFIELD By:________________________________ Its: Mayor And:_______________________________ Its: City Manager AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM #7.B. STAFF REPORT NO. 195 CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING 11/28/2017 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J ay Henthorne, P ublic S afety D irector/C hief of P olice D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ay Henthorne, D irector of P ublic S afety/C hi ef of P olice 11/20/2017 O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager 11/20/2017 I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N: Consideration of the approval of a resolution to accept a grant of $4,027.92 from the O ffice of Justice Programs for bullet proof vests. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: The U.S Department of J ustice, Offic e of J ustic e P rograms, through their B ulletproof Vest Partnership/Body Armor Safety I nitiative (BVP), created by the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Ac t of 1998, is designed to provide a critical resourc e to state and local law enforcement. The Richfield Department of Public Safety has participated in this grant since 2003. This grant allows the department to continually replace bulletproof vests that are out of warranty c overage. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N: By motion: Approve a resolution accepting the grant of $4,027.92 from the Office of Justice Programs for bullet proof vests. B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT Sinc e 1999, the B V P program has awarded more than 13,000 jurisdic tions a total of $430 million in for the purchase of over one million vests (1,294,837 as of J uly, 2017). The Ric hfield Department of Public Safety has received a total of $66,389.62 over fourteen years. Based on data c ollected and recorded by B J A staff, following 2 years of dec line law enforcement offic er line-of-duty deaths, the country realized a dramatic 37% inc rease in offic er deaths in 2010. Fifty-nine (59) of the 160 officers killed in 2010 were shot during violent encounters; a 20% inc rease over 2009 numbers. B V P funds c over 50% of the cost of an individual vest. B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc): Minnesota Statute 465.03 requires that every acc eptance of a grant of devise of real or personal property on terms prescribed by the donor be made by resolution of more than two-thirds majority of the City C ounc il. The A dministrative Servic es Department issued a memo on November 9, 2004, requiring that all grants and restric ted donations to departments be rec eived by resolution and passed by more than two-thirds majority of the City C ounc il in ac cordanc e with Minnesota Statute 465.03. C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S: The Bulletproof Vest Partnership requires that the vests are ordered on or after April 1, 2017. The deadline to request pay ments from the F Y 2016 award funds is August 31, 2019, or until all available FY 2017 funds have been exhausted. D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: The amount of the grant is $4,027.92 for 2017. E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION : There are no legal considerations. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S): Council c ould deny the resolution to acc ept the grant from the Department of J ustice, Offic e of J ustic e Programs; however, the contributions would help defray the c osts of replacing the bulletproof vests for the Department of Public Safety. P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: None AT TAC H ME N TS : D escripti on Type Resolution Resolution L etter RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE GRANT WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS AND RICHFIELD POLICE FOR BULLETPROOF VESTS WHEREAS, following two years of declining law enforcement officer line-of-duty deaths, the country realized a dramatic 37 percent increase in officer deaths in 2010. Fifty-nine of the 160 officers killed in 2010 were shot during violent encounters; a 20 percent increase over 2009 numbers; and, WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Justice is committed to improving officer safety and has undertaken research to review and analyze violent encounters and law enforcement officer deaths and injuries; and, WHEREAS, the Bulletproof Vest Partnership (BVP) was created by the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of 1998 and is a unique U.S. Department of Justice initiative designed to provide a critical resource to state and local law enforcement; and, WHEREAS, the Richfield Department of Public Safety has been informed that a grant has been awarded to the department by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs under their Bulletproof Vest Partnership (BVP) program, for $4,027.92 for the purchase of ballistic vests; and, WHEREAS, the BVP grant is under the Fiscal Year 2017 BVP awards, allowing purchases beginning on or after April 1, 2017 until August 31, 2019, or until all available 2017 award funds have been requested. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, that the Public Safety Department and the Deputy Director of Public Safety will enter into an agreement to receive grant money for Richfield’s bulletproof vest expenditures as outlined in the agreement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of November 2017. ________________________ Pat Elliott, Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM #7.C. STAFF REPORT NO. 196 CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING 11/28/2017 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Melissa P oehlman, A sst. C ommunity D evelopment D irector D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ohn S tark, C ommunity D evelopment D i rector 11/20/2017 O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager 11/20/2017 I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N: Consideration of the approval of a first reading of a transitory ordinance vacating a portion of 67th Street East right-of-way and a storm sewer easement within The Chamber lain development area and schedule a public hearing and second reading for December 12, 2017. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: The City Counc il approved plans for The Chamberlain project (approximately 283 new apartments, 33 renovated apartments, and a 2-bloc k extension of Richfield Parkway) on September 26, 2017. A condition of this approval is the platting of land within the development area. As part of the plat review process, the city considers whether or not existing easements should remain in plac e or be vacated; two segments of 67th Street and a storm sewer easement were identified for vac ation. One segment of the 67th Street right-of-way in question was largely removed in 2007 and construction of The Chamberlain projec t will eliminate any potential for reopening this c onnection from 17th to 18th Avenue. The other segment of 67th Street was constructed as a temporary connec tion between 18th Avenue south of the roundabout and C edar Avenue. This area is beneath a proposed building. A new 67th Street connec tion, between the Vinocopia property (6636 Cedar Ave) and the development will be constructed as part of the project. Finally, there is an existing storm sewer that will be removed as part of the projec t; the easement over this area should also be vacated. Easements for all new roads and utilities shall be incorporated into the plat. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N: By motion: Approve a first reading of a transitory ordinance vacating a portion of 67th Street East right-of-way and a storm sewer easement within The Chamberlain development area and schedule a public hearing and second reading for December 12, 2017. B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT See Exec utive Summary. B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc): The C ounc il may by ordinance vacate a street, alley, public grounds or a part thereof, on its own motion or upon the petition of the owners of half of the land abutting the street, alley, public grounds or part thereof, to be vacated. The Housing and Redevelopment A uthority is the owner of more than 50% of the land abutting the right-of-way and considered a petition requesting the vacation on November 20, 2017. Kraus-A nderson and Richfield Apartments L L C c omprise more than 50% of the land abutting the storm sewer easement and have petitioned for its vac ation. No vacation may be made unless it appears to be in the interest of the public to do so. Easements for identified utilities and drainage must be dedicated in the plat. C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S: This vacation shall be c ontingent upon approval and recording of the final plat. D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: N/A E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION : Notic e of the public hearing shall be published in the Sun Current newspaper, as required. The C ity Attorney's office has reviewed the proposed vacation. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S): Deny the first reading with a finding that the vacation would not be in the public interest. P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: I nland Development Partners Representative(s) AT TAC H ME N TS : D escripti on Type Ordinance Ordinance 67th S treet Vacations E xhibit S torm S ewer E asement A rea E xhibit S ite P lan wi th Vacation A reas Identified E xhibit 511599v1 SJS RC145-174 BILL NO. TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE VACATING PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENTS THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1: The following described lands are subject to the easements as described below for public street right-of-way and storm sewer purposes: That part of 67th Street East as dedicated on the plat of WEXLER'S ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies westerly of a line drawn from the southeast corner of Lot 8, Block 2 to the northeast corner of Lot 1, Block 3 and lies easterly of a line drawn from the southwest corner of Lot 8, Block 2 to the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 3, all in said WEXLER'S ADDITION. (“Street Easement #1”) AND That part of 67th Street East that approximately lies on Lots 1, 2, 15 and 16, Block 4, WEXLER’S ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying westerly of the west right of way line of Cedar Avenue and lying easterly of the east right of way line of 18th Avenue South, as shown on said WEXLER’S ADDITION. (“Street Easement #2”) AND A permanent easement for the construction, operation, maintenance, and repair of a storm sewer under and across the easterly twenty (20) feet of Lots 15 and 16, Block 4, WEXLER’S ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (the “Storm Easement”) Sec. 2: Street Easement #1 and Street Easement #2 are not required for access to the abutting properties. Sec. 3: The following public facilities are located in Street Easement #1: water and storm sewer. 511599v1 SJS RC145-174 Sec. 4: The following facilities are reported to be located in the Street Easement #1: electric, cable, and telephone/internet. The City has notified the service providers for electric, cable, and telephone/internet of the proposed vacation. Sec. 5: Electric, cable, and telephone/internet services will be relocated by the developer as part of the project which consists of platting and developing the underlying property as WEXLER’S SECOND ADDITION (the “Project”). Sec. 6: The Council finds that there is not a public need for Street Easement #1 or Street Easement #2. Sec. 7: The storm sewer and sanitary sewer lines within the Storm Easement shall be removed by the developer as part of the Project. Sec. 8: The City of Richfield held the first reading of this Ordinance on November 28, 2017 and second reading on December 12, 2017. Legal notice was published in the City’s official newspaper as required by ordinance. Sec. 9: Street Easement #1, Street Easement #2, and the Storm Easement are vacated conditioned upon the approval by the City Council and recording of the plat for WEXLER’S SECOND ADDITION. Sec. 10: The vacation of Street Easement #1, Street Easement #2, and the Storm Easement are effective immediately following 30 days after publication of this Ordinance, provided that the final plat for WEXLER’S SECOND ADDITION has been recorded. Sec. 11: The City Clerk is directed to prepare a certificate of completion of vacation proceedings and to record the vacation in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles or Hennepin County Recorder, as appropriate. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this _________, 2017. ________________________________ Pat Elliott, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 Phone (952) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Fax (952) 937-5822 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM #7.D. STAFF REPORT NO. 197 CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING 11/28/2017 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Melissa P oehlman, A sst. C ommunity D evelopment D irector D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ohn S tark, C ommunity D evelopment D i rector 11/20/2017 O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager 11/20/2017 I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N: Consideration of the approval of a first reading of an ordinance authoriz ing the conveyance of vacated right-of-way owned by the City of Richfield to the Richfield Housing and R edevelopment Authority. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: As part of the platting of property for the Chamberlain Apartment Project, the City will vac ate two sec tions of 67th Street that will bec ome part of the development and no longer be necessary for road right-of-way. One of those sections (west of 18th Avenue) is owned in fee by the City. The remainder of the land that will be sold to the developer is owned by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA). I n order to sell this land to the developer alongside the rest of the land, the C ounc il should transfer this right-of-way to the HRA. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N: By motion: Approve a first reading of an or dinance authorizing the conveyance of property owned by the City of Richfield to the Richfield Housing and R edevelopment Authority. B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT N/A B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc): The approved C ontrac t for Private D evelopment calls for the land in question to be sold by the HRA to the developer. State statutes presc ribe a process allowing a C ity’s Housing and Redevelopment Authority to purchase and sell properties for redevelopment purposes. C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S: A sec ond reading of this ordinance is sc heduled for Dec ember 12, 2017. D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: W hile there is no direct financial impact to the C ity, the Ric hfield HRA is proposed to sell approximately 7 acres of land to the developer at its appraised value. This vacated right-of-way represents a very small portion of that property. E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION : City legal c ounsel has advised staff on this matter. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S): None P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: None AT TAC H ME N TS : D escripti on Type Ordinance Ordinance ORDINANCE NO. ____ AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Background; findings; authority. 1.01. The City of Richfield (the “City”) is governed by home rule charter adopted pursuant to the Constitution of the State of Minnesota and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 410. 1.02 The City is the fee owner of vacated right-of-way located in the City of Richfield, as legally described in the attached Exhibit A (the “City Property”). 1.03. It has been proposed that the City convey the City Property to the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (“HRA”) for the purpose of future redevelopment. Pursuant to Section 13.04 of the City’s Charter, no real property of the City shall be disposed of except by ordinance. 1.04. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462.356, it has been determined that the proposed disposal of property has no relationship to the comprehensive plan. 1.05. The Council finds and determines that it is in the best interests of the City to convey the City Property to the HRA for the purpose of redevelopment. Section. 2 Adoption; effective date; filing. 2.01 The conveyance of the City Property to the HRA is approved. The Mayor and the City Manager are authorized and directed to convey the City Property to the HRA and take all steps necessary to effect such conveyance. 2.02. This Ordinance shall take effect after the thirtieth (30th) day, exclusive of day of publication. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 12th day of December, 2017. Pat Elliott, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk EXHIBIT A City of Richfield property to be conveyed to Richfield HRA That part of 67th Street East as dedicated on the plat of Wexler’s Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies westerly of a line drawn from the southeast corner of Lot 8, Block 2 to the northeast corner of Lot 1, Block 3 and lies easterly of a line drawn from the southwest corner of Lot 8, Block 2 to the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 3, all in said Wexler’s Addition. AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM #7.E. STAFF REPORT NO. 198 CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING 11/28/2017 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J ohn S tark, C ommunity D evelopment D i rector D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ohn S tark, C ommunity D evelopment D i rector 11/20/2017 O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: P am D mytrenko, A ssistant C ity Manager/HR Manager C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager 11/21/2017 I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N: Consideration of the approval of a first reading of an ordinance amending the City's Zoning Ordinance related to constr uction standards to mitigate the impact of airport noise and schedule a public hearing and second r eading for December 12, 2017. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: I n 2009, the City adopted a new sec tion to the Zoning Code entitled "541.19 Noise Attenuation." One of the main purposes of this code provision was to require building materials with superior sound transmission classification (S TC) rating to better insulate against noise penetration in the area of the City most affected by airc raft overflight noise associated with operations at the Minneapolis-St. Paul I nternational Airport (MS P). I n 2013, this section of the Code was amended to make it clear that the upgraded building requirements were to be c onsidered only a recommendation for remodeling projects while remaining a requirement for new construction. Sinc e the original adoption of the Ordinance, only a few homes have been built in the affec ted area. W ithin the past 6 months, however, three new single-family homes and 283 units of multi-family housing have been proposed for the area. I n apply ing the Code requirements, as c urrently written, to the new proposals, both staff and the construction contractors involved in these proposals have found that the language in the code is too vague in some cases and practic ally and/or financially infeasible in others. Currently, the language states that construction in the affected areas "shall utilize building materials with a sound transmission classification rating of at least 40." W hile it was the intent of the C ode that this requirement was only meant for the exterior envelope of the building, and not interior walls or floors, this is not clearly stated. I t is also not clear whether the S TC of 40 is required of each and every exterior building component (i.e. dry er vents, storm doors and primary doors, soffits, etc.). I n practic al terms, not every component rec eives an S TC rating or is easy to test for sound transmission and there are some c omponents that are either not offered on the market with an S TC rating of 40 or greater or the c ost of them c an be so excessive as to render c onstruc tion of any housing in this area as infeasible. For these reasons, staff is recommending amending the language in the code to specify that the S TC requirements only apply to exterior building materials and that the S TC rating goal of 40 or higher would be applied as an average to the exterior surfaces rather than to eac h individual c omponent. Additional specificity for minimum S TC ratings for windows and doors is being proposed, as these are a c hief cause of conc ern for noise penetration. The specific S TC ratings for windows and doors that are being recommended is the result of a great deal of researc h as to the market availability of windows and doors designed for noise insulation. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N: By motion: Approve a first reading of an or dinance amending the City's Zoning Ordinance related to construction standards to mitigate the impact of airport noise and schedule a second reading for December 12, 2017. B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT W hen the Minnesota legislature and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MA C ) made the decision to expand the Minneapolis-S t. P aul I nternational Airport (MS P ) in 1999, the City of Richfield had many conc erns regarding the impac t of airport related noise. I n the early 2000's the City undertook legal challenges to address some of those c oncerns. Ultimately, a C onsent Decree was agreed upon that served as a framework for a resolution, settling the legal dispute. As part of that C onsent D ec ree, the MA C agreed to expand its noise mitigation program whic h made upgrades to homes in order to better insulate against noise penetration. A c ondition on Ric hfield was that the C ity had to consider an ordinanc e requiring new residential construction to include building materials and methods designed to better insulate against noise penetration. The C ity did pass suc h an ordinanc e in 2009 (subsequently revised in 2013). Since that time, application of this ordinanc e in prac tice has shown that the language is too vague and, in some cases, requires building materials that do not exist in the market. B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc): As a requirement of the Consent Decree between the City and the MA C , the C ity was required to consider an ordinance governing construction standards to mitigate the impact of airport noise. The C onsent D ec ree, however, did not require adoption (only consideration), nor did it affect whether the C ity could amend such an ordinanc e. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing to c onsider this ordinanc e amendment at their November 27, 2017 meeting. C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S: There are three single-family homes and 283 units of multi-family housing planned in the affected area. The contractors involved in those projects have expressed to C ity staff that there is some confusion about the language in the existing ordinanc e and that, depending on the interpretation of that ordinanc e, it might affect whether their proposals are financ ially feasible. Those projects have paused their design phase as it applies to exterior c onstruction materials until this issue is further c onsidered by the Planning C ommission and City Council. D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: There is no direct financial impact to the C ity. E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION : The C ity Attorney has been involved in discussions about this ordinance amendment and was involved in drafting the language for the proposed revision. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S): Do not approve the first reading of the ordinance amendment. P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: None AT TAC H ME N TS : D escripti on Type Ordinance Ordinance BILL NO. _____ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE SECTION 541.19 NOISE ATTENUATION (SUBDIVISION 3) THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Subsection 541.19 (Subdivison 3) of the Richfield City Code relating Noise Atenuation is amended to read as follows: Subsection 509.09. Accessory buildings. Subd. 3. Noise Attenuation Required. Any new residential construction on property located within the 2007 63+ or greater DNL Contours, or any infill construction or rebuilding of residential structures after tearing down the original structure which takes place within blocks or between structures that have received noise attenuation pursuant to the Consent Decree or pursuant to previous noise mitigation programs of the Metropolitan Airports Commission, shall utilize exterior building materials with an average Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of at least 40 (notwithstanding, windows must have an individual STC rating of at least 31 and glass doors must have an average STC rating of at least 27) and shall include installation of central air conditioning and mechanical ventilation throughout the habitable areas of the structure. Sec. 2. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 12th day of December, 2017. Pat Elliott, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION:CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM #7.F. STAFF REPORT NO. 199 CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING 11/28/2017 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: J enni fer A nderson, S upport S erivces Manager D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ay Henthorne, D irector of P ublic S afety/C hi ef of P olice 11/22/2017 O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager 11/22/2017 I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N: Consideration of the approval of setting a public hearing to be held on January 9, 2018, for the consideration of the issuance of new On-Sale W ine and 3.2 Malt Liquor licenses, with outside service, for L R F C , L LC d/b/a Local Roots Food & C offee located at 817 66th Street East. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: On September 26, 2017, the City received the application materials for new On-Sale W ine and 3.2 Malt Liquor lic enses, with outside service, for L RFC, L L C d/b/a Local Roots Food & C offee located at 817 66th Street East. Local Roots is a new addition to the City of Richfield that will be oc cupy ing the space previously held by Ric hfield Floral. All required information and documents have been received. All licensing fees have been paid. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N: By motion: Approve setting public hearing to be held on January 9, 2018, for the consideration of the issuance of new O n-Sale W ine and 3.2 Malt Liquor licenses, with outside ser vice, for L R F C, L L C d/b/a Local R oots Food & Coffee located at 817 66th Street East. B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT Being this is a notic e to "set the public hearing" at this time, staff will provide a more detailed historical context in the staff report that is submitted for the public hearing on J anuary 9, 2018. B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc): City ordinance provides the City Council c onduct a public hearing to c onsider all On-Sale W ine and 3.2 Malt Liquor license applications and a date be set for the public hearing prior to the hearing. The hearing must be sc heduled and held before a new lic ense may be considered. The new proc ess has been initiated. C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S: Holding the public hearing on J anuary 9, 2018 will provide ample time to c omplete the lic ensing process. D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: All licensing fees have been received. E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION : There are no legal considerations. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S): Reject the applications for new On-Sale W ine and 3.2 Malt Liquor lic enses, with outside service, for L RFC, L L C d/b/a Local Roots Food & C offee. Schedule the public hearing for another date; however, this will delay the licensing process. P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: There are no parties expected at this meeting. AGENDA SECTION:RESOLUTIONS - PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA ITEM #9. STAFF REPORT NO. 200 CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING 11/28/2017 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Matt B ri llhart, A ssociate P lanner D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ohn S tark, C ommunity D evelopment D i rector 11/17/2017 O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager 11/17/2017 I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N: Consideration of the approval of a resolution amending a Planned Unit Development, C onditional Use Permit, and Final Development Plan to allow a daycare facility (Primrose Schools) at Cedar Point Commons. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: Final development plans for C edar Point Commons were approved by the City C ounc il in 2006. The nearly 30 acre development included Target, Home D epot, several restaurants and inline retail shops, and space for additional development on the vacant lots west of Richfield Parkway. For many y ears, market conditions were not strong enough to develop these additional sites. I n August 2016, the City C ounc il approved an amendment to the Planned Unit Development to allow additional retail buildings and preliminary approval of a dayc are serving 180 c hildren at this location. A t the time of that approval, it was antic ipated that final approval of the daycare could be granted administratively, as long as all c ode requirements were met. The applicant is now requesting to reduce a required buffer y ard adjac ent to residential property at 6501 16th Avenue, which is the Mount Calvary Church parsonage residence. The requested buffer y ard reduction necessitates that the amendment be brought bac k before the Council for approval. Mount Calvary Church has provided a letter of support, attached to this report. Finding that all requirements are met, staff rec ommends approval of the amendment. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N: By motion: Approve a resolution amending the P lanned U nit Development, C onditional Use Permit, and Final Development Plan to allow a daycar e facility at C edar Point Commons. B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT See Exec utive Summary. B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc): There are a number of sets of review c riteria that apply to this proposal. A full discussion of all requirements is included as an attac hment to this report. Planned U nit D evelopment/Conditional U se Permit/Final Development Plan: Although this site was originally approved for retail uses, day c are is a permitted use in the underlying General Business (C-2) D istrict. On August 23, 2016, the C ity Council approved a PUD amendment granting preliminary approval of a day care serving 180 c hildren at this loc ation. At the time of that approval, it was antic ipated that final approval could be granted administratively, if all code requirements were met. The requested buffer y ard reduction necessitates that the item be brought back before the policy makers for approval. The following variations from standard requirements are requested: Buffer Yard Adjacent to Residential Use: A buffer y ard of not less than 25 feet in width and 50 percent all-season opacity from the ground to a height of six (6) feet shall be provided to separate all aspects of nonresidential uses from abutting residential parcels. The Council may reduce this requirement to not less than 15 feet if signific ant additional landscaping and/or fenc ing, with 75 perc ent all-season opacity, is provided to screen the use (Zoning Code Section 544.03 S ubd. 6). Due to site constraints, the applic ant proposes to reduc e the buffer y ard requirement along the west lot line to 6.8 feet for the parking lot and to 0 feet for the playground area. The owner of the adjacent residential property at 6501 16th Avenue (Mount Calvary Church) has provided a letter of support for this deviation from requirements. Building O rientation: Code requires that buildings be oriented suc h that a least one primary entrance faces the street. The sec urity needs of a day care limit opportunities for a second primary entrance fac ing Ric hfield Parkway or 65th S treet. S ite design and outdoor play areas will help activate the street frontage. C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S: 60-D AY RUL E: The 60-day clock 'started' when a complete applic ation was received on September 25, 2017. A decision or extension was required by November 24, 2017. The deadline was extended 60 additional days (120 day s total), and the City must issue a dec ision on this matter no later than J anuary 23, 2018. D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: None E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION : A public hearing was held before the P lanning C ommission on Oc tober 23, 2017. Notic e of the public hearing was published in the Sun Current newspaper and mailed to properties within 350 feet of the site on Oc tober 10, 2017. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposal by a unanimous vote. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S): Approve the resolution with modifications. Deny the request with a finding that the proposal does not meet requirements. P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: J ohn Finnemore, Primrose Sc hools AT TAC H ME N TS : D escripti on Type Resolution Resolution L etter Requirements attachment B ackup Materi al P roposed plans B ackup Materi al Zoning maps B ackup Materi al Mount C alvary letter B ackup Materi al RESOLUTION NO. ______ RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDED FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CEDAR POINT COMMONS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests approval of an amended final development plan and conditional use permit to allow construction of a day care facility to complete development of the Cedar Point Commons planned unit development located at approximately 66th Street East and Richfield Parkway, property legally described as: LOTS 1,2,3,5 AND 7, BLOCK 1, CEDAR POINT COMMONS, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AND LOTS 1-4, BLOCK 2, CEDAR POINT COMMONS, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield held a public hearing and recommended approval of the requested amendment to the final development plan and conditional use permit at its October 23, 2017 meeting; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was mailed to properties within 350 feet of the subject property on October 10, 2017 and published in the Sun-Current on October 12, 2017; and WHEREAS, the requested amendment to the final development plan and conditional use permit meets those requirements necessary for approving a planned unit development as specified in Richfield’s Zoning Code, Section 542.09, Subd. 3 and as detailed in City Council Staff Report No.______; and WHEREAS, the request meets those requirements necessary for approving a conditional use permit as specified in Richfield’s Zoning Code, Section 547.09, Subd. 6 and as detailed in City Council Staff Report No.______; and WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval of an amended planned unit development, final development plan and conditional use permit; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City Council adopts as its Findings of Fact the WHEREAS clauses set forth above. 2. An amended planned unit development, final development plan and conditional use permit are approved for a day care facility serving 180 children, as described in City Council Report No. ___, on the Subject Property legally described above. 3. The approved planned unit development, final development plan and conditional use permit are subject to the following conditions: • A recorded copy of the approved resolution must be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit. • The final plat of Cedar Point Commons must be approved by the City Council and the plat recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. A cross access agreement between the parcels is required and must be recorded prior to occupancy. Proof of recording must be provided to the City. • The property owner is responsible for the ongoing maintenance and tending of all landscaping in accordance with approved plans. • The residential buffer requirement in Section 544.03, Subd. 6, as applied to the west lot line abutting 6501 16th Avenue, is waived for a day care, school, or similar uses. If the use of property changes substantially, the 15-foot buffer requirement must be met before the new use may commence. • Snow storage within the surface parking lot is prohibited. All parking spaces must remain available year round. • A final lighting plan complying with City requirements is required. • Grading, drainage, erosion control, and utility plans must be approved by Richfield Public Works. All new utility service must be underground. • All utilities must be screened from public view in accordance with Ordinance requirements. A screening plan is required prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. • Separate sign permits are required. • The applicant is responsible for obtaining all required permits, compliance with all requirements detailed in the City’s Administrative Review Committee Report dated October 6, 2017 and compliance with all other City and State regulations. • Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit the developer must submit a surety equal to 125% of the value of any improvements not yet complete. • Unless specifically modified by this resolution, all previous conditions of approval remain in place. 4. The approved planned unit development, final development plan and conditional use permit shall expire one year from issuance unless the use for which the permit was granted has commenced, substantial work has been completed or upon written request by the developer, the Council extends the expiration date for an additional period of up to one year, as required by the Zoning Ordinance, Section 547.09, Subd. 9. 5. The approved planned unit development, final development plan and conditional use permit shall remain in effect for so long as conditions regulating it are observed, and the conditional use permit shall expire if normal operation of the use has been discontinued for 12 or more months, as required by the Zoning Ordinance, Section 547.09, Subd. 10. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of November, 2017. Pat Elliott, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk Required Findings Part 1: The following findings are necessary for approval of a PUD application (542.09 Subd. 3): 1. The proposed development conforms to the goals and objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and any applicable redevelopment plans. The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for regional commercial/office development. The proposed building represents the final component of the larger Cedar Point Commons development that was begun in 2006. 2. The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. This requirement is met. While the proposed building differs from the architecture of the existing development, the site has been designed to function in a substantially similar manner as the originally approved plans. 3. The development is in substantial conformance with the purpose and intent of the guiding district, and departures from the guiding district regulations are justified by the design of the development. The development is in substantial compliance with the intent of the guiding C-2 District. 4. The development will not create an excessive burden on parks, schools, streets or other public facilities and utilities that serve or area proposed to serve the development. The City’s Public Works, Engineering and Recreation Departments have reviewed the proposal and do not anticipate any issues. 5. The development will not have undue adverse impacts on neighboring properties. No undue adverse impacts are anticipated. 6. The terms and conditions proposed to maintain the integrity of the plan are sufficient to protect the public interest. This requirement is met; appropriate stipulations have been incorporated into the final resolution. Part 2: All uses are conditional uses in the PC-2 District. The findings necessary to issue a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) are as follows (Subd. 547.09, Subd. 6): 1. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. See above – Part 1, #1. 2. The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. The use is consistent with the intent of the Planned General Business District and the underlying General Business District. The proposal provides attractive commercial development that is compatible with adjacent properties and no significant adverse impacts are anticipated. 3. The proposed use is consistent with any officially adopted redevelopment plans or urban design guidelines. The proposed use is similar to the previously adopted Planned Unit Development for this area. A different style of architecture for a day care is justified and reasonable for this development. 4. The proposed use is or will be in compliance with the performance standards specified in Section 544 of this code. The proposed development is in substantial compliance with City performance standards. Deviation from Code requirements is requested as follows: • Building Orientation – Code requires that buildings be oriented such that a least one primary entrance faces the street. The security needs of a day care limit opportunities for a second primary entrance facing Richfield Parkway. Site design and outdoor play areas will help activate the street frontage. • Residential Buffer Yard – Due to site constraints, the applicant proposes to reduce the buffer yard requirement along the west lot line to 6.8 feet for the parking lot and to 0 feet for the playground area. The owner of the adjacent residential property at 6501 16th Avenue (Mt. Calvary Church) has provided a letter of support for this deviation from requirements. 5. The proposed use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities, utilities, services, or existing or proposed improvements. The City’s Public Works and Engineering Departments have reviewed the proposal and do not anticipate any adverse impacts. 6. The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the public health, safety, or welfare. Adequate provisions have been made to protect the public health, safety and welfare. 7. There is a public need for such use at the proposed location. See above – Part 1, #1. 8. The proposed use meets or will meet all the specific conditions set by this code for the granting of such conditional use permit. This requirement is met. SCALE IN FEET04020 Oct 09, 2017 - 12:48pm - User:jmckinney L:\PROJECTS\20769\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20769-C301-SITE.dwgC3.01SITE PLANProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientPRIMROSESCHOOLSFRANCHISINGCOMPANY3660 CEDARCREST ROADACWORTH, GEORGIA 30101PRIMROSESCHOOLRICHFIELD, MN6500 RICHFIELD PARKWAYEAVJMWEWMPRELIMINARYMM/DD/201720769Registration No.I hereby certify that this plan, specification orreport was prepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a duly licensedprofessional ENGINEER under the laws of the stateof Minnesota.If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of thisplan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,Minnetonka, MN office.Date:54914Eric A. VogelMM/DD/2017PR E L IM INAR Y AREAGROSS SITE AREASETBACKSFRONT YARDREAR YARDINTERIOR SIDE YARDPARKING-SIDE/REARPARKING-ROADZONINGEXISTING ZONINGPROPOSED ZONINGPARKING SUMMARYADAADA - VANSTANDARD 9'x19'1.ALL DIMENSIONS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST TENTH FOOT.2.ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.3.KEdZdKZ^,>>Zs/tWsDEd'Z/EdEKE^dZhd͞'hddZKhd͟t,ZtdZZ/E^tz&ZKDhZ͘>>Kd,ZZ^^,>>KE^dZhd^͞'hddZ/E͟hZ͘COORDINATE WITH GRADING CONTRACTOR.4.ALL AREAS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST SQUARE FOOT.5.ALL PARKING STALLS TO BE 9' IN WIDTH AND 19' IN LENGTH UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.6.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OFEXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCELOCATIONS.7.SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR PYLON SIGN DETAILS8.SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION DETAIL AND FOR EXACT LOCATIONS OF LIGHTPOLE.9.REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, LOT NUMBERS, LOT AREAS, AND LOT DIMENSIONS.10.ALL GRADIENTS ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL SLOPEOF 5% (1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB RAMPS (1:12), AND A MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE OF 2.08% (1:48). THEMAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION ON AN ADA PARKING STALL OR ACCESS ISLE SHALL BE 2.08% (1:48).THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADA ROUTESPRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THEENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD VERSUS THEDESIGN GRADIENT AND COORDINATE WITH GRADING CONTRACTOR.11."NO PARKING" SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED ALONG ALL DRIVEWAYS AS REQUIRED BY CITY.12.STREET NAMES ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY.LEGENDEASEMENTCURB & GUTTERBUILDINGRETAINING WALLSAWCUT LINENUMBER OF PARKINGSTALLS PER ROWSIGNPIPE BOLLARDSTANDARD DUTYASPHALT PAVINGHEAVY DUTYASPHALT PAVINGCONCRETE PAVINGPROPERTY LIMITEXISTINGPROPOSEDKEY NOTEDEVELOPMENT SUMMARYDEVELOPMENT NOTESKEY NOTESWETLAND LIMITSTREELINEA.BUILDING, STOOPS, STAIRS SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANSB.B-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTERC.B-618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTERD.CONCRETE APRONE.FLAT CURB SECTIONF.TRANSITION CURB TO MATCH EXISTINGG.ACCESSIBLE RAMPH.ACCESSIBLE STALL STRIPINGI.ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGNJ.TRANSFORMERK.CONCRETE SIDEWALKL.TRASH ENCLOSURE (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)M.MONUMENT SIGNN.TAPERED CURB SECTIONO.INTEGRAL CURBP.DECORATIVE FENCEQ.EXISTING WOOD FENCER.BIKE RACKS (2)58,681 SF1.35 AC35 FEET 25 FEET 0 FEET 5 FEET 8 FEET PC-2 PC-2 2 STALL 1 STALL48 STALLS50 STALLS TOTALTHE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL XX. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINEDACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTINGSUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTINGUTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THECONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BYHIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE,INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.CONCRETE SIDEWALK R 16TH AVE SHIGHWAY 7766TH ST EBLOOMINGTON AVE65TH ST E SB HWY77 TO 66TH ST E17TH AVE SCEDAR AVE SRICHFIELD PKWY66TH ST E TO SB HWY7718TH AVE SHIGHWAY 77RICHFIELD PKWYPC-2 C-2 PC-2 PC-2 R C-2C-2 PC-2 R PC-2 R R PC-2 R PC-2 R R C-2 R R R R R R RR RR R R R R R C-2 R PC-2 PC-2 C-2 C-2 C-2 C-2 PMR PC-2PC-2 PC-2 PC-2 MR-3 MR-3 MR-3 MR-3 MR-3 MR-3 MR-3 MR-3 C-2C-2 PC-2PC-2 PC-2 ± Cedar Point Commons - APUD 10/2017Surrounding Zoning 0 250 500 750 1,000125FeetC-2 - General CommercialPC-2 - Planned General CommercialR - Single Family ResidentialPMR - Planned Multi-Family ResidentialMR-3 - High Density Multi-Family Residential 350 ft I:\GIS\Community Development\Staff\Planning Tech\Projects\Cedar Point Commons APUD - Z.mxd RC RC RC PUB RC RC RC RC RC RC CCOCCO CCOCCCC CC CC RC RC LDR LDR LDR LDR CCCC HDR HDR HDR HDR LDR CCO HDR HDR HDR HDR LDR LDR LDR LDR CHURCH LDR LDR LDR LDR LDRLDR LDRLDR LDR LDR LDR LDR LDR MIXED LDR RC CCOCCOCHURCH 16TH AVE SHIGHWAY 7766TH ST EBLOOMINGTON AVE65TH ST E SB HWY77 TO 66TH ST E17TH AVE SCEDAR AVE SRICHFIELD PKWY66TH ST E TO SB HWY7718TH AVE SHIGHWAY 77RICHFIELD PKWY± Cedar Point Commons - APUD 10/2017Surrounding Comprehensive Plan 0 250 500 750 1,000125FeetRC - Regional CommericalCC - Community CommercialCCO - Community Commercial/OfficeMIXED - Mixed UseLDR - Low Density ResidentialHDR - High Density ResidentialPUB - Public 350 ft I:\GIS\Community Development\Staff\Planning Tech\Projects\Cedar Point Commons APUD - CP.mxd AGENDA SECTION:PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA ITEM #10. STAFF REPORT NO. 201 CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING 11/28/2017 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Melissa P oehlman, A sst. C ommunity D evelopment D irector D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ohn S tark, C ommunity D evelopment D i rector 11/17/2017 O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager 11/17/2017 I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N: Public hearing and consideration of the appr oval of resolutions related to the establishment of a new Tax Increment Financing D istrict for the Chamberlain development. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: On September 26, 2017, the Council approved plans for The C hamberlain, a multi-family housing development on the city 's east side that also inc ludes a two-block extension of Ric hfield Parkway. A revised Contract for P rivate Development (Contract) with C hamberlain Apartments L L C (D eveloper) was approved by the HRA on Oc tober 16, 2017. This Contrac t c alls for the HRA to establish Tax I nc rement Financ ing Distric t 2017-1 (a housing distric t) in order to facilitate redevelopment of the property and promote the development of affordable housing. The development area c urrently sits within an existing Redevelopment Tax I nc rement Financ ing (TI F) Distric t (the Cedar Avenue TI F D istrict) that was established in 2005. C ity staff, HRA TI F analysts from Ehlers, I nc., the HRA Attorney, and the developer have conc luded that a new Housing TI F D istrict would be better suited to this development. I n order to establish a new Housing TI F D istrict for the projec t, the 31 parcels within the project area must be removed from the existing C edar Avenue TI F District. The TI F Plan estimates the generation of up to $25,586,527 of Tax I ncrement (see page 2-5 of the attached TI F Plan). This money will be available to reimburse the developer for "TI F Qualified Expenses" over the life of the TI F District. The HRA adopted substantially similar resolutions on November 20, 2017 and the Planning Commission adopted a resolution finding the Modific ations and TI F Plan c onsistent with the Comprehensive Plan on November 27, 2017. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N: By motion: Approve resolutions to a) modify the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing D istrict and b) to modify the Redevelopment P lan for the R ichfield Redevelopment P roject Area, establish Tax Increment Financing District 2017-1 (The C hamberlain) within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Ar ea, and adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor. B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT A 1999/2000 study, commissioned by the City of Richfield and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MA C ), conc luded that many of the structures in this area, inc luding all single-family homes, were not c apable of withstanding the negative impacts of low frequency noise. As a result of the study, this area was identified as a Redevelopment A rea in 2000. I n Oc tober 2015, the HRA entered into a preliminary agreement with I nland D evelopment Partners to develop a multi-family housing project in this area. After two years of work, final development plans for The Chamberlain project and a Contract for Private Development were approved in S eptember and October of this y ear. B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc): The C ounc il must c onduct a public hearing and take ac tion to approve a modific ation to the Richfield Redevelopment Project A rea Redevelopment Plan, a modific ation to the TI F Plan for the Cedar Avenue TI F D istrict, and to establish the 2017-1 Tax I ncrement Financing Distric t and its Plan. C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S: A TI F Distric t must be established in order for the project to move forward. D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: The approved C ontrac t for Private D evelopment provides the developer with 90% of the available TI F over the life of the District. Ten perc ent (10%) of the TI F will be alloc ated to the HRA to reimburse its administrative expenses in creating the TI F D istrict and in c omplying with regular reporting requirements and other qualified administrative costs. W ithout the money available through the TI F Distric t, this project would be unable to proc eed. E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION : HRA legal counsel has been involved in every step of this process and has reviewed the resolutions. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S): Do not approve the resolutions. P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: J ames Lehnhoff, Ehlers & Assoc iates AT TAC H ME N TS : D escripti on Type Resolution - E stablish 2017-1 (C hamberlai n) TIF D istrict Resolution L etter Resolution - Modify C edar Ave TIF D istrict Resolution L etter TIF P lan S ummary E xhibit C edar Avenue TIF P lan Modification E xhibit 2017-1 (C hamberlain) TIF P lan E xhibit CITY OF RICHFIELD HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Council member ______________________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. __________ RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND ESTABLISHING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 2017-1 (THE CHAMBERLAIN) THEREIN AND ADOPTING A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The Board of Commissioners of the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA") has heretofore established the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and adopted a Redevelopment Plan therefor. It has been proposed by the HRA and the City that the City adopt a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan Modification") for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area") and establish Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) (the "District") therein and adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") therefor (the Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Plans"); all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, all inclusive, as amended, (the "Act") all as reflected in the Plans, and presented for the Council's consideration. 1.02. The HRA and City have investigated the facts relating to the Plans and have caused the Plans to be prepared. 1.03. The HRA and City have performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the establishment of the District and the adoption and approval of the proposed Plans, including, but not limited to, notification of Hennepin County and Independent School District No. 280 having taxing jurisdiction over the property to be included in the District, a review of and written comment on the Plans by the City Planning Commission, approval of the Plans by the HRA on November 20, 2017, and the holding of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law. 1.04. Certain written reports (the ''Reports") relating to the Plans and to the activities contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and consultants and submitted to the Council and/or made a part of the City files and proceedings on the Plans. The Reports include data, information and/or substantiation constituting or relating to the basis for the other findings and determinations made in this resolution. The Council hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are hereby incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein. 1.05. The City is not modifying the boundaries of the Project Area, but is however, modifying the Redevelopment Plan therefor. Section 2. Findings for the Adoption and Approval of the Redevelopment Plan Modification. 2.01. The Council approves the Redevelopment Plan Modification, and specifically finds that: (a) the land within the Project Area would not be available for redevelopment without the financial aid to be sought under this Redevelopment Plan; (b) the Redevelopment Plan Modification will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the Project Area by private enterprise; and (c) that the Redevelopment Plan Modification conforms to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole. Section 3. Findings for the Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain). 3.01. The Council hereby finds that Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) is in the public interest and is a "housing district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subd. 11 of the Act. 3.02. The Council further finds that the proposed development would not occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future, that the Plans conform to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and that the Plans will afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the District by private enterprise. 3.03. The Council further finds, declares and determines that the City made the above findings stated in this Section and has set forth the reasons and supporting facts for each determination in writing, attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 4. Public Purpose. 4.01. The adoption of the Plans conforms in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will help fulfill a need to develop an area of the City which is already built up, to provide housing opportunities, to improve the tax base and to improve the general economy of the State and thereby serves a public purpose. For the reasons described in Exhibit A, the City believes these benefits directly derive from the tax increment assistance provided under the TIF Plan. A private developer will receive only the assistance needed to make this development financially feasible. As such, any private benefits received by a developer are incidental and do not outweigh the primary public benefits. Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Plans. 5.01. The Plans, as presented to the Council on this date, including without limitation the findings and statements of objectives contained therein, are hereby approved, ratified, established, and adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the Community Development Director. 5.02. The staff of the City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Plans and to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose. 5.03 The Auditor of Hennepin County is requested to certify the original net tax capacity of the District, as described in the Plans, and to certify in each year thereafter the amount by which the original net tax capacity has increased or decreased; and the HRA is authorized and directed to forthwith transmit this request to the County Auditor in such form and content as the Auditor may specify, together with a list of all properties within the District, for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding the adoption of this resolution. 5.04. The Community Development Director is further authorized and directed to file a copy of the Plans with the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Revenue and the Office of the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.175, Subd. 4a. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council member _________________, and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: Dated: November 28, 2017 ATTEST: __________________________________ _____________________________________ Mayor City Clerk (Seal) EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. ___________ The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain), as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) is a housing district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11. TIF District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) consists of 31 parcels. As proposed, the development will consist of mixed-income housing projects with a total of 316 apartment units that includes rehabilitating three existing buildings with a total of 33 apartment units and constructing three new buildings with a total of 283 apartment units. All or a portion of which will receive tax increment assistance and will meet income restrictions described in M.S. 469.1761. At least 20 percent of the units/homes receiving assistance will have incomes at or below 50 percent of area median income. Appendices A and E of the TIF Plan contains background for the above finding. 2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future. The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact that the development proposed in this plan is a housing district that meets the City's objectives for development and redevelopment, but that due to the high costs of building new housing in the City, the cost of financing the proposed public improvements, and the insufficiency of rents in developments with affordable housing to provide a sufficient financial return, the project is feasible only through the assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The developer was asked for and provided a letter and a pro forma as justification that the developer would not have gone forward without tax increment assistance. 3. Finding that the TIF Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Planning Commission reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City. 4. Finding that the TIF Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Richfield Redevelopment Project Area by private enterprise. Through the implementation of the TIF Plan, the HRA or City will provide an impetus for residential development, which is desirable or necessary for increased population and an increased need for life-cycle housing within the City. CITY OF RICHFIELD HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Council member ______________________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. ______ RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE CEDAR AVENUE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT WITHIN THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA") has heretofore established Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and adopted the Redevelopment Plan therefor and established the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District and adopted the Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor. It has been proposed that the City adopt a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the “Modification”) for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District (the "District"), all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive as amended (the "Act"), as well as Minnesota Laws 2005, Chapter 152, Article 2, Section 25 (the “2005 Special Law”) and Minnesota Laws 2017, First Special Session, Chapter 1, Article 6, Section 18, (the “2017 Special Law”) all as reflected in the Modifications, and presented for the Council's consideration. 1.02. The Council has investigated the facts related to the Modification and has caused the Modification to be prepared. 1.03. The City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the adoption and approval of the proposed Modification, including, but not limited to, notification of Hennepin County and Independent School District No. 280 having taxing jurisdiction over the property included in the District, and the holding of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law. 1.04. The City is not modifying the boundaries of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. 1.05. The City is modifying the boundaries by removing parcels for inclusion in Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain). 1.05. The City is extending the duration of the District pursuant to the 2017 Special Law. Section 2. Decertification of Parcels from the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 2.01. On September 26, 2006, the HRA created the District pursuant to the 2005 Special Law within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area by approval of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the District. 2.02. The City desires by this resolution to amend the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the District to remove the parcels listed in Exhibit A from the District, thereby reducing the size thereof. 2.03. The City has determined that the current net tax capacity (pay 2017) of the parcels proposed to be eliminated from the District is $29,465. Since the current tax capacity is lower than the frozen tax capacity of $33,779, the City has undergone the full public hearing process pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.175, Subdivision 4. 2.04. The City resolves that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the District is hereby amended to remove the described parcels and the Community Development Director is authorized and directed to notify the County Auditor thereof pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 4, clause (b). Section 3. Extension of the Duration of the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 3.01. The date of receipt by the City of the first increment was in July, 2008. 3.02. The 2017 Special Law extends the duration of the District an additional ten years (for a total of 35 years from the first receipt of increment). 3.03. The City has approved the Special Law in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, §645.021. 3.04. The City resolves that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the District is hereby amended to extend the duration of the District. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the District, would terminate on December 31, 2043, or when the Tax Increment Financing Plan is satisfied. The City reserves the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required date. Section 4. Findings for the Tax Increment Plan Modification 4.01. The Council hereby reaffirms the original findings for the District, namely that the when the District was established, it was established as an a "redevelopment district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10. In addition, the City makes the following findings: I. The Modification conforms to the general plan for development or redevelopment of the City as a whole. The reason for supporting this finding is that the Modification reaffirms the original finding that the District will generally complement and serve to implement policies adopted in the City's comprehensive plan. II. The Modification will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area by private enterprise. The reason for supporting this finding is that the City reaffirms that the development activities contemplated during the establishment of the District were necessary so that development and redevelopment by private enterprise can occur within Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. III. The development and redevelopment efforts, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and therefor the use of tax increment financing is deemed necessary. Section 5. Public Purpose 5.01. The adoption of the Modification conforms in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will help fulfill a need to develop an area of the State which is already built up and that the adoption of the proposed Modification will help provide employment opportunities in the State and in the preservation and enhancement of the tax base fo the City and the State because it will discourage commere and industry from moving their operations to another state or municipality and thereby serves a public purpose. Section 6. Approval and Adoption of the Modification; Filing. 6.01. The Modification is hereby approved, and shall be placed on file in the office of the Community Development Director. Approval of the Modification does not constitute approval of any project or a development agreement with any developer. 6.02. The staff of the City are authorized to file the Modification with the Commissioner of Revenue, the Office of the State Auditor and the Hennepin County Auditor. 6.03. The staff of the City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Modification and for this purpose to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council for its consideration all further modifications, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council member _________________, and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: Dated: November 28, 2017 ATTEST: __________________________________ _____________________________________ Mayor Clerk (Seal) EXHIBIT A The following parcels are being removed from the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District for inclusion in Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (the Chamberlain). Parcel Number Frozen Tax Capacity Pay 17 Tax Capacity Difference 26-028-24-41-0067 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0068 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0069 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0070 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0071 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0072 2370 0 (2370) 26-028-24-41-0073 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0074 2460 0 (2460) 26-028-24-41-0075 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0076 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0077 1784 0 (1784) 26-028-24-41-0080 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0081 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0082 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0083 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0084 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0085 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0086 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0087 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0096 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0097 8425 9350 925 26-028-24-41-0098 8425 9350 925 26-028-24-41-0099 8425 9350 925 26-028-24-41-0100 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0101 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0102 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0103 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0104 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0105 1890 1415 (475) 26-028-24-41-0106 0 0 0 26-028-24-41-0107 0 0 0 Tax Increment Financing District Overview City of Richfield Tax Increment Financing District 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) The following summary contains an overview of the basic elements of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Tax Increment Financing District 2017-1 (The Chamberlain). More detailed information on each of these topics can be found in the complete Tax Increment Financing Plan. Proposed action: Establishment of the Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) (the “District”) and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan). Modification of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District (the “Cedar Avenue TIF District”) to include special legislation extending the duration of the Cedar Avenue TIF District and to remove parcels for inclusion in the new District. Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project includes the establishment of the Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain), which represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project. Type of TIF District: A housing district Parcel Numbers: 26-028-24-41-0067 26-028-24-41-0068 26-028-24-41-0069 26-028-24-41-0070 26-028-24-41-0071 26-028-24-41-0072 26-028-24-41-0073 26-028-24-41-0074 26-028-24-41-0075 26-028-24-41-0076 26-028-24-41-0077 26-028-24-41-0080 26-028-24-41-0081 26-028-24-41-0082 26-028-24-41-0083 26-028-24-41-0084 26-028-24-41-0085 26-028-24-41-0086 26-028-24-41-0087 26-028-24-41-0096 26-028-24-41-0097 26-028-24-41-0098 26-028-24-41-0099 26-028-24-41-0100 26-028-24-41-0101 26-028-24-41-0102 26-028-24-41-0103 26-028-24-41-0104 26-028-24-41-0105 26-028-24-41-0106 26-028-24-41-0107 *All the parcels listed are currently in the Cedar Avenue TIF District and will be removed for inclusion in the new District. Proposed Development: The District is being created to facilitate the construction of 316 mixed- income apartments in the City, which includes rehabilitating 33 existing apartments and constructing 283 new apartments. Please see Appendix A of the TIF Plan for a more detailed project description. Maximum duration: The duration of the District will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment (26 years of increment). The City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2020. It is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after December 31, 2045, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The duration of the Cedar Avenue TIF District is being extended 10 years pursuant to Minnesota Laws 2017, First Special Session, Chapter 1, Article 6, Section 18. The date of receipt by the City of the first increment was in 2008. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after December 31, 2043, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. Estimated annual tax increment: Up to $1,462,003 Authorized uses: The TIF Plan contains a budget that authorizes the maximum amount that may be expended: Land/Building Acquisition .................................................. $5,100,000 Site Improvements/Preparation .............................................. $750,000 Utilities ................................................................................... $750,000 Affordable Housing ............................................................ $8,250,000 Other Qualifying Improvements ............................................ $512,032 Administrative Costs (up to 10%) ....................................... $2,558,653 PROJECT COSTS TOTAL .............................................. $17,920,685 Interest .............................................................................. $10,225,495 PROJECT COSTS TOTAL ........................................... $28,145,180 See Subsection 2-10, on page 2-6 of the TIF Plan for the full budget authorization. Form of financing: The project is proposed to be financed by a pay-as-you-go note and interfund loan. Administrative fee: Up to 10% of annual increment, if costs are justified. Interfund Loan Requirement: If the City wants to pay for administrative expenditures from a tax increment fund, it must pass a resolution authorizing a loan from another fund be within 60 days of the issuance of the check or the reimbursement will not be allowed. 4 Year Activity Rule (§ 469.176 Subd. 6) After four years from the date of certification of the District one of the following activities must have been commenced on each parcel in the District: • Demolition • Rehabilitation • Renovation • Other site preparation (not including utility services such as sewer and water) If the activity has not been started by approximately November 2021, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel until the commencement of a qualifying activity. The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the TIF Plan for the District, as required pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3, are included in Exhibit A of the City resolution. As of October 23, 2017 Draft for Public Hearing Modification to the TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for the THE CEDAR AVENUE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT (a redevelopment district) within THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CITY OF RICHFIELD HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Adopted: September 26, 2006 Modification No. 1 Public Hearing: November 28, 2017 Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105 651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehlers-inc.com TABLE OF CONTENTS (for reference purposes only) SECTION I - TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE CEDAR AVENUE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT ............ 1-1 Subsection 1-1. Foreword............................................... 1-1 Subsection 1-2. Statutory Authority........................................ 1-1 Subsection 1-3. Statement of Objectives ................................... 1-1 Subsection 1-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview .............................. 1-1 Subsection 1-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired . 1-2 Subsection 1-6. Classification of the District................................. 1-2 Subsection 1-7. Duration of the District..................................... 1-3 Subsection 1-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ................ 1-3 Subsection 1-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonded Indebtedness .................... 1-4 Subsection 1-10. Uses of Funds ........................................... 1-5 Subsection 1-11. Fiscal Disparities Election.................................. 1-6 Subsection 1-12. Business Subsidies....................................... 1-7 Subsection 1-13. County Road Costs ....................................... 1-8 Subsection 1-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions................. 1-8 Subsection 1-15. Supporting Documentation ................................ 1-10 Subsection 1-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ....................... 1-11 Subsection 1-17. Modifications to the District................................ 1-11 Subsection 1-18. Administrative Expenses .................................. 1-12 Subsection 1-19. Limitation of Increment ................................... 1-12 Subsection 1-20. Use of Tax Increment .................................... 1-13 Subsection 1-21. Excess Increments ...................................... 1-14 Subsection 1-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer .............. 1-14 Subsection 1-23. Assessment Agreements ................................. 1-14 Subsection 1-24. Administration of the District ............................... 1-14 Subsection 1-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements ........................... 1-15 Subsection 1-26. Reasonable Expectations ................................. 1-15 Subsection 1-27. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment................. 1-15 Subsection 1-28. Summary.............................................. 1-16 APPENDIX A PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................ A-1 APPENDIX B MAP(S) OF THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND THE DISTRICT ..................................................................... B-1 APPENDIX C DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT............. C-1 APPENDIX D ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR THE DISTRICT .............................. D-1 APPENDIX E MINNESOTA BUSINESS ASSISTANCE FORM ............................... E-1 APPENDIX F FINDINGS AND BUT/FOR QUALIFICATIONS ................................ F-1 APPENDIX G PRIOR IMPROVEMENTS ................................................ G-1 APPENDIX H LAWS OF MINNESOTA 2005 ................................................ H-1 SECTION I - TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE CEDAR AVENUE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT Subsection 1-1. Foreword The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), the City of Richfield (the "City"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District (the "District"), a redevelopment tax increment financing district, located in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. Subsection 1-2. Statutory Authority Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or redevelopment to occur. To this end, the HRA and City have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ("M.S."), Sections 469.001 to 469.047, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act"), to assist in financing public costs related to this project. The HRA and City derive further statutory authority by virtue of Laws of Minnesota 2005, Chapter 152, Article 2, Section 25. This section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the District. Other relevant information is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. (AS MODIFIED NOVEMBER 28, 2017) Pursuant to Minnesota Laws 2017, First Special Session, Chapter 1, Article 6, Section 18 (the “Special Law”), the duration of the District is being extended an additional ten years. A copy of the Special Law can be found in Appendix I. Subsection 1-3. Statement of Objectives The District currently consists of 172 parcel(s) of land and adjacent and internal rights-of-way. The District is being created to facilitate construction of approximately 350,000 sq. ft. of retail development, 600,000 sq. ft. of office space and 600 housing units in the City of Richfield. Please see Appendix A for further project information. Contracts for this have not been entered into at the time of preparation of this TIF Plan, but development is likely to occur in 2007. This TIF Plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan do not preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated to occur over the life of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and the District. (AS MODIFIED NOVEMBER 28, 2017) The District is being modified in order to remove 31 parcels for inclusion in Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) and to extend the duration of the District pursuant to the Special Law. Contracts for redevelopment have not been entered into at the time of preparation of this Modification, but development may occur in 2019. Please see Appendix A for further project information and background information on the District. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-1 Subsection 1-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview 1. Property to be Acquired - Selected property located within the District may be acquired by the HRA or City and is further described in this TIF Plan. 2. Relocation - Relocation services, to the extent required by law, are available pursuant to M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws. 3. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary legal requirements, the HRA or City may sell to a developer selected properties that it may acquire within the District or may lease land or facilities to a developer. 4. The HRA or City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District. Subsection 1-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcel(s) listed below. See the map in Appendix B for further information on the location of the District. Parcel Numbers *See Appendix C The HRA or City may acquire any parcel within the District including interior and adjacent street rights of way. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the HRA or City only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets, utilities and facilities; carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The HRA or City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Subsection 1-6. Classification of the District The HRA and City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with Laws of Minnesota 2005, Chapter 152, Article 2, Section 25. Specifically, the enacted language is as follows: Sec. 25. [CITY OF RICHFIELD; TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT.] Subdivision 1. [AUTHORIZATION.] The City of Richfield may create a tax increment financing district consisting of an area lying west of Trunk Highway 77 extending: to 16th Avenue between Crosstown Highway 62 and 66th Street; to 17th Avenue between 66th and 69th Streets; and to 18th Avenue between 69th and 72nd Streets. The City or it's Housing and Redevelopment Authority may be the authority for the purposes of Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.174 to 469.179. Subd. 2. [DISTRICT IS REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.] The redevelopment tax increment district created pursuant to subdivision 1 is deemed to be a Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-2 redevelopment district and is subject to Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.174 to 469.179, except that: (1) expenditures for activities as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 469.1763, subdivision 1, paragraph (b), anywhere in the district are deemed to be the costs of correcting conditions that allow the designation of redevelopment districts pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 469.174, subdivision 10; and (2) the five-year rule under Minnesota Statutes, section 469.1763, subdivision 3, does not apply. [EFFECTIVE DATE.] This section received local approval by the City of Richfield on June 28, 2005 in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, section 645.021. Pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.176 Subd. 7, the District does not contain any parcel or part of a parcel that qualified under the provisions of M.S., Sections 273.111 or 273.112 or Chapter 473H for taxes payable in any of the five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification of the District. Subsection 1-7. Duration of the District Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration of the District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 1b, the duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the HRA or City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The date of receipt by the City of the first tax increment is expected to be 2008. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2033, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. If increment is received in 2009, the term of the District will be 2034. The HRA or City reserves the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required date. (AS MODIFIED NOVEMBER 28, 2017) Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration of the District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Section 469.176, Subd. 1b, provides that the duration of the District would be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). Pursuant to the Special Law, the duration of District is being extended an additional ten years (for a total of 35 years from receipt of first increment). The date of receipt by the City of the first increment was in 2008. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate on December 31, 2043, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The City reserves the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required date. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-3 Subsection 1-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor in 2006 for taxes payable 2007. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 2008) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of: 1. Change in tax exempt status of property; 2. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district; 3. Change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements; 4. Change in the use of the property and classification; 5. Change in state law governing class rates; or 6. Change in previously issued building permits. In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTC, no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the HRA or City. The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2007, assuming the request for certification is made before June 30, 2007. The ONTC and the Original Local Tax Rate for the District appear in the table below. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, upon completion of the project, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the following table. The HRA and City request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2008. The Project Tax Capacity (PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the project is completed. WATERSHED DISTRICT NO. 0 Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $4,159,167 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) $524,969 Fiscal Disparities Reduction $862,825 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $2,771,373 Original Local Tax Rate 1.07715 Pay 2006 Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $2,985,184 Percent Retained by the HRA 100% Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-4 WATERSHED DISTRICT NO. 3 Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $831,833 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) $143,105 Fiscal Disparities Reduction $163,557 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $525,171 Original Local Tax Rate 1.087870 Pay 2006 Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $571,318 Percent Retained by the HRA 100% Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the HRA shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building permit was issued. The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District has found building permits that were issued in the past 18 months prior to the public hearing. Please see Appendix H for the building permits that were issued. Subsection 1-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonded Indebtedness Public improvement costs, acquisition, relocation, utilities, parking facilities, streets and sidewalks, and site preparation costs and other costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The HRA or City reserves the right to use other sources of revenue legally ap- plicable to the HRA or City and the TIF Plan, including, but not limited to, special assessments, general property taxes, state aid for road maintenance and construction, proceeds from the sale of land, other contribu- tions from the developer and investment income, to pay for the estimated public costs. The HRA or City reserves the right to incur bonded indebtedness or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF Plan. As presently proposed, the project will be financed by a bond issue/pay-as-you-go note/interfund loan/transfer. Additional indebtedness may be required to finance other authorized activities. The total principal amount of bonded indebtedness, including a general obligation (GO) TIF bond, or other indebtedness related to the use of tax increment financing will not exceed $40,000,000 without a modification to the TIF Plan pursuant to applicable statutory requirements. It is estimated that $200,000 in interfund loans will be financed with tax increment revenues. It is estimated that $ 40,000,000 in bonded debt/loan proceeds will be financed with tax increment revenues. This provision does not obligate the HRA or City to incur debt. The HRA or City will issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The HRA or City may also finance the activities to be undertaken pursuant to the TIF Plan through loans from funds of the HRA or City or to reimburse the developer on a "pay-as-you-go" basis for eligible costs paid for by a developer. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-5 The estimated sources of funds for the District are contained in the table below. SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL Tax Increment $88,000,000 PROJECT REVENUES $88,000,000 Interfund Loans $200,000 Bond Principal $10,000,000 TIF Note Principal $30,000,000 The other financing sources list above is included for purposes of OSA reporting for the TIF District. It is not intended to be cumulative. Transfers are included in case money is moved from one fund to another before an expenditure. Subsection 1-10. Uses of Funds Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate construction of approximately 350,000 sq. ft. of retail development, 600,000 sq. ft. of office space and 600 housing units. The HRA and City have determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project for certain costs. The HRA has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with the District is outlined in the following table. USES OF FUNDS TOTAL Land/Building Acquisition $21,940,000 Site Improvements/Preparation $3,640,000 Public Utilities $3,640,000 Public Parking Facilities $3,640,000 Streets and Sidewalks $3,640,000 Interest $42,700,000 Administrative Costs (up to 10%) $8,800,000 PROJECT COSTS TOTAL $88,000,000 Interfund Loans $200,000 Bond Principal $10,000,000 TIF Note Principal $30,000,000 The other financing uses listed above is included for purposes of OSA reporting for the TIF District. It is not intended to be cumulative. Transfers are included in case money is moved from one fund to another before an expenditure. TIF is expected to be used for the project costs listed above, which is a not-to-exceed budget Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-6 rather than an expected budget of costs. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1 (5), it is estimated that the cost of improvements, including administrative expenses which will be paid or financed with tax increments, will equal $88,000,000. For purposes of OSA reporting forms, it is estimated that the cost of improvements, including financing which will be paid for with tax increment will equal $128,200,000 as is presented in the budget above. Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent of the tax increment paid by property within the District will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of the District but within the boundaries of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of the District) subject to the limitations as described in this TIF Plan. Subsection 1-11. Fiscal Disparities Election Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, the HRA or City may elect one of two methods to calculate fiscal disparities. If the calculations pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, clause b, (within the District) are followed, the following method of computation shall apply: (1) The original net tax capacity shall be determined before the application of the fiscal disparity provisions of Chapter 276A or 473F. The current net tax capacity shall exclude any fiscal disparity commercial-industrial net tax capacity increase between the original year and the current year multiplied by the fiscal disparity ratio determined pursuant to M.S., Section 276A.06, subdivision 7 or M.S., Section 473F.08, subdivision 6. Where the original net tax capacity is equal to or greater than the current net tax capacity, there is no captured tax capacity and no tax increment determination. Where the original tax capacity is less than the current tax capacity, the difference between the original net tax capacity and the current net tax capacity is the captured net tax capacity. This amount less any portion thereof which the authority has designated, in its tax increment financing plan, to share with the local taxing districts is the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority. (2) The county auditor shall exclude the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority from the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts in determining local taxing district tax rates. The local tax rates so determined are to be extended against the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority as well as the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts. The tax generated by the extension of the less of (A) the local taxing district tax rates or (B) the original local tax rate to the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority is the tax increment of the authority. The HRA will choose to calculate fiscal disparities by clause b. According to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3: (c) The method of computation of tax increment applied to a district pursuant to paragraph (a) or (b) shall remain the same for the duration of the district, except that the governing body may elect to change its election from the method of computation in paragraph (a) to the method in paragraph (b). Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-7 Subsection 1-12. Business Subsidies Pursuant to M.S. Sections 116J.993, Subd. 3, the following forms of financial assistance are not considered a business subsidy: (1) A business subsidy of less than $25,000; (2) Assistance that is generally available to all businesses or to a general class of similar businesses, such as a line of business, size, location, or similar general criteria; (3) Public improvements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve a public purpose and do not principally benefit a single business or defined group of businesses at the time the improvements are made; (4) Redevelopment property polluted by contaminants as defined in M.S., Section 116J.552, Subd. 3; (5) Assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or bringing it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts, provided that the assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the total cost; (6) Assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance is to provide those services; (7) Assistance for housing; (8) Assistance for pollution control or abatement, including assistance for a tax increment financing hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 23; (9) Assistance for energy conservation; (10) Tax reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law; (11) Workers' compensation and unemployment compensation; (12) Benefits derived from regulation; (13) Indirect benefits derived from assistance to educational institutions; (14) Funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds, and bonds issued for the benefit of an organization described in section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999; (15) Assistance for a collaboration between a Minnesota higher education institution and a business; (16) Assistance for a tax increment financing soils condition district as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 19; (17) Redevelopment when the recipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site preparation is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value; (18) General changes in tax increment financing law and other general tax law changes of a principally technical nature. (19) Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local government agency; (20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority; (21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $75,000 or less; and (22) Federal loan funds provided through the United States Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration. The HRA will comply with M.S., Section 116J.993 to 116J.995 to the extent the tax increment assistance under this TIF Plan does not fall under any of the above exemptions. (AS MODIFIED NOVEMBER 28, 2017, TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE IN CURRENT LAW) Pursuant to M.S., Section 116J.993, Subd. 3, the following two items related to what is considered a business subsidy were increased from $75,000 to $150,000: Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-8 (1) A business subsidy of less than $150,000; (21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $150,000 or less; In addition, an additional form of financial assistance is not considered a business subsidy: (23) Property tax abatements granted under M.S., Section 469.1813 to property that is subject to valuation under Minnesota Rules, chapter 8100. The HRA will comply with M.S., Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995 to the extent the tax increment assistance under this TIF Plan does not fall under any of the above exemptions in this Subsection. Subsection 1-13. County Road Costs Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1a, the county board may require the HRA or City to pay for all or part of the cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by tax increment will, in the judgement of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of road improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five years under a capital improvement plan or within five years under another county plan. If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the HRA or City within forty- five days of receipt of this TIF Plan. The HRA and City are aware that the county could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing. Subsection 1-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF Plan would occur without the creation of the District. However, the HRA or City has determined that such development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: IMPACT ON TAX BASE 2005/2006Total Net Tax Capacity Estimated CapturedTax Capacity (CTC)Upon Completion Percent of CTCto Entity Total Hennepin County 1,229,390,982 3,314,080 0.2696% City of Richfield 26,793,818 3,314,080 12.3688% ISD No. 280 32,426,328 3,314,080 10.2203% Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-9 WATERSHED DISTRICT NO. 0 IMPACT ON TAX RATES 2005/2006Extension Rates Percentof Total CTC PotentialTaxes Hennepin County 0.410160 38.08% 2,771,373 1,136,706 City of Richfield 0.404970 37.60% 2,771,373 1,122,323 ISD No. 280 0.192040 17.83% 2,771,373 532,214 Other 0.069980 6.50%2,771,373 193,941 Total 1.077150 100.00%2,985,184 WATERSHED DISTRICT NO 3 IMPACT ON TAX RATES 2005/2006Extension Rates Percentof Total CTC PotentialTaxes Hennepin County 0.410160 37.70% 525,171 215,404 City of Richfield 0.404970 37.23% 525,171 212,678 ISD No. 280 0.192040 17.65% 525,171 100,854 Other 0.080700 7.42%525,171 42,381 Total 1.087870 100.00%571,318 The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the actual 2005/Pay 2006 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on actual Pay 2006 figures. The District will be certified under the actual 2006/Pay 2007 rates, which were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared. The cashflows assume a 1% inflation rate. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b): (1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be generated over the life of the District is $88,000,000. (2) Probable impact of the District on city provided services and ability to issue debt. While, an impact on the District on police protection is expected, the degree of impact is uncertain. With new residents and businesses, police calls for service may increase. New development will increase vehicular traffic and additional overall demands to the call load. Even though call demand is expected to increase, the City does not expect that the proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment in equipment or require the City hire additional employees. The probable impact of the District on fire protection should be negligible. An increase in service calls can be expected due to the increase in the density of development; however, new buildings typically generate few calls, if any, because of superior construction and fire sprinklers. None of the existing buildings, which will be eliminated by the new development, have fire sprinkler systems. The impact of the District on Parks should be insignificant. Recreational Services has two costs associated with its operations: Program Costs and Capital Costs. Program costs are funded by user Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-10 fees. If more programs are added as a result of the District, the additional programs will be entirely funded by user fees. If Capital Costs are needed for new facilities, the District and developments within would be contributors. Therefore, it is anticipated that the District will have a negligible impact on the Department’s existing infrastructure. The District should benefit public infrastructure. There should be a net reduction in miles of public streets and a corresponding reduction in public street lighting. This reduces the maintenance costs for Public Works. Land parcels for development will generally be larger than existing land parcels. While new development will be at increased densities, the number of water and sanitary sewer lines will be reduced making for lower maintenance costs for the City. Also, the proposed development densities can be accommodated with existing capacity of the water and sanitary sewer infrastructure. The new development may require additional storm water treatment but this should be funded by the developer(s). Traffic resulting from the new development will increase over existing traffic volumes. However, both East 66th Street and the Highway 77 interchange at 66th Street have been upgraded to accommodate increased traffic volumes. The District will require a new north-south road that extends from 67th Street south to 72nd Street to serve the new development. The new road will likely be located generally between the existing 17th and 18th Avenues, and will be designed as a parkway. Financing for the new road will be folded into financing for the new private redevelopment. The probable impact of any debt issuance within the District on the main operating fund of the city is expected to be minimal. In addition, the ability of the City to issue future debt will not be affected by the creation of this TIF District. (3) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to school district levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to school district levies, assuming the school district's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same is $16,459,768; (4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the county's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same is $35,154,860; (5) Additional information requested by the county or school district. The City is not aware of any standard questions in a county or school district written policy regarding tax increment districts and impact on county or school district services. The county or school district must request additional information pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) within 15 days after receipt of the tax increment financing plan. No requests for additional information from the county or school district regarding the proposed development for the District have been received. Subsection 1-15. Supporting Documentation Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd 1, clause 7 the TIF Plan must contain identification and description of studies and analyses used to make the determination set forth in M.S. Section 469.175 Subd 3, clause (b)(2) and the findings are required in the resolution approving the District. Following is a list of reports and studies on file at the City that support the Authority's findings: Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-11 • Cedar Avenue Corridor Redevelopment Concept Master Plan, JLG Architects, September 2004 • Acoustical Construction - Baseline Measurements, Orfield Laboratories, Inc., December 30, 2004 • Acoustical Construction Criteria, Orfield laboratories, Inc., January 13, 2005 • Acoustical Construction Criteria, Orfield Laboratories, Inc., May 18, 2005 • Roadway and Transit Assessment of Cedar Avenue Corridor Transit Oriented Development, WSB & Associates, Inc., January 10, 2005 • Legislative Summary 2005, John Choi, Kennedy & Graven, Chartered • House Research Summary 2005, Joel Michael, House Research Subsection 1-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing district include all of the following potential revenue sources: 1. Taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed under M.S., Section 469.177; 2. The proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, to the extent the property was purchased by the Authority with tax increments; 3. Principal and interest received on loans or other advances made by the Authority with tax increments; 4. Interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments; 5. Repayments or return of tax increments made to the Authority under agreements for districts for which the request for certification was made after August 1, 1993; and 6. The market value homestead credit paid to the Authority under M.S., Section 273.1384. Subsection 1-17. Modifications to the District In accordance with M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any: 1. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the District, if the reduction does not meet the requirements of M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e); 2. Increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred; 3. A determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original TIF Plan; 4. Increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the HRA or City; 5. Increase in the estimate of the cost of the project, including administrative expenses, that will be paid or financed with tax increment from the District; or 6. Designation of additional property to be acquired by the HRA or City, shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 4(f), the geographic area of the District may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county auditor. If a redevelopment district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that the addition to the district meets the criteria of M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10, paragraph (a), clauses (1) to (5), must be documented in writing and retained. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is elimination of parcel(s) from the District and (2) (A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in the District's original net tax capacity or (B) the HRA agrees that, notwithstanding M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-12 eliminated from the District. The HRA or City must notify the County Auditor of any modification that reduces or enlarges the geographic area of the District. Modifications to the District in the form of a budget modification or an expansion of the boundaries will be recorded in the TIF Plan. Subsection 1-18. Administrative Expenses In accordance with M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 14, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the HRA or City, other than: 1. Amounts paid for the purchase of land; 2. Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the project; 3. Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the project; or 4. Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178; or 5. Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance costs described in clauses (1) to (3). For districts for which the request for certification were made before August 1, 1979, or after June 30, 1982, administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3, tax increment may be used to pay any authorized and documented administrative expenses for the District up to but not to exceed 10 percent of the total estimated tax increment expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined by M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the County's actual administrative expenses incurred in connection with the District. The county may require payment of those expenses by February 15 of the year following the year the expenses were incurred. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the County Treasurer shall deduct an amount (currently .36 percent) of any increment distributed to the HRA or City and the County Treasurer shall pay the amount deducted to the State Treasurer for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor for the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of examining and auditing authorities' use of tax increment financing. This amount may be adjusted annually by the Commissioner of Revenue. Subsection 1-19. Limitation of Increment The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and the District may be terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the debt service fund or other escrow account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment of the bonds at maturity or redemption date. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6: Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-13 if, after four years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel and the original net tax capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity has commenced and the county auditor shall certify the net tax capacity thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. The county auditor must enforce the provisions of this subdivision. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required activity has taken place for each parcel in the district. The evidence for a parcel must be submitted by February 1 of the fifth year following the year in which the parcel was certified as included in the district. For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements of a street are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street, and (3) substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street. The HRA or City or a property owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately September, 2010 and report such actions to the County Auditor. (AS MODIFIED NOVEMBER 28, 2017, TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE IN CURRENT LAW) In 2009 M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6 was amended to include Subd 6(b) which reads: For districts which were certified on or after January 1, 2005, and before April 20, 2009, the four-year period under paragraph (a) is increased to six years. This District was certified on May 21, 2007. Since it meets the requirement of the updated language in the law, the new date by which qualifying activities must take place on or adjacent to any parcel in the District is May 2013. Subsection 1-20. Use of Tax Increment The HRA or City hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity of taxable property located in the District for the following purposes: 1. To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued to finance a project; 2. To finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to the M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047; 3. To pay for project costs as identified in the budget set forth in the TIF Plan; 4. To finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4; 5. To pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to or on behalf of the HRA or City or for the benefit of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area by a developer; 6. To finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance or other security guaranteeing the payment when due of principal of and interest on bonds pursuant to the TIF Plan or pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C. M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178; and 7. To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and interest on Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-14 the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C, M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other purposes prohibited by M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4. Tax increments generated in the District will be paid by Hennepin County to the HRA for the Tax Increment Fund of said District. The HRA or City will pay to the developer(s) annually an amount not to exceed an amount as specified in a developer's agreement to reimburse the costs of land acquisition, public improvements, demolition and relocation, site preparation, and administration. Remaining increment funds will be used for HRA or City administration (up to 10 percent) and the costs of public improvement activities outside the District. Subsection 1-21. Excess Increments Excess increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, shall be used only to do one or more of the following: 1. Prepay any outstanding bonds; 2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment for any outstanding bonds; 3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of any outstanding bonds; or 4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their local tax rates. The HRA or City must spend or return the excess increments under paragraph (c) within nine months after the end of the year. In addition, the HRA or City may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area or the District. Subsection 1-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer The HRA or City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the Redevelopment Plan and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the HRA or City to demonstrate the conformance of the development with City plans and ordinances. The HRA or City may also use the Agreements to address other issues related to the development. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 5, no more than 25 percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired in the District as set forth in the TIF Plan shall at any time be owned by the HRA or City as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178 to which tax increments from property acquired is pledged, unless prior to acquisition in excess of 25 percent of the acreage, the HRA or City concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the HRA or City should the development or redevelopment not be completed. Subsection 1-23. Assessment Agreements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the HRA or City may enter into a written assessment agreement in recordable form with the developer of property within the District which establishes a minimum market Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-15 value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the District. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the County Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears, in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the County Assessor shall also certify the minimum market value agreement. Subsection 1-24. Administration of the District Administration of the District will be handled by the Community Development Director. Subsection 1-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5, 6, and 6b the HRA or City must undertake financial reporting for all tax increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board and County Auditor on or before August 1 of each year. M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15. If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M.S., Section 469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the OSA will direct the County Auditor to withhold the distribution of tax increment from the District. Subsection 1-26. Reasonable Expectations As required by the TIF Act, in establishing the District, the determination has been made that the anticipated development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan. In making said determination, reliance has been placed upon written representation made by the developer to such effects and upon HRA and City staff awareness of the feasibility of developing the project site. A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of the District and the use of tax increments has been performed as described above. Such analysis is included with the cashflow in Appendix D, and indicates that the increase in estimated market value of the proposed development (less the indicated subtractions) exceeds the estimated market value of the site absent the establishment of the District and the use of tax increments. Subsection 1-27. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment 1. General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the TIF Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to the M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047. Tax increments may not be used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No tax increment may be used for the acquisition, construction, renovation, operation, or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of government or the state or federal government. This provision does not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure. 2. Pooling Limitations. At least 75 percent of tax increments from the District must be expended on Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-16 activities in the District or to pay bonds, to the extent that the proceeds of the bonds were used to finance activities within said district or to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. Not more than 25 percent of said tax increments may be expended, through a development fund or otherwise, on activities outside of the District except to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. For purposes of applying this restriction, all administrative expenses must be treated as if they were solely for activities outside of the District. 3. Five Year Limitation on Commitment of Tax Increments. Pursuant to Laws of Minnesota 2005, Chapter 152, Article 2, Section 25 Subd 2: (2) the five-year rule under Minnesota Statutes, section 469.1763, subdivision 3, does not apply. 4. Redevelopment District. Pursuant to Laws of Minnesota 2005, Chapter 152, Article 2, Section 25 Subd 2: (1) expenditures for activities as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 469.1763, subdivision 1, paragraph (b), anywhere in the district are deemed to be the costs of correcting conditions that allow the designation of redevelopment districts pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 469.174, subdivision 10; Subsection 1-28. Summary The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority is establishing the District to preserve and enhance the tax base, redevelop substandard areas, and provide employment opportunities in the City. The TIF Plan for the District was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113, telephone (651) 697-8500. Richfield HRA Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District 1-17 APPENDIX A PROJECT DESCRIPTION In 1996, the Minnesota State Legislature made a decision that the Minneapolis-St. Paul International airport (MSP) would remain and expand at its current location. Expansion included the construction of a new North/South Runway, and independent studies confirmed that the noise from this runway - believed to be the closest that any similar runway has been built to an existing residential area in the country - would be incompatible with the adjacent predominantly residential land uses. Based on decibel level studies, the City identified a redevelopment area which essentially included land bounded by Highway 62 to the north, Interstate 494 to the south, Highway 77 to the east, and 16th Avenue to the west. In 1999, a redevelopment plan was created. (See Subsection 2-15). Since that time, additional sound studies completed in 2000 revised the noise impact area to include land bounded by Highway 62 to the north, 72nd Street to the south, Highway 77 to the east, and a jogged profile from approximately 16th Avenue at the north end of the site to 18th Avenue at the south end. (See Subsection 2-15). Expansion work at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport has presented tremendous challenges and opportunities for the City of Richfield. The construction of a new north-south runway at the westernmost area of the airport site and its resulting low-frequency noise levels have made it essential for the City to revision its eastern edge. The existing land-use, essentially single family residential, is no longer an appropriate neighbor for the airport. These challenges have given rise to opportunities for development that serve the future of the City of Richfield and help to mitigate the problems caused by the airport expansion. JLG Architects was contracted in 2004 to prepare a new land-use master plan based on these new parameters. In 2005 WSB & Associates, Inc. prepared a Roadway and Transit Assessment that suggests the overall proposed redevelopment is anticipated to consist of the following primary components: • Approximately 350,000 square feet of new retail development • Approximately 600,000 square feet of new office space • Approximately 600 new housing units After completing various financial feasability models it was determined that Tax Increment Financing was needed to make the project feasible. Also in 2005 the City of Richfield requested and received special Tax Increment Financing legislation for this area. (See Subsection 2-6). (AS MODIFIED NOVEMBER 28, 2017) In 2006, the City and HRA established the Cedar Avenue TIF District as a result of decisions made by the Minnesota State Legislature to keep the MSP airport in its current location, and as an effort of the City to be proactive with its redevelopment efforts. The TIF District was established to encourage new commercial and housing development instead of capital and people moving to newer developing communities. The Financial Crisis of 2007-2008 marked the start of a recession that continued into 2009. During this period and for several years following, development slowed or halted, and the type of development contemplated for the area changed. APPENDIX A-1 The Cedar Avenue TIF District received inflationary increment in the first year starting the term of the District. Market values then declined and increment was not generated over the past eight years. During this time the City and HRA considered multiple development proposals; however, for a variety of reasons, none of the projects moved forward. In 2013, the City issued General Obligation Improvement Bonds to acquire properties and construct Richfield Parkway (Series 2013A Bonds) in the north portion of the District. In 2017 the City of Richfield received special legislation to extend the term of the Cedar Avenue TIF District (see Appendix I). The City and HRA have not entered into an agreement, but anticipate housing and retail development in the District. It is anticipated that development may occur in 2019. APPENDIX A-2 APPENDIX B MAP(S) OF THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND THE DISTRICT APPENDIX B-1 71st 1/2 70th 1/2 LOGAN75th VINCENTUPTONTHOMASWASHBURNXERXESI - 494 78th 77th 76th OLIVERNEWTONMORGANSHERIDANRUSSELLQUEENPENN74th 72nd 73th 71st 69th 70th DUPONTKNOXJAMESIRVINGHUMBOLDTGIRARDFREMONTEMERSONCOLFAXBRYANTALDRICHGARFIELDGRANDHARRIETLYNDALE62nd 67th 68th 66th 65th 64th 63rd SHERIDAN1700240031002300WASHBURNXERXESVINCENTUPTONTHOMASRUSSELLQUEENPENNOLIVERNEWTONMORGANLOGANDUPONTHUMBOLDTKNOXJAMESIRVINGGIRARDEMERSONFREMONTLYNDALECOLFAXBRYANTALDRICHGARFIELDHARRIETGRAND69th 71st 72nd 73th 74th 75th 78th 70th 76th 77th COLUMBUS2nd1stSTEVENSPLEASANTPILLSBURYBLAISDELLWENTWORTHNICOLLET3rdCLINTON4th5thPORTLANDOAKLANDPARK10th11th12th13th14thELLIOTCHICAGO15th16th17th18thCEDARBLOOMINGTON62nd 63rd 64th 65th 67th 68th 66thCOLUMBUSPLEASANTPILLSBURYWENTWORTHBLAISDELLSTEVENSNICOLLET1st2nd5thCLINTON3rd4thOAKLANDPARKPORTLAND15th11thCHICAGOELLIOT10th13th12th14thBLOOMINGTON16th17thCEDAR18th 1900800900100011001200130018006005004003002005010012420030032440050062070072080090010001100130014001500160017001800100152419006001200000700140029002800270026002500220021002000300015001600´ 07/13/0602,300 4,600 6,900 9,2001,150 Feet RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Cedar Corridor Tax Increment Financing District Redevelopment Project Area Cedar Corridor Tax Increment Financing District APPENDIX C DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcels listed below. PARCEL ADDRESS 2502824320001 6733 CEDAR AVE S 2502824330054 6841 CEDAR AVE S 2502824330055 6839 CEDAR AVE S 2502824330056 6833 CEDAR AVE S 2502824330057 6829 CEDAR AVE S 2502824330058 6825 CEDAR AVE S 2502824330059 6821 CEDAR AVE S 2502824330060 6813 CEDAR AVE S 2502824330061 6809 CEDAR AVE S 2502824330062 6801 CEDAR AVE S 2602824110002 6300 18TH AVE S 2602824110033 6309 16TH AVE S 2602824110034 6315 16TH AVE S 2602824110035 6321 16TH AVE S 2602824110036 6327 16TH AVE S 2602824110037 6333 16TH AVE S 2602824110038 6339 16TH AVE S 2602824110039 6345 16TH AVE S 2602824110040 6344 17TH AVE S 2602824110041 6338 17TH AVE S 2602824110042 6332 17TH AVE S 2602824110043 6326 17TH AVE S 2602824110044 6320 17TH AVE S 2602824110045 6314 17TH AVE S 2602824110062 6309 18TH AVE S 2602824140001 6541 16TH AVE S 2602824140002 6509 16TH AVE S 2602824140003 6501 16TH AVE S 2602824140004 6401 16TH AVE S 2602824140005 6409 16TH AVE S 2602824140006 6415 16TH AVE S 2602824140007 6421 16TH AVE S 2602824140008 6427 16TH AVE S 2602824140009 6433 16TH AVE S 2602824140010 6439 16TH AVE S 2602824140011 6445 16TH AVE S 2602824140012 6444 17TH AVE S 2602824140013 6438 17TH AVE S 2602824140014 6432 17TH AVE S 2602824140015 6426 17TH AVE S 2602824140016 6420 17TH AVE S 2602824140017 6414 17TH AVE S APPENDIX C-1 2602824140018 6408 17TH AVE S 2602824140019 6400 17TH AVE S 2602824140020 6500 17TH AVE S 2602824140021 6508 17TH AVE S 2602824140022 6514 17TH AVE S 2602824140023 6520 17TH AVE S 2602824140024 6526 17TH AVE S 2602824140025 6532 17TH AVE S 2602824140122 1620 66TH ST E 2602824140123 1614 66TH ST E 2602824410001 6607 18TH AVE S 2602824410002 660 CEDAR AVE S 2602824410063 6636 CEDAR AVE S 2602824410066 6614 18TH AVE S 2602824410067 6620 18TH AVE S 2602824410068 6626 18TH AVE S 2602824410069 6632 18TH AVE S 2602824410070 6638 18TH AVE S 2602824410071 6644 18TH AVE S 2602824410072 6645 17TH AVE S 2602824410073 6639 17TH AVE S 2602824410074 6633 17TH AVE S 2602824410075 6627 17TH AVE S 2602824410076 6621 17TH AVE S 2602824410077 6615 17TH AVE S 2602824410078 6609 17TH AVE S 2602824410079 6601 17TH AVE S 2602824410080 6700 18TH AVE S 2602824410081 6708 18TH AVE S 2602824410082 6714 18TH AVE S 2602824410083 6720 18TH AVE S 2602824410084 6726 18TH AVE S 2602824410085 6732 18TH AVE S 2602824410086 6738 18TH AVE S 2602824410087 6744 18TH AVE S 2602824410088 6745 17TH AVE S 2602824410089 6739 17TH AVE S 2602824410090 6733 17TH AVE S 2602824410091 6727 17TH AVE S 2602824410092 6721 17TH AVE S 2602824410093 6715 17TH AVE S 2602824410094 6709 17TH AVE S 2602824410095 6701 17TH AVE S 2602824410096 6700 CEDAR AVE S 2602824410097 6720 CEDAR AVE S 2602824410098 6730 CEDAR AVE S 2602824410099 6744 CEDAR AVE S 2602824410100 6745 18TH AVE S 2602824410101 6739 18TH AVE S 2602824410102 6733 18TH AVE S APPENDIX C-2 2602824410103 6727 18TH AVE S 2602824410104 6721 18TH AVE S 2602824410105 6715 18TH AVE S 2602824410106 6709 18TH AVE S 2602824410107 6701 18TH AVE S 2602824410108 1717 66TH ST E 2602824440001 6800 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440002 6808 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440003 6814 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440004 6820 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440005 6826 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440006 6832 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440007 6838 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440008 6844 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440009 6845 18TH AVE S 2602824440010 6839 18TH AVE S 2602824440011 6833 18TH AVE S 2602824440012 6827 18TH AVE S 2602824440013 6821 18TH AVE S 2602824440014 6815 18TH AVE S 2602824440015 6809 18TH AVE S 2602824440016 6801 18TH AVE S 2602824440017 6800 18TH AVE S 2602824440018 6808 18TH AVE S 2602824440019 6814 18TH AVE S 2602824440020 6820 18TH AVE S 2602824440021 6826 18TH AVE S 2602824440022 6832 18TH AVE S 2602824440023 6838 18TH AVE S 2602824440024 6844 18TH AVE S 2602824440025 6845 17TH AVE S 2602824440026 6839 17TH AVE S 2602824440027 6833 17TH AVE S 2602824440028 6827 17TH AVE S 2602824440029 6821 17TH AVE S 2602824440030 6815 17TH AVE S 2602824440031 6809 17TH AVE S 2602824440032 6801 17TH AVE S 2602824440065 6900 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440066 6908 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440067 6914 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440068 6920 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440069 6924 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440070 6932 CEDAR AVE S 2602824440073 6945 18TH AVE S 2602824440074 6939 18TH AVE S 2602824440075 6933 18TH AVE S 2602824440076 6927 18TH AVE S 2602824440077 6921 18TH AVE S 2602824440078 6915 18TH AVE S APPENDIX C-3 2602824440079 6909 18TH AVE S 2602824440080 6901 18TH AVE S 2602824440129 6938 CEDAR AVE S 3502824110001 6958 CEDAR AVE S 3502824110002 7001 18TH AVE S 3502824110003 7005 18TH AVE S 3502824110009 7000 CEDAR AVE S 3502824110010 7034 CEDAR AVE S 3502824110011 7040 CEDAR AVE S 3502824110012 7048 CEDAR AVE S 3502824110013 7100 CEDAR AVE S 3502824110014 7108 CEDAR AVE S 3502824110015 7116 CEDAR AVE S 3502824110016 7121 18TH AVE S 3502824110017 7115 18TH AVE S 3502824110018 7111 18TH AVE S 3502824110019 7105 18TH AVE S 3502824110020 7101 18TH AVE S 3502824110021 7049 18TH AVE S 3502824110022 7045 18TH AVE S 3502824110023 7039 18TH AVE S 3502824110024 7035 18TH AVE S 3502824110025 7033 18TH AVE S 3502824110026 7029 18TH AVE S 3502824110027 7025 18TH AVE S 3502824110123 7134 CEDAR AVE S 3502824110124 7145 18TH AVE S 3502824110125 7137 18TH AVE S 3502824110126 7131 18TH AVE S 3502824110127 7127 18TH AVE S APPENDIX C-4 (AS MODIFIED NOVEMBER 28, 2017) The following parcels are being removed from the District for inclusion in Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain): Parcel Numbers Address Owner 26-028-24-41-0067 6620 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0068 6626 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0069 6632 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0070 6638 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0071 6644 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0072 6645 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0073 6639 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0074 6633 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0075 6627 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0076 6621 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0077 6615 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0080 6700 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0081 6708 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0082 6714 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0083 6720 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0084 6726 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0085 6732 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0086 6738 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0087 6744 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0096 6700 Cedar Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0097 6720 Cedar Ave S Cedar South Pointe LLC 26-028-24-41-0098 6730 Cedar Ave S Cedar South Pointe LLC 26-028-24-41-0099 6744 Cedar Ave S Cedar South Pointe LLC 26-028-24-41-0100 6745 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0101 6739 18 th Ave S HRA APPENDIX C-5 26-028-24-41-0102 6733 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0103 6727 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0104 6721 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0105 6715 18 th Ave S Richfield Apartments LLC 26-028-24-41-0106 6709 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0107 6701 18 th Ave S HRA The following are the parcels remaining in the District: 2502824320001 2502824330054 2502824330055 2502824330056 2502824330057 2502824330058 2502824330059 2502824330060 2502824330061 2502824330062 2602824110002 2602824110033 2602824110034 2602824110035 2602824110036 2602824110037 2602824110038 2602824110039 2602824110040 2602824110041 2602824110042 2602824110043 2602824110044 2602824110045 2602824110062 2602824140001 2602824140002 2602824140003 2602824140004 2602824140005 2602824140006 2602824140007 2602824140008 2602824140009 2602824140010 2602824140011 2602824140012 2602824140013 2602824140014 2602824140015 2602824140016 2602824140017 2602824140018 2602824140019 2602824140137 2602824140138 2602824140140 2602824140141 2602824410001 2602824410002 2602824410063 2602824410066 2602824410088 2602824410089 2602824410090 2602824410091 2602824410092 2602824410093 2602824410094 2602824410095 2602824410108 2602824440001 2602824440002 2602824440003 2602824440004 2602824440005 2602824440006 2602824440007 2602824440008 2602824440009 2602824440010 2602824440011 2602824440012 2602824440013 2602824440014 2602824440015 2602824440016 2602824440017 2602824440018 2602824440019 2602824440020 2602824440021 2602824440022 2602824440023 2602824440024 2602824440025 2602824440026 2602824440027 2602824440028 2602824440029 2602824440030 2602824440031 2602824440032 2602824440065 2602824440066 2602824440067 2602824440068 2602824440069 2602824440071 2602824440073 2602824440074 2602824440075 2602824440076 2602824440077 2602824440078 APPENDIX C-6 2602824440079 2602824440080 2602824440129 3502824110001 3502824110002 3502824110003 3502824110009 3502824110010 3502824110011 3502824110012 3502824110013 3502824110014 3502824110015 3502824110016 3502824110017 3502824110018 3502824110019 3502824110020 3502824110021 3502824110022 3502824110023 3502824110024 3502824110025 3502824110026 3502824110027 3502824110123 3502824110124 3502824110125 3502824110126 3502824110127 APPENDIX C-7 APPENDIX D ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR THE DISTRICT APPENDIX C-8 9/18/2006 Page 1 of 11 CEDAR AVE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT CITY OF RICHFIELD SUMMARY T.I.F. CASH FLOW ASSUMPTIONS District New Redevelopment District County District # Inflation Rate - Every _ Years 1.00% Pay-As-You-Go Interest Rate: 6.50% City Internal Loan Rate 4.00% Note Issued Date (Present Value Date): 01-Feb-06 Local Tax Rate - Frozen 113.5680% Pay 2006 Fiscal Disparities Election Inside Year District was certified 2006 Assumes First Tax Increment For District 2008 Year District was Modified N/A Development located in modified area N/A Assumes First Tax Increment For Dev 2009 Years of Tax Increment 26 Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment 2033 Fiscal Disparities Ratio 33.6177% Pay 2006 Fiscal Disparities Metro Wide Tax Rate 121.8020% Pay 2006 Local Tax Rate - Current 107.7150% Pay 2006 State Wide Property Tax Rate (Used for total taxes) 50.8270% Pay 2006 Market Value Tax Rate (used for total taxes) N/A Pay 2006 Commercial Industrial Class Rate 1.5%-2.0% Pay 2006 First 150,000 1.50% Over 150,000 2.00% Rental Class Rate 1.25% Pay 2006 Residential Class Rat - Under $500,000 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% Note: 1. Tax estimates are based upon market value, construction costs and taxes per sq/ft. 2. Apartments/residential do not pay State-wide property tax or Fiscal Disparities 3. Assumes Fiscal Disparities is paid inside the district Prepared by Ehlers TIF PLAN Run- 09-18-2006 9/18/2006 Page 2 of 11 CEDAR AVE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT CITY OF RICHFIELD SUMMARY TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW Base Project Fiscal Captured Semi-Annual State Admin. Housing Semi-Annual Semi-Annual PAYMENT DATE PERIOD BEGINNING Tax Tax Disparities Tax Gross Tax Auditor Net Tax Present PERIOD ENDING Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capacity Capacity Reduction Capacity Increment 0.36% 10.00% 15.00% Increment Value Yrs. Mth. Yr. Present Value Date 01-Feb-06 0.0 1-Aug 2006 668,074 668,074 0 0.0 1-Feb 2006 0.0 1-Feb 2007 668,074 668,074 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1-Aug 2006 0.0 1-Aug 2007 668,074 668,074 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1-Feb 2007 0.0 1-Feb 2008 668,074 668,074 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 1-Aug 2007 0.5 1-Aug 2008 668,074 668,074 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 1-Feb 2008 1.0 1-Feb 2009 668,074 974,938 (78,342) 228,522 123,076 (443) (12,263) (18,395) 91,975 78,383 1.5 1-Aug 2008 1.5 1-Aug 2009 668,074 974,938 (78,342) 228,522 123,076 (443) (12,263) (18,395) 91,975 154,298 2.0 1-Feb 2009 2.0 1-Feb 2010 668,074 1,806,772 (290,749) 847,948 456,684 (1,644) (45,504) (68,256) 341,280 427,120 2.5 1-Aug 2009 2.5 1-Aug 2010 668,074 1,806,772 (290,749) 847,948 456,684 (1,644) (45,504) (68,256) 341,280 691,355 3.0 1-Feb 2010 3.0 1-Feb 2011 668,074 2,638,605 (503,157) 1,467,373 790,291 (2,845) (78,745) (118,117) 590,584 1,134,220 3.5 1-Aug 2010 3.5 1-Aug 2011 668,074 2,638,605 (503,157) 1,467,373 790,291 (2,845) (78,745) (118,117) 590,584 1,563,145 4.0 1-Feb 2011 4.0 1-Feb 2012 668,074 3,470,438 (715,565) 2,086,799 1,123,898 (4,046) (111,985) (167,978) 839,889 2,153,932 4.5 1-Aug 2011 4.5 1-Aug 2012 668,074 3,470,438 (715,565) 2,086,799 1,123,898 (4,046) (111,985) (167,978) 839,889 2,726,123 5.0 1-Feb 2012 5.0 1-Feb 2013 668,074 4,302,272 (927,973) 2,706,224 1,457,505 (5,247) (145,226) (217,839) 1,089,193 3,444,801 5.5 1-Aug 2012 5.5 1-Aug 2013 668,074 4,302,272 (927,973) 2,706,224 1,457,505 (5,247) (145,226) (217,839) 1,089,193 4,140,857 6.0 1-Feb 2013 6.0 1-Feb 2014 668,074 4,991,000 (1,103,879) 3,219,047 1,736,447 (6,251) (173,020) (259,529) 1,297,647 4,944,023 6.5 1-Aug 2013 6.5 1-Aug 2014 668,074 4,991,000 (1,103,879) 3,219,047 1,736,447 (6,251) (173,020) (259,529) 1,297,647 5,721,909 7.0 1-Feb 2014 7.0 1-Feb 2015 668,074 5,040,910 (1,116,623) 3,256,213 1,756,497 (6,323) (175,017) (262,526) 1,312,630 6,484,007 7.5 1-Aug 2014 7.5 1-Aug 2015 668,074 5,040,910 (1,116,623) 3,256,213 1,756,497 (6,323) (175,017) (262,526) 1,312,630 7,222,118 8.0 1-Feb 2015 8.0 1-Feb 2016 668,074 5,091,319 (1,129,495) 3,293,750 1,776,747 (6,396) (177,035) (265,553) 1,327,763 7,945,236 8.5 1-Aug 2015 8.5 1-Aug 2016 668,074 5,091,319 (1,129,495) 3,293,750 1,776,747 (6,396) (177,035) (265,553) 1,327,763 8,645,593 9.0 1-Feb 2016 9.0 1-Feb 2017 668,074 5,142,232 (1,142,496) 3,331,662 1,797,199 (6,470) (179,073) (268,609) 1,343,047 9,331,712 9.5 1-Aug 2016 9.5 1-Aug 2017 668,074 5,142,232 (1,142,496) 3,331,662 1,797,199 (6,470) (179,073) (268,609) 1,343,047 9,996,235 10.0 1-Feb 2017 10.0 1-Feb 2018 668,074 5,193,655 (1,155,626) 3,369,954 1,817,857 (6,544) (181,131) (271,697) 1,358,484 10,647,239 10.5 1-Aug 2017 10.5 1-Aug 2018 668,074 5,193,655 (1,155,626) 3,369,954 1,817,857 (6,544) (181,131) (271,697) 1,358,484 11,277,750 11.0 1-Feb 2018 11.0 1-Feb 2019 668,074 5,245,591 (1,168,888) 3,408,629 1,838,720 (6,619) (183,210) (274,815) 1,374,076 11,895,424 11.5 1-Aug 2018 11.5 1-Aug 2019 668,074 5,245,591 (1,168,888) 3,408,629 1,838,720 (6,619) (183,210) (274,815) 1,374,076 12,493,655 12.0 1-Feb 2019 12.0 1-Feb 2020 668,074 5,298,047 (1,182,283) 3,447,690 1,859,793 (6,695) (185,310) (277,965) 1,389,823 13,079,696 12.5 1-Aug 2019 12.5 1-Aug 2020 668,074 5,298,047 (1,182,283) 3,447,690 1,859,793 (6,695) (185,310) (277,965) 1,389,823 13,647,290 13.0 1-Feb 2020 13.0 1-Feb 2021 668,074 5,351,028 (1,195,811) 3,487,142 1,881,076 (6,772) (187,430) (281,146) 1,405,728 14,203,309 13.5 1-Aug 2020 13.5 1-Aug 2021 668,074 5,351,028 (1,195,811) 3,487,142 1,881,076 (6,772) (187,430) (281,146) 1,405,728 14,741,826 14.0 1-Feb 2021 14.0 1-Feb 2022 668,074 5,404,538 (1,209,475) 3,526,988 1,902,572 (6,849) (189,572) (284,358) 1,421,792 15,269,352 14.5 1-Aug 2021 14.5 1-Aug 2022 668,074 5,404,538 (1,209,475) 3,526,988 1,902,572 (6,849) (189,572) (284,358) 1,421,792 15,780,274 15.0 1-Feb 2022 15.0 1-Feb 2023 668,074 5,458,583 (1,223,276) 3,567,233 1,924,282 (6,927) (191,736) (287,603) 1,438,016 16,280,760 15.5 1-Aug 2022 15.5 1-Aug 2023 668,074 5,458,583 (1,223,276) 3,567,233 1,924,282 (6,927) (191,736) (287,603) 1,438,016 16,765,492 16.0 1-Feb 2023 16.0 1-Feb 2024 668,074 5,513,169 (1,237,214) 3,607,881 1,946,210 (7,006) (193,920) (290,881) 1,454,403 17,240,316 16.5 1-Aug 2023 16.5 1-Aug 2024 668,074 5,513,169 (1,237,214) 3,607,881 1,946,210 (7,006) (193,920) (290,881) 1,454,403 17,700,194 17.0 1-Feb 2024 17.0 1-Feb 2025 668,074 5,568,301 (1,251,292) 3,648,935 1,968,358 (7,086) (196,127) (294,191) 1,470,954 18,150,665 17.5 1-Aug 2024 17.5 1-Aug 2025 668,074 5,568,301 (1,251,292) 3,648,935 1,968,358 (7,086) (196,127) (294,191) 1,470,954 18,586,956 18.0 1-Feb 2025 18.0 1-Feb 2026 668,074 5,623,984 (1,265,511) 3,690,399 1,990,726 (7,167) (198,356) (297,534) 1,487,670 19,014,316 18.5 1-Aug 2025 18.5 1-Aug 2026 668,074 5,623,984 (1,265,511) 3,690,399 1,990,726 (7,167) (198,356) (297,534) 1,487,670 19,428,225 19.0 1-Feb 2026 19.0 1-Feb 2027 668,074 5,680,224 (1,279,871) 3,732,278 2,013,319 (7,248) (200,607) (300,911) 1,504,553 19,833,654 19.5 1-Aug 2026 19.5 1-Aug 2027 668,074 5,680,224 (1,279,871) 3,732,278 2,013,319 (7,248) (200,607) (300,911) 1,504,553 20,226,321 20.0 1-Feb 2027 20.0 1-Feb 2028 668,074 5,737,026 (1,294,376) 3,774,576 2,036,137 (7,330) (202,881) (304,321) 1,521,605 20,610,939 20.5 1-Aug 2027 20.5 1-Aug 2028 668,074 5,737,026 (1,294,376) 3,774,576 2,036,137 (7,330) (202,881) (304,321) 1,521,605 20,983,451 21.0 1-Feb 2028 21.0 1-Feb 2029 668,074 5,794,396 (1,309,025) 3,817,297 2,059,184 (7,413) (205,177) (307,766) 1,538,828 21,348,320 21.5 1-Aug 2028 21.5 1-Aug 2029 668,074 5,794,396 (1,309,025) 3,817,297 2,059,184 (7,413) (205,177) (307,766) 1,538,828 21,701,704 22.0 1-Feb 2029 22.0 1-Feb 2030 668,074 5,852,340 (1,323,821) 3,860,445 2,082,461 (7,497) (207,496) (311,245) 1,556,223 22,047,834 22.5 1-Aug 2029 22.5 1-Aug 2030 668,074 5,852,340 (1,323,821) 3,860,445 2,082,461 (7,497) (207,496) (311,245) 1,556,223 22,383,069 23.0 1-Feb 2030 23.0 1-Feb 2031 668,074 5,910,863 (1,338,765) 3,904,024 2,105,971 (7,581) (209,839) (314,758) 1,573,792 22,711,417 23.5 1-Aug 2030 23.5 1-Aug 2031 668,074 5,910,863 (1,338,765) 3,904,024 2,105,971 (7,581) (209,839) (314,758) 1,573,792 23,029,429 24.0 1-Feb 2031 24.0 1-Feb 2032 668,074 5,969,972 (1,353,858) 3,948,040 2,129,715 (7,667) (212,205) (318,307) 1,591,536 23,340,904 24.5 1-Aug 2031 24.5 1-Aug 2032 668,074 5,969,972 (1,353,858) 3,948,040 2,129,715 (7,667) (212,205) (318,307) 1,591,536 23,642,575 25.0 1-Feb 2032 25.0 1-Feb 2033 668,074 6,029,672 (1,369,103) 3,992,495 2,153,698 (7,753) (214,594) (321,892) 1,609,458 23,938,041 25.5 1-Aug 2032 25.5 1-Aug 2033 668,074 6,029,672 (1,369,103) 3,992,495 2,153,698 (7,753) (214,594) (321,892) 1,609,458 24,224,206 26.0 1-Feb 2033 Totals (54,332,949) 85,495,591 (307,645) (8,514,920) (12,772,380) 63,861,898 Present Value 45,943,843 (165,398) (6,624,506) (6,866,767) 24,224,206 NOTES: 1. State Auditor payment is based upon 1st half, pay 2006 actual and may increase over term of district 2. TIF run does not reflect potential reduction in Market Value Homestead Credit 3. Amount of increment will vary depending upon market value, tax rates, class rates, construction schedule and inflation on Market Value. 4. Inflation on tax rates cannot be captured. 5. TIF does not capture state wide property taxes or market value property taxes Prepared by Ehlers TIF PLAN Run- 09-18-2006 9/18/2006 Page 3 of 11 CEDAR AVE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT CITY OF RICHFIELD RETAIL T.I.F. CASH FLOW ASSUMPTIONS District New Redevelopment District County District # Inflation Rate - Every _ Years 1.00% Pay-As-You-Go Interest Rate: 6.50% City Internal Loan Rate 4.00% Note Issued Date (Present Value Date): 01-Feb-06 Local Tax Rate - Frozen 107.71500% Pay 2006 Fiscal Disparities Election Inside Year District was certified 2006 Assumes First Tax Increment For District 2008 Year District was Modified N/A Development located in modified area N/A Assumes First Tax Increment For Dev 2009 Years of Tax Increment 26 Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment 2033 Fiscal Disparities Ratio 33.6177% Pay 2006 Fiscal Disparities Metro Wide Tax Rate 121.8020% Pay 2006 Local Tax Rate - Current 107.7150% Pay 2006 State Wide Property Tax Rate (Used for total taxes) 50.8270% Pay 2006 Market Value Tax Rate (used for total taxes) N/A Pay 2006 Commercial Industrial Class Rate 1.5%-2.0% Pay 2006 First 150,000 1.50% Over 150,000 2.00% Rental Class Rate 1.25% Pay 2006 Residential Class Rat - Under $500,000 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% BASE VALUE INFORMATION Market Tax Value Capacity 0 32,594,600 396,759 Comm Retail 158,333,333 61.29% 19,977,335 1.5%-2.0% 398,797 Housing 100,000,000 38.71% 12,617,265 1.00% 126,173 Total 258,333,333 100.00%32,594,600 524,969 PROJECT INFORMATION Total Market Value Market Class New Date Date Date PHASE Use Sq. Ft./Units Sq. Ft./Units Value Rate Tax Capacity Completed Asses Payable 1 Retail 58,333 200.00 11,666,667 1.5%-2.0% 232,583 2007 2008 2009 Office 100,000 200.00 20,000,000 1.5%-2.0% 399,250 2007 2008 2009 Housing 100 200,000.00 20,000,000 1.00% 200,000 2007 2008 2009 2 Retail 58,333 200.00 11,666,667 1.5%-2.0% 232,583 2008 2009 2010 Office 100,000 200.00 20,000,000 1.5%-2.0% 399,250 2008 2009 2010 Housing 100 200,000.00 20,000,000 1.00% 200,000 2008 2009 2010 3 Retail 58,333 200.00 11,666,667 1.5%-2.0% 232,583 2009 2010 2011 Office 100,000 200.00 20,000,000 1.5%-2.0% 399,250 2009 2010 2011 Housing 100 200,000.00 20,000,000 1.00% 200,000 2009 2010 2011 4 Retail 58,333 200.00 11,666,667 1.5%-2.0% 232,583 2010 2011 2012 Office 100,000 200.00 20,000,000 1.5%-2.0% 399,250 2010 2011 2012 Housing 100 200,000.00 20,000,000 1.00% 200,000 2010 2011 2012 5 Retail 58,333 200.00 11,666,667 1.5%-2.0% 232,583 2011 2012 2013 Office 100,000 200.00 20,000,000 1.5%-2.0% 399,250 2011 2012 2013 Housing 100 200,000.00 20,000,000 1.00% 200,000 2011 2012 2013 TOTAL 792,167 258,333,333 4,159,167 Note: 1. Tax estimates are based upon market value, construction costs and taxes per sq/ft. 2. Apartments/residential do not pay State-wide property tax or Fiscal Disparities 3. Assumes Fiscal Disparities is paid inside the district Watershed Prepared by Ehlers TIF PLAN Run- 09-18-2006 9/18/2006 Page 4 of 11 CEDAR AVE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT CITY OF RICHFIELD RETAIL TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW Base Project Fiscal Captured Semi-Annual State Admin. Housing Semi-Annual Semi-Annual PAYMENT DATE PERIOD BEGINNING Tax Tax Disparities Tax Gross Tax Auditor Net Tax Present PERIOD ENDING Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capacity Capacity Reduction Capacity Increment 0.36% 10.00% 15.00% Increment Value Yrs. Mth. Yr. Present Value Date 01-Feb-06 0.0 1-Aug 2006 524,969 524,969 0.0 1-Feb 2006 0.0 1-Feb 2007 524,969 524,969 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1-Aug 2006 0.0 1-Aug 2007 524,969 524,969 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1-Feb 2007 0.0 1-Feb 2008 524,969 524,969 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 1-Aug 2007 0.5 1-Aug 2008 524,969 524,969 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 1-Feb 2008 1.0 1-Feb 2009 524,969 831,833 (78,342) 228,522 123,076 (443) (12,263) (18,395) 91,975 78,383 1.5 1-Aug 2008 1.5 1-Aug 2009 524,969 831,833 (78,342) 228,522 123,076 (443) (12,263) (18,395) 91,975 154,298 2.0 1-Feb 2009 2.0 1-Feb 2010 524,969 1,663,667 (290,749) 847,948 456,684 (1,644) (45,504) (68,256) 341,280 427,120 2.5 1-Aug 2009 2.5 1-Aug 2010 524,969 1,663,667 (290,749) 847,948 456,684 (1,644) (45,504) (68,256) 341,280 691,355 3.0 1-Feb 2010 3.0 1-Feb 2011 524,969 2,495,500 (503,157) 1,467,373 790,291 (2,845) (78,745) (118,117) 590,584 1,134,220 3.5 1-Aug 2010 3.5 1-Aug 2011 524,969 2,495,500 (503,157) 1,467,373 790,291 (2,845) (78,745) (118,117) 590,584 1,563,145 4.0 1-Feb 2011 4.0 1-Feb 2012 524,969 3,327,333 (715,565) 2,086,799 1,123,898 (4,046) (111,985) (167,978) 839,889 2,153,932 4.5 1-Aug 2011 4.5 1-Aug 2012 524,969 3,327,333 (715,565) 2,086,799 1,123,898 (4,046) (111,985) (167,978) 839,889 2,726,123 5.0 1-Feb 2012 5.0 1-Feb 2013 524,969 4,159,167 (927,973) 2,706,224 1,457,505 (5,247) (145,226) (217,839) 1,089,193 3,444,801 5.5 1-Aug 2012 5.5 1-Aug 2013 524,969 4,159,167 (927,973) 2,706,224 1,457,505 (5,247) (145,226) (217,839) 1,089,193 4,140,857 6.0 1-Feb 2013 6.0 1-Feb 2014 524,969 4,159,167 (927,973) 2,706,224 1,457,505 (5,247) (145,226) (217,839) 1,089,193 4,815,003 6.5 1-Aug 2013 6.5 1-Aug 2014 524,969 4,159,167 (927,973) 2,706,224 1,457,505 (5,247) (145,226) (217,839) 1,089,193 5,467,929 7.0 1-Feb 2014 7.0 1-Feb 2015 524,969 4,200,758 (938,593) 2,737,196 1,474,185 (5,307) (146,888) (220,332) 1,101,659 6,107,540 7.5 1-Aug 2014 7.5 1-Aug 2015 524,969 4,200,758 (938,593) 2,737,196 1,474,185 (5,307) (146,888) (220,332) 1,101,659 6,727,018 8.0 1-Feb 2015 8.0 1-Feb 2016 524,969 4,242,766 (949,320) 2,768,477 1,491,032 (5,368) (148,566) (222,850) 1,114,248 7,333,854 8.5 1-Aug 2015 8.5 1-Aug 2016 524,969 4,242,766 (949,320) 2,768,477 1,491,032 (5,368) (148,566) (222,850) 1,114,248 7,921,588 9.0 1-Feb 2016 9.0 1-Feb 2017 524,969 4,285,194 (960,154) 2,800,070 1,508,048 (5,429) (150,262) (225,393) 1,126,964 8,497,318 9.5 1-Aug 2016 9.5 1-Aug 2017 524,969 4,285,194 (960,154) 2,800,070 1,508,048 (5,429) (150,262) (225,393) 1,126,964 9,054,925 10.0 1-Feb 2017 10.0 1-Feb 2018 524,969 4,328,046 (971,096) 2,831,980 1,525,234 (5,491) (151,974) (227,961) 1,139,807 9,601,136 10.5 1-Aug 2017 10.5 1-Aug 2018 524,969 4,328,046 (971,096) 2,831,980 1,525,234 (5,491) (151,974) (227,961) 1,139,807 10,130,153 11.0 1-Feb 2018 11.0 1-Feb 2019 524,969 4,371,326 (982,148) 2,864,209 1,542,591 (5,553) (153,704) (230,556) 1,152,779 10,648,350 11.5 1-Aug 2018 11.5 1-Aug 2019 524,969 4,371,326 (982,148) 2,864,209 1,542,591 (5,553) (153,704) (230,556) 1,152,779 11,150,235 12.0 1-Feb 2019 12.0 1-Feb 2020 524,969 4,415,039 (993,310) 2,896,760 1,560,123 (5,616) (155,451) (233,176) 1,165,880 11,641,846 12.5 1-Aug 2019 12.5 1-Aug 2020 524,969 4,415,039 (993,310) 2,896,760 1,560,123 (5,616) (155,451) (233,176) 1,165,880 12,117,983 13.0 1-Feb 2020 13.0 1-Feb 2021 524,969 4,459,190 (1,004,583) 2,929,637 1,577,829 (5,680) (157,215) (235,822) 1,179,112 12,584,367 13.5 1-Aug 2020 13.5 1-Aug 2021 524,969 4,459,190 (1,004,583) 2,929,637 1,577,829 (5,680) (157,215) (235,822) 1,179,112 13,036,070 14.0 1-Feb 2021 14.0 1-Feb 2022 524,969 4,503,782 (1,015,970) 2,962,842 1,595,713 (5,745) (158,997) (238,495) 1,192,476 13,478,514 14.5 1-Aug 2021 14.5 1-Aug 2022 524,969 4,503,782 (1,015,970) 2,962,842 1,595,713 (5,745) (158,997) (238,495) 1,192,476 13,907,030 15.0 1-Feb 2022 15.0 1-Feb 2023 524,969 4,548,819 (1,027,470) 2,996,380 1,613,775 (5,810) (160,797) (241,195) 1,205,974 14,326,756 15.5 1-Aug 2022 15.5 1-Aug 2023 524,969 4,548,819 (1,027,470) 2,996,380 1,613,775 (5,810) (160,797) (241,195) 1,205,974 14,733,271 16.0 1-Feb 2023 16.0 1-Feb 2024 524,969 4,594,308 (1,039,086) 3,030,252 1,632,018 (5,875) (162,614) (243,921) 1,219,607 15,131,440 16.5 1-Aug 2023 16.5 1-Aug 2024 524,969 4,594,308 (1,039,086) 3,030,252 1,632,018 (5,875) (162,614) (243,921) 1,219,607 15,517,076 17.0 1-Feb 2024 17.0 1-Feb 2025 524,969 4,640,251 (1,050,817) 3,064,464 1,650,444 (5,942) (164,450) (246,675) 1,233,377 15,894,791 17.5 1-Aug 2024 17.5 1-Aug 2025 524,969 4,640,251 (1,050,817) 3,064,464 1,650,444 (5,942) (164,450) (246,675) 1,233,377 16,260,616 18.0 1-Feb 2025 18.0 1-Feb 2026 524,969 4,686,653 (1,062,666) 3,099,018 1,669,053 (6,009) (166,304) (249,457) 1,247,284 16,618,921 18.5 1-Aug 2025 18.5 1-Aug 2026 524,969 4,686,653 (1,062,666) 3,099,018 1,669,053 (6,009) (166,304) (249,457) 1,247,284 16,965,947 19.0 1-Feb 2026 19.0 1-Feb 2027 524,969 4,733,520 (1,074,633) 3,133,917 1,687,849 (6,076) (168,177) (252,266) 1,261,330 17,305,836 19.5 1-Aug 2026 19.5 1-Aug 2027 524,969 4,733,520 (1,074,633) 3,133,917 1,687,849 (6,076) (168,177) (252,266) 1,261,330 17,635,025 20.0 1-Feb 2027 20.0 1-Feb 2028 524,969 4,780,855 (1,086,720) 3,169,165 1,706,833 (6,145) (170,069) (255,103) 1,275,516 17,957,439 20.5 1-Aug 2027 20.5 1-Aug 2028 524,969 4,780,855 (1,086,720) 3,169,165 1,706,833 (6,145) (170,069) (255,103) 1,275,516 18,269,704 21.0 1-Feb 2028 21.0 1-Feb 2029 524,969 4,828,663 (1,098,928) 3,204,766 1,726,007 (6,214) (171,979) (257,969) 1,289,845 18,575,537 21.5 1-Aug 2028 21.5 1-Aug 2029 524,969 4,828,663 (1,098,928) 3,204,766 1,726,007 (6,214) (171,979) (257,969) 1,289,845 18,871,744 22.0 1-Feb 2029 22.0 1-Feb 2030 524,969 4,876,950 (1,111,258) 3,240,722 1,745,372 (6,283) (173,909) (260,863) 1,304,317 19,161,846 22.5 1-Aug 2029 22.5 1-Aug 2030 524,969 4,876,950 (1,111,258) 3,240,722 1,745,372 (6,283) (173,909) (260,863) 1,304,317 19,442,816 23.0 1-Feb 2030 23.0 1-Feb 2031 524,969 4,925,720 (1,123,711) 3,277,039 1,764,931 (6,354) (175,858) (263,787) 1,318,933 19,717,991 23.5 1-Aug 2030 23.5 1-Aug 2031 524,969 4,925,720 (1,123,711) 3,277,039 1,764,931 (6,354) (175,858) (263,787) 1,318,933 19,984,505 24.0 1-Feb 2031 24.0 1-Feb 2032 524,969 4,974,977 (1,136,289) 3,313,718 1,784,686 (6,425) (177,826) (266,739) 1,333,696 20,245,519 24.5 1-Aug 2031 24.5 1-Aug 2032 524,969 4,974,977 (1,136,289) 3,313,718 1,784,686 (6,425) (177,826) (266,739) 1,333,696 20,498,317 25.0 1-Feb 2032 25.0 1-Feb 2033 524,969 5,024,726 (1,148,993) 3,350,764 1,804,638 (6,497) (179,814) (269,721) 1,348,606 20,745,895 25.5 1-Aug 2032 25.5 1-Aug 2033 524,969 5,024,726 (1,148,993) 3,350,764 1,804,638 (6,497) (179,814) (269,721) 1,348,606 20,985,680 26.0 1-Feb 2033 Totals (46,439,011) 72,977,389 (262,579) (7,267,606) (10,901,409) 54,507,045 Present Value 39,555,053 (142,398) (5,762,797) (5,911,898) 20,985,680 NOTES: 1. State Auditor payment is based upon 1st half, pay 2006 actual and may increase over term of district 2. TIF run does not reflect potential reduction in Market Value Homestead Credit 3. Amount of increment will vary depending upon market value, tax rates, class rates, construction schedule and inflation on Market Value. 4. Inflation on tax rates cannot be captured. 5. TIF does not capture state wide property taxes or market value property taxes Prepared by Ehlers TIF PLAN Run- 09-18-2006 9/18/2006 Page 5 of 11 CEDAR AVE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT CITY OF RICHFIELD RETAIL T.I.F. CASH FLOW ASSUMPTIONS District New Redevelopment District County District # Inflation Rate - Every _ Years 1.00% Pay-As-You-Go Interest Rate: 6.50% City Internal Loan Rate 4.00% Note Issued Date (Present Value Date): 01-Feb-06 Local Tax Rate - Frozen 108.7870% Pay 2006 Fiscal Disparities Election Inside Year District was certified 2006 Assumes First Tax Increment For District 2008 Year District was Modified N/A Development located in modified area N/A Assumes First Tax Increment For Dev 2009 Years of Tax Increment 26 Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment 2033 Fiscal Disparities Ratio 33.6177% Pay 2006 Fiscal Disparities Metro Wide Tax Rate 121.8020% Pay 2006 Local Tax Rate - Current 107.7150% Pay 2006 State Wide Property Tax Rate (Used for total taxes) 50.8270% Pay 2006 Market Value Tax Rate (used for total taxes) N/A Pay 2006 Commercial Industrial Class Rate 1.5%-2.0% Pay 2006 First 150,000 1.50% Over 150,000 2.00% Rental Class Rate 1.25% Pay 2006 Residential Class Rat - Under $500,000 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% BASE VALUE INFORMATION Market Tax Value Capacity 3 8,919,000 108,761 Comm Retail 31,666,667 61.29% 5,466,484 1.5%-2.0% 108,580 Housing 20,000,000 38.71% 3,452,516 1.00% 34,525 Total 51,666,667 100.00%8,919,000 143,105 PROJECT INFORMATION Total Market Value Market Class New Date Date Date PHASE Use Sq. Ft./Units Sq. Ft./Units Value Rate Tax Capacity Completed Asses Payable 6 Retail 58,333 200.00 11,666,667 1.5%-2.0% 232,583 2012 2013 2014 Office 100,000 200.00 20,000,000 1.5%-2.0% 399,250 2012 2013 2014 Housing 100 200,000.00 20,000,000 1.00% 200,000 2012 2013 2014 TOTAL 158,433 51,666,667 831,833 Note: 1. Tax estimates are based upon market value, construction costs and taxes per sq/ft. 2. Apartments/residential do not pay State-wide property tax or Fiscal Disparities 3. Assumes Fiscal Disparities is paid inside the district Watershed Prepared by Ehlers TIF PLAN Run- 09-18-2006 9/18/2006 Page 6 of 11 CEDAR AVE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT CITY OF RICHFIELD RETAIL TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW Base Project Fiscal Captured Semi-Annual State Admin. Housing Semi-Annual Semi-Annual PAYMENT DATE PERIOD BEGINNING Tax Tax Disparities Tax Gross Tax Auditor Net Tax Present PERIOD ENDING Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capacity Capacity Reduction Capacity Increment 0.36% 10.00% 15.00% Increment Value Yrs. Mth. Yr. Present Value Date 01-Feb-06 0.0 1-Aug 2006 143,105 143,105 0.0 1-Feb 2006 0.0 1-Feb 2007 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1-Aug 2006 0.0 1-Aug 2007 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1-Feb 2007 0.0 1-Feb 2008 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 1-Aug 2007 0.5 1-Aug 2008 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 1-Feb 2008 1.0 1-Feb 2009 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 1-Aug 2008 1.5 1-Aug 2009 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.0 1-Feb 2009 2.0 1-Feb 2010 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 1-Aug 2009 2.5 1-Aug 2010 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.0 1-Feb 2010 3.0 1-Feb 2011 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.5 1-Aug 2010 3.5 1-Aug 2011 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.0 1-Feb 2011 4.0 1-Feb 2012 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.5 1-Aug 2011 4.5 1-Aug 2012 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.0 1-Feb 2012 5.0 1-Feb 2013 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.5 1-Aug 2012 5.5 1-Aug 2013 143,105 143,105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.0 1-Feb 2013 6.0 1-Feb 2014 143,105 831,833 (175,906) 512,823 278,942 (1,004) (27,794) (41,691) 208,453 129,020 6.5 1-Aug 2013 6.5 1-Aug 2014 143,105 831,833 (175,906) 512,823 278,942 (1,004) (27,794) (41,691) 208,453 253,980 7.0 1-Feb 2014 7.0 1-Feb 2015 143,105 840,152 (178,030) 519,017 282,311 (1,016) (28,130) (42,194) 210,971 376,467 7.5 1-Aug 2014 7.5 1-Aug 2015 143,105 840,152 (178,030) 519,017 282,311 (1,016) (28,130) (42,194) 210,971 495,099 8.0 1-Feb 2015 8.0 1-Feb 2016 143,105 848,553 (180,175) 525,273 285,714 (1,029) (28,469) (42,703) 213,514 611,382 8.5 1-Aug 2015 8.5 1-Aug 2016 143,105 848,553 (180,175) 525,273 285,714 (1,029) (28,469) (42,703) 213,514 724,005 9.0 1-Feb 2016 9.0 1-Feb 2017 143,105 857,039 (182,342) 531,592 289,151 (1,041) (28,811) (43,217) 216,083 834,395 9.5 1-Aug 2016 9.5 1-Aug 2017 143,105 857,039 (182,342) 531,592 289,151 (1,041) (28,811) (43,217) 216,083 941,310 10.0 1-Feb 2017 10.0 1-Feb 2018 143,105 865,609 (184,530) 537,974 292,623 (1,053) (29,157) (43,735) 218,677 1,046,103 10.5 1-Aug 2017 10.5 1-Aug 2018 143,105 865,609 (184,530) 537,974 292,623 (1,053) (29,157) (43,735) 218,677 1,147,597 11.0 1-Feb 2018 11.0 1-Feb 2019 143,105 874,265 (186,741) 544,420 296,129 (1,066) (29,506) (44,259) 221,297 1,247,074 11.5 1-Aug 2018 11.5 1-Aug 2019 143,105 874,265 (186,741) 544,420 296,129 (1,066) (29,506) (44,259) 221,297 1,343,421 12.0 1-Feb 2019 12.0 1-Feb 2020 143,105 883,008 (188,973) 550,930 299,670 (1,079) (29,859) (44,789) 223,943 1,437,850 12.5 1-Aug 2019 12.5 1-Aug 2020 143,105 883,008 (188,973) 550,930 299,670 (1,079) (29,859) (44,789) 223,943 1,529,307 13.0 1-Feb 2020 13.0 1-Feb 2021 143,105 891,838 (191,228) 557,505 303,247 (1,092) (30,215) (45,323) 226,616 1,618,942 13.5 1-Aug 2020 13.5 1-Aug 2021 143,105 891,838 (191,228) 557,505 303,247 (1,092) (30,215) (45,323) 226,616 1,705,756 14.0 1-Feb 2021 14.0 1-Feb 2022 143,105 900,756 (193,505) 564,146 306,859 (1,105) (30,575) (45,863) 229,316 1,790,839 14.5 1-Aug 2021 14.5 1-Aug 2022 143,105 900,756 (193,505) 564,146 306,859 (1,105) (30,575) (45,863) 229,316 1,873,243 15.0 1-Feb 2022 15.0 1-Feb 2023 143,105 909,764 (195,805) 570,854 310,507 (1,118) (30,939) (46,408) 232,042 1,954,003 15.5 1-Aug 2022 15.5 1-Aug 2023 143,105 909,764 (195,805) 570,854 310,507 (1,118) (30,939) (46,408) 232,042 2,032,221 16.0 1-Feb 2023 16.0 1-Feb 2024 143,105 918,862 (198,128) 577,628 314,192 (1,131) (31,306) (46,959) 234,796 2,108,875 16.5 1-Aug 2023 16.5 1-Aug 2024 143,105 918,862 (198,128) 577,628 314,192 (1,131) (31,306) (46,959) 234,796 2,183,117 17.0 1-Feb 2024 17.0 1-Feb 2025 143,105 928,050 (200,475) 584,471 317,914 (1,144) (31,677) (47,515) 237,577 2,255,874 17.5 1-Aug 2024 17.5 1-Aug 2025 143,105 928,050 (200,475) 584,471 317,914 (1,144) (31,677) (47,515) 237,577 2,326,340 18.0 1-Feb 2025 18.0 1-Feb 2026 143,105 937,331 (202,844) 591,381 321,673 (1,158) (32,051) (48,077) 240,386 2,395,396 18.5 1-Aug 2025 18.5 1-Aug 2026 143,105 937,331 (202,844) 591,381 321,673 (1,158) (32,051) (48,077) 240,386 2,462,277 19.0 1-Feb 2026 19.0 1-Feb 2027 143,105 946,704 (205,238) 598,361 325,470 (1,172) (32,430) (48,645) 243,223 2,527,818 19.5 1-Aug 2026 19.5 1-Aug 2027 143,105 946,704 (205,238) 598,361 325,470 (1,172) (32,430) (48,645) 243,223 2,591,296 20.0 1-Feb 2027 20.0 1-Feb 2028 143,105 956,171 (207,655) 605,411 329,304 (1,185) (32,812) (49,218) 246,089 2,653,500 20.5 1-Aug 2027 20.5 1-Aug 2028 143,105 956,171 (207,655) 605,411 329,304 (1,185) (32,812) (49,218) 246,089 2,713,746 21.0 1-Feb 2028 21.0 1-Feb 2029 143,105 965,733 (210,097) 612,531 333,177 (1,199) (33,198) (49,797) 248,983 2,772,783 21.5 1-Aug 2028 21.5 1-Aug 2029 143,105 965,733 (210,097) 612,531 333,177 (1,199) (33,198) (49,797) 248,983 2,829,960 22.0 1-Feb 2029 22.0 1-Feb 2030 143,105 975,390 (212,563) 619,722 337,089 (1,214) (33,588) (50,381) 251,906 2,885,988 22.5 1-Aug 2029 22.5 1-Aug 2030 143,105 975,390 (212,563) 619,722 337,089 (1,214) (33,588) (50,381) 251,906 2,940,253 23.0 1-Feb 2030 23.0 1-Feb 2031 143,105 985,144 (215,054) 626,986 341,039 (1,228) (33,981) (50,972) 254,859 2,993,425 23.5 1-Aug 2030 23.5 1-Aug 2031 143,105 985,144 (215,054) 626,986 341,039 (1,228) (33,981) (50,972) 254,859 3,044,924 24.0 1-Feb 2031 24.0 1-Feb 2032 143,105 994,995 (217,569) 634,321 345,030 (1,242) (34,379) (51,568) 257,841 3,095,385 24.5 1-Aug 2031 24.5 1-Aug 2032 143,105 994,995 (217,569) 634,321 345,030 (1,242) (34,379) (51,568) 257,841 3,144,258 25.0 1-Feb 2032 25.0 1-Feb 2033 143,105 1,004,945 (220,110) 641,731 349,060 (1,257) (34,780) (52,170) 260,852 3,192,146 25.5 1-Aug 2032 25.5 1-Aug 2033 143,105 1,004,945 (220,110) 641,731 349,060 (1,257) (34,780) (52,170) 260,852 3,238,526 26.0 1-Feb 2033 Totals (7,893,938) 12,556,951 (45,066) (1,247,314) (1,870,971) 9,354,853 Present Value 6,388,790 (23,000) (861,709) (954,869) 3,238,526 NOTES: 1. State Auditor payment is based upon 1st half, pay 2006 actual and may increase over term of district 2. TIF run does not reflect potential reduction in Market Value Homestead Credit 3. Amount of increment will vary depending upon market value, tax rates, class rates, construction schedule and inflation on Market Value. 4. Inflation on tax rates cannot be captured. 5. TIF does not capture state wide property taxes or market value property taxes Prepared by Ehlers TIF PLAN Run- 09-18-2006 APPENDIX E MINNESOTA BUSINESS ASSISTANCE FORM (MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT) APPENDIX E-1 APPENDIX F FINDINGS AND BUT/FOR QUALIFICATIONS But-For Analysis Current Market Value 41,513,600 New Market Value - Estimate 310,000,000 Difference 268,486,400 Present Value of Tax Increment 45,943,843 Difference 222,542,557 Value Likely to Occur Without TIF is Less Than: 222,542,557 The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan) for the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District (District), as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District is a redevelopment district as defined in the Laws of Minnesota 2005, Chapter 152, Article 2, Section 25. Sec. 25. [CITY OF RICHFIELD; TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT.] Subdivision 1. [AUTHORIZATION.] The City of Richfield may create a tax increment financing district consisting of an area lying west of Trunk Highway 77 extending: to 16th Avenue between Crosstown Highway 62 and 66th Street; to 17th Avenue between 66th and 69th Streets; and to 18th Avenue between 69th and 72nd Streets. The City or its Housing and Redevelopment Authority may be the authority for the purposes of Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.174 to 469.179. Subd. 2. [DISTRICT IS REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.] The redevelopment tax increment district created pursuant to subdivision 1 is deemed to be a redevelopment district and is subject to Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.174 to 469.179, except that: (1) expenditures for activities as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 469.1763, subdivision 1, paragraph (b), anywhere in the district are deemed to be the costs of correcting conditions that allow the designation of redevelopment districts pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 469.174, subdivision 10; and (2) the five-year rule under Minnesota Statutes, section 469.1763, subdivision 3, does not apply. [EFFECTIVE DATE.] This section received local approval by the City of Richfield on June 28, 2005 in APPENDIX F-1 compliance with Minnesota Statutes, section 645.021. 2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan. The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact that the redevelopment proposed in the TIF Plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment. Due to the high cost of redevelopment on the parcels because of their location in a noise impacted area, and the cost of financing the proposed improvements, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan: This finding is justified on the grounds that the cost of site improvements and utilities add to the total redevelopment cost. Historically, due to the extra cost of sound mitigation and site improvements costs in this area have made redevelopment infeasible without tax increment assistance. This is also the basis for the Special TIF Statute by the State for this TIF District. Therefore, the City reasonably determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope is anticipated on this site without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development. A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of the District and the use of tax increments has been performed as described above. If all development which is proposed to be assisted with tax increment were to occur in the District, the total increase in market value would be up to $268,486,400. The present value of tax increments from the District is estimated to be $47,049,903. It is the Council's finding that no development with a market value of greater than $221,436,497 would occur without tax increment assistance in this district within 25 years. This finding is based upon evidence from general past experience with the high cost of acquisition and public improvements in the general area of the District. (See Cashflow in Appendix D of the TIF Plan.) 3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Planning Commission reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City. 4. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area by private enterprise. The project to be assisted by the District will result in increased employment in the City and the State of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality development to the City. APPENDIX F-2 APPENDIX G PRIOR IMPROVEMENTS APPENDIX G-1 APPENDIX H Laws of Minnesota 2005, Chapter 152, Article 2, Section 25 Sec. 25. [CITY OF RICHFIELD; TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT.] Subdivision 1. [AUTHORIZATION.] The city of Richfield may create a tax increment financing district consisting of an area lying west of Trunk Highway 77 extending: to 16th Avenue between Crosstown Highway 62 and 66th Street; to 17th Avenue between 66th and 69th Streets; and to 18th Avenue between 69th and 72nd Streets. The city or its housing and redevelopment authority may be the authority for the purposes of Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.174 to 469.179. Subd. 2. [DISTRICT IS REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.] The redevelopment tax increment district created pursuant to subdivision 1 is deemed to be a redevelopment district and is subject to Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.174 to 469.179, except that: (1) expenditures for activities as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 469.1763, subdivision 1, paragraph (b), anywhere in the district are deemed to be the costs of correcting conditions that allow the designation of redevelopment districts pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 469.174, subdivision 10; and (2) the five-year rule under Minnesota Statutes, section 469.1763, subdivision 3, does not apply. [EFFECTIVE DATE.] This section is effective upon local approval by the city of Richfield in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, section 645.021. APPENDIX H-1 APPENDIX I 2017 SPECIAL LEGISLATION Minnesota Laws 2017, First Special Session, Chapter 1, Article 6, Section 18 is as follows: Sec. 18. CITY OF RICHFIELD; EXTENSION OF CEDAR AVENUE TIF DISTRICT. Notwithstanding Minnesota Statutes, section 469.176, subdivision 1b, or any other law to the contrary, the city of Richfield and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the city of Richfield may elect to extend the duration limit of the redevelopment tax increment financing district known as the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District established by Laws 2005, chapter 152, article 2, section 25, by ten years. EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective upon compliance by the governing bodies of the city of Richfield, Hennepin County and Independent School District No. 280 with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.1782, subdivision 2; and 645.021, subdivisions 2 and 3. APPENDIX I-1 As of November 16, 2017 Draft for Public Hearing Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) (a housing district) within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority City of Richfield Hennepin County State of Minnesota Public Hearing: November 28, 2017 Adopted: Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105 651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehlers-inc.com Table of Contents (for reference purposes only) Section 1 - Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area ................................. 1-1 Foreword ............................................................. 1-1 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)................ 2-1 Subsection 2-1. Foreword............................................... 2-1 Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority........................................ 2-1 Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives ................................... 2-1 Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview .............................. 2-1 Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired . 2-2 Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District................................. 2-2 Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District........... 2-3 Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ................ 2-4 Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued ...................... 2-5 Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds ........................................... 2-5 Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election.................................. 2-6 Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies....................................... 2-7 Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs ....................................... 2-8 Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions ................. 2-8 Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation ................................ 2-10 Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ....................... 2-10 Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District................................ 2-10 Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses .................................. 2-11 Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment ................................... 2-12 Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment .................................... 2-13 Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments ...................................... 2-13 Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer .............. 2-14 Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements ................................. 2-14 Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District ............................... 2-14 Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements ........................... 2-14 Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations ................................. 2-14 Subsection 2-27. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment . ................ 2-15 Subsection 2-28. Summary.............................................. 2-15 Appendix A Project Description ...................................................... A-1 Appendix B Maps of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and the District ................ B-1 Appendix C Description of Property to be Included in the District ............................ C-1 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District ........................................ D-1 Appendix E Housing Qualifications for the District........................................ E-1 Appendix F Findings for the District................................................... F-1 Section 1 - Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area Foreword The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. Generally, the substantive changes include the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area is recommended. It is available from the Community Development Director at the City of Richfield. Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area 1-1 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) Subsection 2-1. Foreword The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), the City of Richfield (the "City"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) (the "District"), a housing tax increment financing district, located in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or redevelopment to occur. To this end, the HRA and City have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ("M.S."), Sections 469.001 to 469.047, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act"), to assist in financing public costs related to this project. This section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the District. Other relevant information is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives The District currently consists of 31 parcels of land and adjacent and internal rights-of-way. The District is being created to facilitate the construction of 316 mixed-income apartments in the City, which includes rehabilitating 33 existing apartment units and constructing 283 new apartment units. The development will reserve 20 percent of the units (63 units) to be affordable to households with incomes at or below 50 percent of area median income. Please see Appendix A for further District information. The HRA approved a development agreement with Chamberlain Apartments, LLC on October 16, 2017. After the August 28, 2017 meeting, new changes were required so a new approval was completed on October 16, 2017. Development is anticipated to begin in the first quarter of 2018 and be complete by the end of 2020. This TIF Plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan do not preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated to occur over the life of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and the District. Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview 1. Property to be Acquired - The HRA or City currently owns 27 parcels of property within the District. The HRA intends to purchase another parcel with the District in 2017. The remaining property located within the District may be acquired by the HRA or City and is further described in this TIF Plan. 2. Relocation - Relocation services, to the extent required by law, are available pursuant to M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws. 3. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-1 legal requirements, the HRA or City may sell to a developer selected properties that it may acquire within the District or may lease land or facilities to a developer. 4. The HRA or City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District. Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcels listed in Appendix C of this TIF Plan. Please also see the map in Appendix B for further information on the location of the District. The HRA or City may acquire any parcel within the District including interior and adjacent street rights of way. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the HRA or City only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: construction of storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets, utilities and facilities; and to carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The HRA or City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District The HRA and City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, as amended, inclusive, find that the District, to be established, is a housing district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11 and M.S., Section 469.1761 as defined below: M.S., Section 469.174, Subd.11: "Housing district" means a type of tax increment financing district which consists of a project, or a portion of a project, intended for occupancy, in part, by persons or families of low and moderate income, as defined in chapter 462A, Title II of the National Housing Act of 1934, the National Housing Act of 1959, the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, Title V of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended, any other similar present or future federal, state, or municipal legislation, or the regulations promulgated under any of those acts, and that satisfies the requirements of M.S., Section 469.1761. Housing project means a project, or portion of a project, that meets all the qualifications of a housing district under this subdivision, whether or not actually established as a housing district. M.S., Section 469.1761: Subd. 1. Requirement imposed. (a) In order for a tax increment financing district to qualify as a housing district: (1) the income limitations provided in this section must be satisfied; and (2) no more than 20 percent of the square footage of buildings that receive assistance from tax increments may consist of commercial, retail, or other nonresidential uses. (b) The requirements imposed by this section apply to property receiving assistance financed with Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-2 tax increments, including interest reduction, land transfers at less than the authority’s cost of acquisition, utility service or connections, roads, parking facilities, or other subsidies. The provisions of this section do not apply to districts located within a targeted area as defined in Section 462C.02 Subd 9, clause (e). (c) For purposes of the requirements of paragraph (a), the authority may elect to treat an addition to an existing structure as a separate building if: (1) construction of the addition begins more than three years after construction of the existing structure was completed; and (2) for an addition that does not meet the requirements of paragraph (a), clause (2),if it is treated as a separate building, the addition was not contemplated by the tax increment financing plan which includes the existing structure. Subd. 2. Owner occupied housing. For owner occupied residential property, 95 percent of the housing units must be initially purchased and occupied by individuals whose family income is less than or equal to the income requirements for qualified mortgage bond projects under section 143(f) of the Internal Revenue Code. Subd. 3. Rental property. For residential rental property, the property must satisfy the income requirements for a qualified residential rental project as defined in section 142(d) of the Internal Revenue Code. The requirements of this subdivision apply for the duration of the tax increment financing district. Subd. 4. Noncompliance; enforcement. Failure to comply with the requirements of this section is subject to M.S., Section 469.1771. In meeting the statutory criteria the HRA and City rely on the following facts and findings: • The District consists of 31 parcels. • The development will consist of 316 units of multi-family rental housing. • 20% of the units will be reserved for occupancy by persons with incomes less than 50% of area median income. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 7, the District does not contain any parcel or part of a parcel that qualified under the provisions of M.S., Sections 273.111, 273.112, or 273.114 or Chapter 473H for taxes payable in any of the five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification of the District. Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration and first year of tax increment of the District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 1b., the duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the HRA or City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The HRA or City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2020, which is no later than four years following the year of approval of the District. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2045, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The HRA or City reserves the right to decertify the District prior to Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-3 the legally required date. Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor in 2017 for taxes payable 2018. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 2020) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of: 1. Change in tax exempt status of property; 2. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district; 3. Change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements; 4. Change in the use of the property and classification; 5. Change in state law governing class rates; or 6. Change in previously issued building permits. In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTC, no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the HRA or City. The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2018, assuming the request for certification is made before June 30, 2018. The ONTC and the Original Local Tax Rate for the District appear in the table below. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, upon completion of the projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table below. The HRA and City request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2020. The Project Tax Capacity (PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the projects within the District are completed. Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $1,103,790 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) $63,988 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $1,039,802 Original Local Tax Rate 1.40604 Pay 2017 Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $1,462,003 Percent Retained by the HRA 100% Tax capacity includes a 3% inflation factor for the duration of the District. The tax capacity included in thischart is the estimated tax capacity of the District in year 25. The tax capacity of the District in year one isestimated to be $192,913. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the HRA shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-4 TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building permit was issued. The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District and found no parcels for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the City. Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The HRA or City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF Plan. As presently proposed, the projects within the District will be financed by a pay-as-you-go note and interfund loan but the HRA reserves the right to issue bonds in any form as authorized under the TIF Act. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification. This provision does not obligate the HRA or City to incur debt. The HRA or City will issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are shown in the table below: SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL Tax Increment $25,586,527 Interest $2,558,653 TOTAL $28,145,180 The HRA or City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments from the District in a maximum principal amount of $17,920,685. Such bonds may be in the form of pay-as- you-go notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total bonded indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan as of the date of approval. Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate the construction of 316 mixed-income apartment units. The HRA and City have determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District costs, as described. The HRA has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with the District is outlined in the table on the following page. Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-5 USES OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS TOTAL Land/Building Acquisition $5,100,000 Site Improvements/Preparation $750,000 Utilities $750,000 Affordable Housing $8,250,000 Other Qualifying Improvements $512,032 Administrative Costs (up to 10%)$2,558,653 PROJECT COST TOTAL $17,920,685 Interest $10,224,495 PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $28,145,180 The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total projected tax increments for the District as shown in Subsection 2-9. Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. The HRA may expend funds for qualified housing activities outside of the District boundaries. Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, the City may elect one of two methods to calculate fiscal disparities. If the calculations pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, clause b, (inside the District) are followed, the following method of computation shall apply: (1) The original net tax capacity shall be determined before the application of the fiscal disparity provisions of Chapter 276A or 473F. The current net tax capacity shall exclude any fiscal disparity commercial-industrial net tax capacity increase between the original year and the current year multiplied by the fiscal disparity ratio determined pursuant to M.S., Section 276A.06, subdivision 7 or M.S., Section 473F.08, subdivision 6. Where the original net tax capacity is equal to or greater than the current net tax capacity, there is no captured tax capacity and no tax increment determination. Where the original tax capacity is less than the current tax capacity, the difference between the original net tax capacity and the current net tax capacity is the captured net tax capacity. This amount less any portion thereof which the authority has designated, in its tax increment financing plan, to share with the local taxing districts is the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority. (2) The county auditor shall exclude the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority from the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts in determining local taxing district tax rates. The local tax rates so determined are to be extended against the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority as well as the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts. The tax generated by the extension of the less of (A) the local taxing district tax rates or (B) the original local tax rate to the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority is the tax increment of the authority. Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-6 The HRA will choose to calculate fiscal disparities by clause b. It is not anticipated that the District will contain commercial/industrial property. As a result, there should be no impact due to the fiscal disparities provision on the District. According to Section 469.177, Subd. 3 of the TIF Act: (c) The method of computation of tax increment applied to a district pursuant to paragraph (a) or (b) shall remain the same for the duration of the district, except that the governing body may elect to change its election from the method of computation in paragraph (a) to the method in paragraph (b). Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies Pursuant to M.S., Section 116J.993, Subd. 3, the following forms of financial assistance are not considered a business subsidy: (1) A business subsidy of less than $150,000; (2) Assistance that is generally available to all businesses or to a general class of similar businesses, such as a line of business, size, location, or similar general criteria; (3) Public improvements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve a public purpose and do not principally benefit a single business or defined group of businesses at the time the improvements are made; (4) Redevelopment property polluted by contaminants as defined in M.S., Section 116J.552, Subd. 3; (5) Assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or bringing it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts, provided that the assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the total cost; (6) Assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance is to provide those services; (7) Assistance for housing; (8) Assistance for pollution control or abatement, including assistance for a tax increment financing hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 23; (9) Assistance for energy conservation; (10) Tax reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law; (11) Workers' compensation and unemployment compensation; (12) Benefits derived from regulation; (13) Indirect benefits derived from assistance to educational institutions; (14) Funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds, and bonds issued for the benefit of an organization described in section 501 © (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999; (15) Assistance for a collaboration between a Minnesota higher education institution and a business; (16) Assistance for a tax increment financing soils condition district as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 19; (17) Redevelopment when the recipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site preparation is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value; (18) General changes in tax increment financing law and other general tax law changes of a principally technical nature; (19) Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local government agency; (20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority; (21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $150,000 or less; Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-7 (22) Federal loan funds provided through the United States Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration; and (23) Property tax abatements granted under M.S., Section 469.1813 to property that is subject to valuation under Minnesota Rules, chapter 8100. The HRA will comply with M.S., Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995 to the extent the tax increment assistance under this TIF Plan does not fall under any of the above exemptions. Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1a, the county board may require the HRA or City to pay for all or part of the cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by tax increment will, in the judgment of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of road improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five years under a capital improvement plan or within five years under another county plan. If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the HRA or City within forty- five days of receipt of this TIF Plan. In the opinion of the HRA and City and consultants, the proposed development outlined in this TIF Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads, therefore the TIF Plan was not forwarded to the county 45 days prior to the public hearing. The HRA and City are aware that the county could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing. Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF Plan would occur without the creation of the District. However, the HRA or City has determined that such development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: IMPACT ON TAX BASE Estimated 2017/Pay 2018 Total Net Tax Capacity Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) Upon Completion Percent of CTC to Entity Total Hennepin County 1,691,017,124 1,039,802 0.0615% City of Richfield 30,179,862 1,039,802 3.4454% Richfield Public ISD No. 280 43,840,919 1,039,802 2.3718% Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-8 IMPACT ON TAX RATES Pay 2017 Extension Rates Percent of Total CTC Potential Taxes Hennepin County 0.440870 31.36% 1,039,802 458,418 City of Richfield 0.584060 41.54% 1,039,802 607,307 Richfield Public ISD No. 280 0.270540 19.24% 1,039,802 281,308 Other 0.110570 7.86%1,039,802 114,971 Total 1.406040 100.00%1,462,003 The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the actual Pay 2017 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on estimated Pay 2018 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2018 rates and figures, which were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b): (1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be generated over the life of the District is $25,586,527; (2) Probable impact of the District on city provided services and ability to issue debt. A minimal impact of the District on police protection is expected. The City does track all calls for service including property-type calls and crimes. With any addition of new residents or businesses, police calls for service will be increased. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional overall demands to the call load. The City believes there is a slight possibility that the proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment in vehicles. The probable impact of the District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The existing buildings are several non-sprinkled single family homes that are being replaced by three fully sprinkled multi- family homes. The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The development is not expected to significantly impact any traffic movements in the area. The current infrastructure for sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be able to handle the additional volume generated from the proposed development. Based on the development plans, there are no additional costs associated with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting and sidewalks. The development in the District is expected to contribute an estimated $705,740 in sanitary sewer (SAC) and water (WAC) connection fees. The probable impact of any District general obligation tax increment bonds on the ability to issue debt for general fund purposes is expected to be minimal. It is not anticipated that there will be any general obligation debt issued in relation to this project, therefore there will be no impact on the City's ability to issue future debt or on the City's debt limit. Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-9 (3) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to school district levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to school district levies, assuming the school district's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $4,922,848; (4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the county's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $8,023,935; (5) Additional information requested by the county or school district. The City is not aware of any standard questions in a county or school district written policy regarding tax increment districts and impact on county or school district services. The county or school district must request additional information pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) within 15 days after receipt of the tax increment financing plan. No requests for additional information from the county or school district regarding the proposed development for the District have been received. Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 1 (a), clause 7 the TIF Plan must contain identification and description of studies and analyses used to make the determination set forth in M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 3, clause (b)(2) and the findings are required in the resolution approving the District. Following is a list of reports and studies on file at the City that support the HRA and City's findings: • Cedar Avenue Corridor Master Plan (2016) • City of Richfield Comprehensive Plan (2007) • Cedar Avenue Corridor Redevelopment Concept Master Plan (2004) Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing district include all of the following potential revenue sources: 1. Taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed under M.S., Section 469.177; 2. The proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, to the extent the property was purchased by the authority with tax increments; 3. Principal and interest received on loans or other advances made by the authority with tax increments; 4. Interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments; 5. Repayments or return of tax increments made to the Authority under agreements for districts for which the request for certification was made after August 1, 1993; and 6. The market value homestead credit paid to the Authority under M.S., Section 273.1384. Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District In accordance with M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any: 1. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the District, if the reduction does not meet the requirements of M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e); Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-10 2. Increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred; 3. A determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original TIF Plan; 4. Increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the HRA or City; 5. Increase in the estimate of the cost of the District, including administrative expenses, that will be paid or financed with tax increment from the District; or 6. Designation of additional property to be acquired by the HRA or City, shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 4(f), the geographic area of the District may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county auditor. If a housing district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that the addition to the district meets the criteria of M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11 must be documented. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is elimination of parcel(s) from the District and (2) (A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in the District's original net tax capacity or (B) the HRA agrees that, notwithstanding M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District. The HRA or City must notify the County Auditor of any modification to the District. Modifications to the District in the form of a budget modification or an expansion of the boundaries will be recorded in the TIF Plan. Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses In accordance with M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 14, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the HRA or City, other than: 1. Amounts paid for the purchase of land; 2. Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the District; 3. Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the District; 4. Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178; or 5. Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance costs described in clauses (1) to (3). For districts for which the request for certification were made before August 1, 1979, or after June 30, 1982, and before August 1, 2001, administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3, tax increment may be used to pay any authorized and documented administrative expenses for the District up to but not to exceed 10 percent of the total estimated tax increment expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined by M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less. For districts for which certification was requested after July 31, 2001, no tax increment may be used to pay Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-11 any administrative expenses for District costs which exceed ten percent of total estimated tax increment expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the County's actual administrative expenses incurred in connection with the District and are not subject to the percentage limits of M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3. The county may require payment of those expenses by February 15 of the year following the year the expenses were incurred. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the County Treasurer shall deduct an amount (currently .36 percent) of any increment distributed to the HRA or City and the County Treasurer shall pay the amount deducted to the State Commissioner of Management and Budget for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor for the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of examining and auditing authorities' use of tax increment financing. This amount may be adjusted annually by the Commissioner of Revenue. Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and the District may be terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the debt service fund or other escrow account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment of the bonds at maturity or redemption date. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6: if, after four years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel, and the original net tax capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity has commenced and the county auditor shall certify the net tax capacity thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. The county auditor must enforce the provisions of this subdivision. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required activity has taken place for each parcel in the district. The evidence for a parcel must be submitted by February 1 of the fifth year following the year in which the parcel was certified as included in the district. For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements of a street are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street, and (3) substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street. The HRA or City or a property owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately November 2021 and report such actions to the County Auditor. Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-12 Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment The HRA or City hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity of taxable property located in the District for the following purposes: 1. To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued to finance a project; 2. To finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047; 3. To pay for project costs as identified in the budget set forth in the TIF Plan; 4. To finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4; 5. To pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to or on behalf of the HRA or City or for the benefit of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area by a developer; 6. To finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance or other security guaranteeing the payment when due of principal of and interest on bonds pursuant to the TIF Plan or pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C. M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178; and 7. To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and interest on the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C, M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178. Revenues derived from tax increment from a housing district must be used solely to finance the cost of housing projects as defined in M.S., Sections 469.174, Subd. 11 and 469.1761. The cost of public improvements directly related to the housing projects and the allocated administrative expenses of the HRA or City may be included in the cost of a housing project. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other purposes prohibited by M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4. Tax increments generated in the District will be paid by Hennepin County to the HRA for the Tax Increment Fund of said District. The HRA or City will pay to the developer(s) annually an amount not to exceed an amount as specified in a developer's agreement to reimburse the costs of land acquisition, public improvements, demolition and relocation, site preparation, and administration. Remaining increment funds will be used for HRA or City administration (up to 10 percent) and for the costs of public improvement activities outside the District. Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments Excess increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, shall be used only to do one or more of the following: 1. Prepay any outstanding bonds; 2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment for any outstanding bonds; 3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of any outstanding bonds; or 4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their local tax rates. The HRA or City must spend or return the excess increments under paragraph (c) within nine months after the end of the year. In addition, the HRA or City may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area or the District. Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-13 Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer The HRA or City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the Redevelopment Plan and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the HRA or City to demonstrate the conformance of the development with City plans and ordinances. The HRA or City may also use the Agreements to address other issues related to the development. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 5, no more than 10 percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired in the District as set forth in the TIF Plan shall at any time be owned by the HRA or City as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178 to which tax increments from property acquired is pledged, unless prior to acquisition in excess of 10 percent of the acreage, the HRA or City concluded an agreement for the development of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the HRA or City should the development not be completed. Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the HRA or City may enter into a written assessment agreement in recordable form with the developer of property within the District which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the District. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the County Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears, in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the County Assessor shall also certify the minimum market value agreement. Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District Administration of the District will be handled by the Community Development Director. Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subds. 5, 6, and 6b the HRA or City must undertake financial reporting for all tax increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board and County Auditor on or before August 1 of each year. M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15. If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M.S., Section 469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the Office of the State Auditor will direct the County Auditor to withhold the distribution of tax increment from the District. Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations As required by the TIF Act, in establishing the District, the determination has been made that the anticipated development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-14 increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan. In making said determination, reliance has been placed upon written representation made by the developer to such effects and upon HRA and City staff awareness of the feasibility of developing the project site(s) within the District. A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of the District and the use of tax increments has been performed as described above. Such analysis is included with the cashflow in Appendix D, and indicates that the increase in estimated market value of the proposed development (less the indicated subtractions) exceeds the estimated market value of the site absent the establishment of the District and the use of tax increments. Subsection 2-27. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment 1. General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the TIF Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.001 to 469.047. Tax increments may not be used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No tax increment may be used for the acquisition, construction, renovation, operation, or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of government or the state or federal government. This provision does not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure. 2. Housing District Exceptions to Restriction on Pooling; Five Year Limit. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763, (1) At least 80% of revenues derived from tax increments paid by properties in the District must be expended on Public Costs incurred within said district, and up to 20% of said tax increments may be spent on public costs incurred outside of the District but within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area; provided that in the case of a housing district, a housing project, as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11, is deemed to be an activity in the District, even if the expenditure occurred after five years. Subsection 2-28. Summary The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority is establishing the District to provide an impetus for residential development and provide safe and decent life cycle housing in the City. The TIF Plan for the District was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113- 1105, telephone (651) 697-8500. Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain)2-15 Appendix A Project Description Chamberlain Apartments, LLC intends to redevelop the parcels in the District into a mixed-income housing projects with a total of 316 apartment units that includes rehabilitating three existing buildings with a total of 33 apartment units and constructing three new buildings with a total of 283 apartment units. The new apartments will include underground parking. The development will reserve 20% of the units (63 units) to be affordable to households at or below 50% of area median income. The Developer will construct a new public road through the site. Construction is anticipated to start in the first quarter of 2018 and be completed by the end of 2020. Appendix A-1 Appendix B Maps of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and the District Appendix B-1 ]72.17[ ]94.96[]30.54[[82.16][33.89]]51.06[[25.31][53.64] ]26.75[[53.64][36.47]] 92.08[ [36.43] ]7 8.64[ ]82.211[ [74] [134.34] [388.25]]6.16[=C[38.6]C=[49.8] ]94.96[]30.54[[82.16][33.89]]51.06[[25.31]71st 1/2 70th 1/2 LOGAN75th VINCENTUPTONTHOMASWASHBURNXERXESI - 494 78th 77th 76th OLIVERNEWTONMORGANSHERIDANRUSSELLQUEENPENN74th 72nd 73th 71st 69th 70th DUPONTKNOXJAMESIRVINGHUMBOLDTGIRARDFREMONTEMERSONCOLFAXBRYANTALDRICHGARFIELDGRANDHARRIETLYNDALECR OSSTOWN H WY 62nd 67th 68th 66th 65th 64th 63rd SHERIDANWASHBURNXERXESVINCENTUPTONTHOMASRUSSELLQUEENPENNOLIVERNEWTONMORGANLOGANDUPONTHUMBOLDTKNOXJAMESIRVINGGIRARDEMERSONFREMONTLYNDALECOLFAXBRYANTALDRICHGARFIELDHARRIETGRAND69th 71st 72nd 73th 74th 75th 78th 70th 76th 77th COLUMBUS2nd1stSTEVENSPLEASANTPILLSBURYBLAISDELLWENTWORTHNICOLLET3rdCLINTON4th5thPORTLANDOAKLANDPARK10th11th12th13th14thELLIOTCHICAGO15th16th17th18thCEDARBLOOMINGTONI-494 62nd 63rd 64th 65th 67th 68th 66thCOLUMBUSPLEASANTPILLSBURYWENTWORTHBLAISDELLSTEVENSNICOLLET1st2nd5thCLINTON3rd4thOAKLANDPARKPORTLAND15th11thCHICAGOELLIOT10th13th12th14thBLOOMINGTON16th17thCEDAR18th 19008009001000110012001300180060050040030020050100124200300324400500620700720800900100011001300140015001600170018001001524190060012000007001400290028002700260025002200210020003000150016001700240031002300´11-2017 CEDAR CORRIDOR AND 2017-1 HOUSING TIF DISTRICTS 0 0.5 10.25 MilesRichfield Redevelopment Project area boundary2017-1 Housing TIF District Boundary Cedar Corridor TIF District Boundary Appendix C Description of Property to be Included in the District The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcels listed below. Parcel Numbers Address Owner 26-028-24-41-0067 6620 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0068 6626 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0069 6632 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0070 6638 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0071 6644 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0072 6645 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0073 6639 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0074 6633 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0075 6627 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0076 6621 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0077 6615 17 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0080 6700 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0081 6708 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0082 6714 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0083 6720 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0084 6726 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0085 6732 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0086 6738 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0087 6744 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0096 6700 Cedar Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0097 6720 Cedar Ave S Cedar South Pointe LLC 26-028-24-41-0098 6730 Cedar Ave S Cedar South Pointe LLC 26-028-24-41-0099 6744 Cedar Ave S Cedar South Pointe LLC 26-028-24-41-0100 6745 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0101 6739 18 th Ave S HRA Appendix C-1 26-028-24-41-0102 6733 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0103 6727 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0104 6721 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0105** 6715 18 th Ave S Richfield Apartments LLC 26-028-24-41-0106 6709 18 th Ave S HRA 26-028-24-41-0107 6701 18 th Ave S HRA *All of the listed parcels are currently in the Cedar Avenue Tax Increment Financing District and will be removed for inclusion in the District. ** The HRA plans to purchase 6715 18th Ave South in 2017. Appendix C-2 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District Appendix D-1 11/13/2017Base Value Assumptions - Page 1The Chamberlain Apts (2017-1 Housing)City of Richfield316 Mixed Income AptsASSUMPTIONS AND RATESDistrictType: HousingDistrict Name/Number:County District #:Exempt Class Rate (Exempt) 0.00%First Year Construction or Inflation on Value 2018Commercial Industrial Preferred Class Rate (C/I Pref.)Existing District - Specify No. Years RemainingFirst $150,000 1.50%Inflation Rate - Every Year:3.00%Over $150,000 2.00%Interest Rate:4.00%Commercial Industrial Class Rate (C/I) 2.00%Present Value Date:1-Aug-19Rental Housing Class Rate (Rental) 1.25%First Period Ending 1-Feb-20Affordable Rental Housing Class Rate (Aff. Rental)Tax Year District was Certified:Pay 2018First $115,000 0.75%Cashflow Assumes First Tax Increment For Development: 2020 Over $115,000 0.25%Years of Tax Increment 26 Non-Homestead Residential (Non-H Res. 1 Unit)Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment 2045 First $500,000 1.00%Fiscal Disparities Election [Outside (A), Inside (B), or NA]Inside(B)Over $500,000 1.25%Incremental or Total Fiscal DisparitiesIncrementalHomestead Residential Class Rate (Hmstd. Res.)Fiscal Disparities Contribution Ratio 34.3809% Pay 2017 First $500,000 1.00%Fiscal Disparities Metro-Wide Tax Rate 150.0490% Pay 2017 Over $500,000 1.25%Maximum/Frozen Local Tax Rate: 140.604% Pay 2017 Agricultural Non-Homestead 1.00%Current Local Tax Rate: (Use lesser of Current or Max.) 140.604%Pay 2017 State-wide Tax Rate (Comm./Ind. only used for total taxes) 45.8020% Pay 2017 Market Value Tax Rate (Used for total taxes) 0.12679% Pay 2017 Building Total Percentage Tax Year Property Current Class AfterLand Market Market Of Value Used Original Original Tax Original After ConversionMap # PID Owner Address Market Value Value Value for District Market Value Market Value Class Tax Capacity Conversion Orig. Tax Cap.26-028-24-41-0067RA City of Richfie6620 18th Ave. S. 2,547,000 2,547,000 100% 2,547,000 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental 31,838 A26-028-24-41-0068RA City of Richfie6626 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - A26-028-24-41-0069RA City of Richfie6632 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - A26-028-24-41-0070RA City of Richfie6638 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - A26-028-24-41-0071RA City of Richfie6644 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - A26-028-24-41-0072RA City of Richfie6645 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - A26-028-24-41-0073RA City of Richfie6639 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - A26-028-24-41-0074RA City of Richfie6633 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - A26-028-24-41-0075RA City of Richfie6627 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - A26-028-24-41-0076RA City of Richfie6621 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - A26-028-24-41-0077RA City of Richfie6615 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - A26-028-24-41-0080RA City of Richfie6700 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - B26-028-24-41-0081RA City of Richfie6708 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - B26-028-24-41-0082RA City of Richfie6714 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - B26-028-24-41-0083RA City of Richfie6720 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - B26-028-24-41-0084RA City of Richfie6726 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - B26-028-24-41-0085RA City of Richfie6732 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - B26-028-24-41-0086RA City of Richfie6738 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - B26-028-24-41-0087RA City of Richfie6744 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - B26-028-24-41-0100RA City of Richfie6745 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - C26-028-24-41-0101RA City of Richfie6739 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - C26-028-24-41-0102RA City of Richfie6733 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - C26-028-24-41-0103RA City of Richfie6727 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - C26-028-24-41-0104RA City of Richfie6721 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - C26-028-24-41-0105field Apartments 6715 18th Ave. S. 76,000 105,000 181,000 100% 181,000Pay 2018 Hmstd. Res. 1,810 Rental 2,263 C26-028-24-41-0106RA City of Richfie6709 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - C26-028-24-41-0107RA City of Richfie6701 18th Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - C26-028-24-41-0096RA City of Richfie6700 Cedar Ave. S. 0 100% 0 Pay 2018 Exempt - Rental - D26-028-24-41-0097 ar South Pointe 6720 Cedar Ave. S 132,000 665,000 797,000 100% 797,000 Pay 2018 Rental 9,963 Rental 9,963 D26-028-24-41-0098 ar South Pointe 6730 Cedar Ave. S 132,000 665,000 797,000 100% 797,000 Pay 2018 Rental 9,963 Rental 9,963 D26-028-24-41-0099 ar South Pointe 6744 Cedar Ave. S 132,000 665,000 797,000 100% 797,000 Pay 2018 Rental 9,963 Rental 9,963 D3,019,000 2,100,000 5,119,0005,119,000 31,698 63,988Note:1. HRA-owned property assumes a value of $9,000 per new unit for 283 units based on discussions with County Assessor on 8-23-17. The $2,547,000 value represents the base value for all HRA owned property. The Hennepin County Assessor will allocate the value to the HRA owned parcels as necessary. Remaining base values per County website on 8-21-17.Area/ PhaseTax Rates BASE VALUE INFORMATION (Original Tax Capacity)Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\Richfield\Housing-ED-Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\2017-1 Housing TIF\TIF Plan Run 10-18-17 11/13/2017Base Value Assumptions - Page 2The Chamberlain Apts (2017-1 Housing)City of Richfield316 Mixed Income AptsEstimated Taxable Total Taxable Property Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage First YearMarket Value Market Value Total Market Tax Project Project Tax Completed Completed Completed Completed Full TaxesArea/Phase New Use Per Sq. Ft./Unit Per Sq. Ft./Unit Sq. Ft./UnitsValue Class Tax Capacity Capacity/Unit 2018 2019 2020 2021 PayableAApartments 143,000 143,000 93 13,299,000 Rental 166,238 1,788 60% 100% 100% 100% 2021BApartments 143,000 143,000 95 13,585,000 Rental 169,813 1,788 40% 100% 100% 100% 2021CApartments 143,000 143,000 95 13,585,000 Rental 169,813 1,788 0% 60% 100% 100% 2022DApartments 102,000 102,000 33 3,366,000 Rental 42,075 1,275 60% 100% 100% 100% 2021TOTAL43,835,000 547,938 Subtotal Residential 316 43,835,000 547,938 Subtotal Commercial/Ind. 0 0 0 Note:1. Est. Market Value per County Assessor on 8-23-17.Total Fiscal Local Local Fiscal State-wide MarketTax Disparities Tax Property Disparities PropertyValue Total Taxes PerNew UseCapacity Tax Capacity Capacity Taxes Taxes Taxes Taxes Taxes Sq. Ft./UnitApartments 166,238 0 166,238 233,737 0 0 16,862 250,598 2,694.61Apartments 169,813 0 169,813 238,763 0 0 17,224 255,988 2,694.61Apartments 169,813 0 169,813 238,763 0 0 17,224 255,988 2,694.61Apartments 42,075 0 42,075 59,159 0 0 4,268 63,427 1,922.03TOTAL 547,938 0 547,938 770,422 0 0 55,578 826,000Note: 1. Taxes and tax increment will vary significantly from year to year depending upon values, rates, state law, fiscal disparities and other factors which cannot be predicted.Total Property Taxes 826,000less State-wide Taxes 0less Fiscal Disp. Adj. 0less Market Value Taxes (55,578)less Base Value Taxes (89,969)Annual Gross TIF 680,453 WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM TIF?TAX CALCULATIONSPROJECT INFORMATION (Project Tax Capacity)Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\Richfield\Housing-ED-Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\2017-1 Housing TIF\TIF Plan Run 10-18-17 11/13/2017Tax Increment Cashflow - Page 3The Chamberlain Apts (2017-1 Housing)City of Richfield316 Mixed Income AptsTAX INCREMENT CASH FLOWProject Original Fiscal Captured Local Annual Semi-Annual State Admin.Semi-Annual Semi-Annual PERIOD% of Tax Tax Disparities Tax Tax Gross Tax Gross Tax Auditor at Net Tax Present ENDING Tax PaymentOTC Capacity Capacity Incremental Capacity Rate Increment Increment 0.36% 10% Increment Value Yrs. Year Date- - - - 02/01/20100% 192,913 (63,988) - 128,925 140.604% 181,274 90,637 (326) (9,031) 81,280 78,123 0.52020 08/01/20100% 192,913 (63,988) - 128,925 140.604% 181,274 90,637 (326) (9,031) 81,280 154,715 12020 02/01/21100% 480,013 (63,988) - 416,025 140.604% 584,948 292,474 (1,053) (29,142) 262,279 397,020 1.52021 08/01/21100% 480,013 (63,988) - 416,025 140.604% 584,948 292,474 (1,053) (29,142) 262,279 634,574 22021 02/01/22100% 559,281 (63,988) - 495,294 140.604% 696,403 348,201 (1,254) (34,695) 312,253 911,846 2.52022 08/01/22100% 559,281 (63,988) - 495,294 140.604% 696,403 348,201 (1,254) (34,695) 312,253 1,183,681 32022 02/01/23100% 576,060 (63,988) - 512,072 140.604% 719,994 359,997 (1,296) (35,870) 322,831 1,459,214 3.52023 08/01/23100% 576,060 (63,988) - 512,072 140.604% 719,994 359,997 (1,296) (35,870) 322,831 1,729,344 42023 02/01/24100% 593,341 (63,988) - 529,354 140.604% 744,293 372,146 (1,340) (37,081) 333,726 2,003,116 4.52024 08/01/24100% 593,341 (63,988) - 529,354 140.604% 744,293 372,146 (1,340) (37,081) 333,726 2,271,520 52024 02/01/25100% 611,142 (63,988) - 547,154 140.604% 769,321 384,660 (1,385) (38,328) 344,948 2,543,509 5.52025 08/01/25100% 611,142 (63,988) - 547,154 140.604% 769,321 384,660 (1,385) (38,328) 344,948 2,810,165 62025 02/01/26100% 629,476 (63,988) - 565,488 140.604% 795,099 397,550 (1,431) (39,612) 356,507 3,080,352 6.52026 08/01/26100% 629,476 (63,988) - 565,488 140.604% 795,099 397,550 (1,431) (39,612) 356,507 3,345,242 72026 02/01/27100% 648,360 (63,988) - 584,373 140.604% 821,651 410,826 (1,479) (40,935) 368,412 3,613,610 7.52027 08/01/27100% 648,360 (63,988) - 584,373 140.604% 821,651 410,826 (1,479) (40,935) 368,412 3,876,716 82027 02/01/28100% 667,811 (63,988) - 603,824 140.604% 849,000 424,500 (1,528) (42,297) 380,675 4,143,249 8.52028 08/01/28100% 667,811 (63,988) - 603,824 140.604% 849,000 424,500 (1,528) (42,297) 380,675 4,404,556 92028 02/01/29100% 687,845 (63,988) - 623,858 140.604% 877,169 438,585 (1,579) (43,701) 393,305 4,669,239 9.52029 08/01/29100% 687,845 (63,988) - 623,858 140.604% 877,169 438,585 (1,579) (43,701) 393,305 4,928,732 102029 02/01/30100% 708,481 (63,988) - 644,493 140.604% 906,183 453,092 (1,631) (45,146) 406,314 5,191,552 10.52030 08/01/30100% 708,481 (63,988) - 644,493 140.604% 906,183 453,092 (1,631) (45,146) 406,314 5,449,219 112030 02/01/31100% 729,735 (63,988) - 665,748 140.604% 936,068 468,034 (1,685) (46,635) 419,714 5,710,164 11.52031 08/01/31100% 729,735 (63,988) - 665,748 140.604% 936,068 468,034 (1,685) (46,635) 419,714 5,965,993 122031 02/01/32100% 751,627 (63,988) - 687,640 140.604% 966,849 483,424 (1,740) (48,168) 433,516 6,225,053 12.52032 08/01/32100% 751,627 (63,988) - 687,640 140.604% 966,849 483,424 (1,740) (48,168) 433,516 6,479,034 132032 02/01/33100% 774,176 (63,988) - 710,189 140.604% 998,554 499,277 (1,797) (49,748) 447,731 6,736,199 13.52033 08/01/33100% 774,176 (63,988) - 710,189 140.604% 998,554 499,277 (1,797) (49,748) 447,731 6,988,322 142033 02/01/34100% 797,401 (63,988) - 733,414 140.604% 1,031,209 515,605 (1,856) (51,375) 462,374 7,243,585 14.52034 08/01/34100% 797,401 (63,988) - 733,414 140.604% 1,031,209 515,605 (1,856) (51,375) 462,374 7,493,843 152034 02/01/35100% 821,323 (63,988) - 757,336 140.604% 1,064,845 532,422 (1,917) (53,051) 477,455 7,747,197 15.52035 08/01/35100% 821,323 (63,988) - 757,336 140.604% 1,064,845 532,422 (1,917) (53,051) 477,455 7,995,582 162035 02/01/36100% 845,963 (63,988) - 781,976 140.604% 1,099,489 549,744 (1,979) (54,777) 492,989 8,247,021 16.52036 08/01/36100% 845,963 (63,988) - 781,976 140.604% 1,099,489 549,744 (1,979) (54,777) 492,989 8,493,529 172036 02/01/37100% 871,342 (63,988) - 807,354 140.604% 1,135,173 567,586 (2,043) (56,554) 508,989 8,743,047 17.52037 08/01/37100% 871,342 (63,988) - 807,354 140.604% 1,135,173 567,586 (2,043) (56,554) 508,989 8,987,672 182037 02/01/38100% 897,482 (63,988) - 833,495 140.604% 1,171,927 585,963 (2,109) (58,385) 525,469 9,235,266 18.52038 08/01/38100% 897,482 (63,988) - 833,495 140.604% 1,171,927 585,963 (2,109) (58,385) 525,469 9,478,006 192038 02/01/39100% 924,407 (63,988) - 860,419 140.604% 1,209,784 604,892 (2,178) (60,271) 542,443 9,723,673 19.52039 08/01/39100% 924,407 (63,988) - 860,419 140.604% 1,209,784 604,892 (2,178) (60,271) 542,443 9,964,523 202039 02/01/40100% 952,139 (63,988) - 888,151 140.604% 1,248,776 624,388 (2,248) (62,214) 559,926 10,208,261 20.52040 08/01/40100% 952,139 (63,988) - 888,151 140.604% 1,248,776 624,388 (2,248) (62,214) 559,926 10,447,220 212040 02/01/41100% 980,703 (63,988) - 916,716 140.604% 1,288,939 644,469 (2,320) (64,215) 577,934 10,689,028 21.52041 08/01/41100% 980,703 (63,988) - 916,716 140.604% 1,288,939 644,469 (2,320) (64,215) 577,934 10,926,095 222041 02/01/42100% 1,010,124 (63,988) - 946,137 140.604% 1,330,306 665,153 (2,395) (66,276) 596,483 11,165,973 22.52042 08/01/42100% 1,010,124 (63,988) - 946,137 140.604% 1,330,306 665,153 (2,395) (66,276) 596,483 11,401,147 232042 02/01/43100% 1,040,428 (63,988) - 976,440 140.604% 1,372,914 686,457 (2,471) (68,399) 615,587 11,639,095 23.52043 08/01/43100% 1,040,428 (63,988) - 976,440 140.604% 1,372,914 686,457 (2,471) (68,399) 615,587 11,872,377 242043 02/01/44100% 1,071,641 (63,988) - 1,007,653 140.604% 1,416,801 708,400 (2,550) (70,585) 635,265 12,108,395 24.52044 08/01/44100% 1,071,641 (63,988) - 1,007,653 140.604% 1,416,801 708,400 (2,550) (70,585) 635,265 12,339,786 252044 02/01/45100% 1,103,790 (63,988) - 1,039,802 140.604% 1,462,004 731,002 (2,632) (72,837) 655,533 12,573,878 25.52045 08/01/45100% 1,103,790 (63,988) - 1,039,802 140.604% 1,462,004 731,002 (2,632) (72,837) 655,533 12,803,379 262045 02/01/46 Total25,678,972 (92,444) (2,558,653) 23,027,875 Present Value From 08/01/2019 Present Value Rate 4.00% 14,277,376 (51,399) (1,422,598) 12,803,379 Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\Richfield\Housing-ED-Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\2017-1 Housing TIF\TIF Plan Run 10-18-17 Appendix E Housing Qualifications for the District INCOME RESTRICTIONS - ADJUSTED FOR FAMILY SIZE (HOUSING DISTRICT) - HENNEPIN COUNTY HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDIAN INCOME: $90,400 No. of Persons 50% of Median Income 60% of Median Income 1-person $31,650 $37,980 2-person $36,200 $43,440 3-person $40,700 $48,840 4-person $45,200 $54,240 Source: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Minnesota Housing Finance Agency The two options for income limits on a standard housing district are 20% of the units at 50% of median income or 40% of the units at 60% of median income. There are no rent restrictions for a housing district. ***PLEASE NOTE: THESE NUMBERS ARE ADJUSTED ANNUALLY. ALL INCOME FIGURES REPORTED ON THIS PAGE ARE FOR 2017. Appendix E-1 Appendix F Findings for the District The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain), as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) is a housing district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11. TIF District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) consists of 31 parcels. As proposed, the development will consist of mixed-income housing projects with a total of 316 apartment units that includes rehabilitating three existing buildings with a total of 33 apartment units and constructing three new buildings with a total of 283 apartment units. All or a portion of which will receive tax increment assistance and will meet income restrictions described in M.S. 469.1761. At least 20 percent of the units/homes receiving assistance will have incomes at or below 50 percent of area median income. Appendices A and E of the TIF Plan contains background for the above finding. 2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future. The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact that the development proposed in this plan is a housing district that meets the City's objectives for development and redevelopment, but that due to the high costs of building new housing in the City, the cost of financing the proposed public improvements, and the insufficiency of rents in developments with affordable housing to provide a sufficient financial return, the project is feasible only through the assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The developer was asked for and provided a letter and a pro forma as justification that the developer would not have gone forward without tax increment assistance. 3. Finding that the TIF Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Planning Commission reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City. 4. Finding that the TIF Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 2017-1 (The Chamberlain) will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Richfield Redevelopment Project Area by private enterprise. Through the implementation of the TIF Plan, the HRA or City will provide an impetus for residential development, which is desirable or necessary for increased population and an increased need for life- cycle housing within the City. Appendix F-1 AGENDA SECTION:PROPOSED ORDINANCES AGENDA ITEM #11. STAFF REPORT NO. 202 CIT Y COUNCIL ME E T ING 11/28/2017 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: Melissa P oehlman, A sst. C ommunity D evelopment D irector D E PA RTM E NT D IRE C TOR RE V IE W: J ohn S tark, C ommunity D evelopment D i rector 11/21/2017 O TH E R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: N/A C ITY M A NA G E R RE V IE W: S teven L . D evich, C ity Manager 11/21/2017 I T E M F O R C O UNC I L C O NS I D E RAT IO N: Consideration of a variety of land use approvals related to a proposal for construction of a new auto dealership at 1550 78th Street East. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: Morrie's Automotive Group has submitted an applic ation requesting approval of a rezoning and planned unit development plans that would allow construction of a new J aguar/Land Rover Dealership at 1550 78th Street East. This property is c urrently home to the A dler Graduate Sc hool and J im Ramstad C ommunity Services Center. T he property at 1550 78th Street East is zoned Mixed Use - Regional (MU-R) and is guided for Regional Commercial within the I-494 Corridor Master Plan Area. T he applicant has submitted revised plans since the date of the Planning Commission hearing on October 23rd. Staff has reviewed these plans for agreement with the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan requirements and found that improvements from the previous plans have been made; however, the plans continue to be non-compliant with a number of requirements. Zoning Parking structures do not count toward minimum building height of two stories. Single story portions of structures may be allowed provided they are attached to a princ ipal structure that is two or more stories in height and that the footprint of the single story portion of the structure is no more than 40 percent of the total struc ture's footprint (537.07). Only 2.2% of the second floor area is not dedicated to parking; the remainder of the building is c onsidered a single story. Minimum building c overage of 50 percent; proposed 41.9 perc ent (537.07). Minimum 5 percent usable open space required (defined as an area that is at least 1,000 square feet in area and a minimum of 20 feet in width in all directions). Proposed pathway s and benches do not meet dimensional requirements to be considered "usable open space." (537.11 Subd. 9). Minimum 60 perc ent "street level active use" required. Defined as "the spac e of a building that front a primary street and c ontains a use that provides for a significant level of pedestrian activity from morning to late evening hours on weekday s and evenings (537.07). Building does not provide/contain a use that provides for a signific ant level of pedestrian ac tivity. Maximum rear setbac k is 15 feet; 37.4 feet proposed (537.07). Minimum 15-foot landscape buffer along I -494 required; 6.3 feet proposed (537.07). Principal entranc es should be architecturally emphasized and visible from the street. Princ ipal patron entranc es should be c learly defined and highly visible utilizing such design features as awnings, canopies, pillars, spec ial building materials or architec tural details (537.11). Principal c ustomer entranc es do not do this. A pedestrian walking down 77th Street would not immediately rec ognize where the door is located. Lighting levels exceed allowable limits (544.09). Commercial developments shall use plant materials, berms, slopes, retaining walls, fenc es, low masonry walls, and public art to enhanc e the appearance of buildings and parking areas; to provide visual relief from long blank walls; to improve the environment for pedestrians; and to improve compatibility with adjac ent housing. I n partic ular special attention should be paid to providing visual and auditory separation between c ommercial and residential land uses and in hiding features suc h as truck docks and rooftop mec hanic al equipment (544.03, Subd. 6). Bloomington side of building (adjacent to housing) has seven roll-up servic e bays. There is minimal landscaping between the housing and the auto-centric c ommercial use. Failure to meet the parking lot setback leaves little room for effec tive buffering. Building entranc es shall incorporate arc ades, roofs, porches, alcoves, porticoes, and awnings that protect pedestrians from rain and sun (537.11, Subd. 4). One c overed entranc e has been added along Bloomington Avenue. No other entrances are covered. Required parking lot setback from property line is 8 ft. (544.13, Subd. 4). Not met. Proposed setback varies from 3.8-4.5 ft. Cross ac cess and c irculation across adjoining parcels is required, where appropriate and feasible (537.11, S ubd.7h). Proposal will isolate E coS marte property and without ac cess agreement may lead to taking of property by State when I -494 is expanded. T he applicant has requested a change in the zoning from Mixed Use - Regional to a Planned Unit Development District (PM R). Planned Unit Development (PUD) designations offer flexibility in the application of zoning requirements (like those listed above) in exchange for "innovative and creative development..." A P UD designation is intended "to encourage efficient use of land and resources, to promote efficiency in public and utility services, and to encourage innovation in the planning and building of of all types of development." In order to approve a rezoning to a PUD, the Council must make the following findings: 1. Development must c onform to the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Development must be designed in a manner to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. 3. Development must be in substantial conformance with the purpose and intent of the guiding (MU-R) district and departures from guiding distric t regulations are justified by design of the development. 4. Development must not create excessive burden on parks, schools, streets or other public fac ilities. 5. Development will not have undue adverse impacts on neighboring properties. 6. Terms and conditions proposed are suffic ient to protect the public interest. Staff does not feel that the proposed development meets the required findings for a rezoning to a PUD. Specifically, the proposal does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan (as detailed below), design fails to justify the requested departures from guiding zoning district requirements, and would have undue adverse impacts on both the adjacent apartment building and EcoSmarte business. Without a rezoning, the applicant would need to request variances from the list of items above. Comprehensive Plan: Land use approvals also require agreement with the City 's Comprehensive P lan. A s discussed at work sessions on J uly 25 and October 10, although the proposal calls for a use with a regional customer base, the building does not meet the 150,000 square feet minimum and the proposed use does not advance the I -494 Plan vision and key components. Plan excerpts: The vision is aimed at helping the community shape future development in the corridor to be more unique and identifiable, urban in charac ter, pedestrian-friendly, economically sustainable and ultimately, more livable (pg 1). Urban villages typically inc lude multiple story buildings that are more densely developed than the surrounding neighborhoods ac hieving a greater mix of land uses and drawing pedestrian ac tivity (pg 1). I t should not look like a collec tion of stand alone, single-use buildings that take advantage of its strategic location, but a place filled with variety, vitality and greenery (pg 2). Mixed-use development refers to the integration of residential, commercial, retail, employ ment, civic, recreational, and educational uses. The mix of land uses in a c ompact area not only supports and enhances eac h element in the development but also provides residents a ric h and diverse environment in which to live, work, shop, play and learn (pg 2). Automobile dealerships c an be part of a thriving, pedestrian-friendly, mixed use development; however, a proliferation of c ar dealerships does not meet the mixed use guidance for this area. Further, auto dealerships do not tend to invite pedestrian ac tivity or provide services to the immediate neighborhood. The proposed plans do not attempt to make up for this by combining with another use that would provide these benefits, by providing a neighborhood amenity that meets the requirements of the Code or that addresses the immediate residential neighbors, or any similar efforts to meet the intent of the I -494 Plan. A s designed, the project isolates the two neighboring properties - potentially leading to the eventual total loss of one business when I - 494 is expanded and 78th Street removed (78th street is MnD OT right-of-way). There are over 700 apartments in the area between Portland Avenue and Truc k Hwy 77. As stated in the I -494 Plan, this area is envisioned as a vibrant area that includes a diverse array of options for shopping, services, restaurants, hotels, and park space for its residents. Based on this review of the proposal, staff rec ommends denial of the rezoning and conditional use permit applications. I f the Council believes that the proposal meets the requirements of the Zoning C ode, they are asked to articulate specific findings of complianc e on whic h staff could draft a revised ordinanc e and resolution. The Council should also request that the applic ant authorize an additional extension of the statutory "cloc k" to extend the deadline for a final decision until J anuary 23, 2018 in order to provide adequate time for preparation and review of a revised resolution. RE C O M M E ND E D AC T IO N: By motion: Approv e the attached resolution denying: 1. A reque st to ame nd Appendix I of the Richfield City Code to change the zoning de signation 1550 78th Stre et East from Mixe d Use - Re gional (MU-R) to Planned Mixe d Use (PMU); and 2. A request for a Conditional Use Per mit and Final Development Plan for a Planned Unit Development that would allow constr uction of an automobile dealer ship at 1550 78th Street East. B AS IS O F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A.H IS TOR IC AL C ON TEXT I n 2005, the C ity determined that existing zoning regulations were inadequate to address the Comprehensive Plan vision for Regional Commerc ial properties within the I -494 C orridor. Additionally, improvement plans and ac cess c hanges for the I nterstate that c ould signific antly impact land use patterns had been announced. The City determined that further study of this area was needed, and a one year moratorium was adopted on February 2, 2005. The I -494 C orridor Plan was the result of an extensive public outreach program that included three open houses, three newsletters, presentations to the Richfield Sc hool Board and Chamber of Commerce, and meetings with representatives from Bloomington, Minneapolis, Edina, and the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Meetings were also held with developers and marketing experts to ensure that the concept was a prac tical one. Even so, the Plan ac knowledges that the implementation of the vision would likely take twenty years or more. The I -494 Corridor P lan was officially adopted by the City C ounc il on December 13, 2005 and reaffirmed with the adoption of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. B.P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, etc): Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan is a vision for a c ommunity 's future. I t provides a framework for land use dec isions. The Comprehensive Plan for this area emphasizes a unique and identifiable urban c haracter, diversity of uses, street-level ac tivity, and pedestrian amenities/c onnections. I n our review of this proposal, staff finds that the proposal does not generally conform to the vision articulated by the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning: The stated purpose and intent of the Mixed Use Zoning D istrict is as follows: Guide future development along the I -494 c orridor in order to adapt to market and transportation changes; Enc ourage vertical mixed-uses clustered at primary (regional) and sec ondary (community) transportation nodes to build identity within the district; Provide a mix of residential densities along the c orridor; Provide appropriate transitions between uses; Promote greater pedestrian and bic yc le acc ess and connections throughout the c orridor and along the length of the c orridor; Disc ourage auto oriented uses in favor of pedestrian friendly mixed-use development; Enc ourage reduc tions in impervious surface, well landsc aped and attractive public and private spaces with a pedestrian and bicyc le friendly character and environment by minimizing surface parking and enhancing pedestrian corridors (sidewalks and trails) through reinforc ing build-to lines, getting new buildings to address the street and emphasize entic ing street level arc hitecture; Enc ourage public open spaces within the corridor by allowing and enc ouraging taller buildings for high-density uses; Ensure high quality arc hitectural design and materials; Promote increased use of transit; and Enc ourage redevelopment in a manner that is c onsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and any redevelopment plan(s) that exist for the distric t. Planned Unit Developments (PUD) are intended to encourage the efficient use of land and resources and to encourage innovation in planning and building. In exchange for these efficiencies and superior design, flexibility in the application of dimensional requirements is available. Without a P U D designation, developments are required to meet the requirements of the applicable zoning district or apply for variances. Staff has found that the site plans do not meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. T here is specific concern that the proposal will isolate and harm the adjacent 40-unit apartment building to the west and the EcoSmarte building to the east. There are a number of different sets of review criteria that apply to this proposal. A full disc ussion of all requirements is included as an attachment to this report. C.C R IT IC AL T IMIN G ISSU E S: 60-D AY RUL E: The 60-day cloc k 'started' when a c omplete applic ation was rec eived on September 11, 2017. A dec ision or extension was required by November 10, 2017. I n order to acc ommodate a work session disc ussing the I -494 Corridor Plan, the C ity issued a letter of extension on September 18, 2017. The time period has been extended to November 28, 2017. The Counc il can issue one additional extension (to the full 120 days) without applic ant approval. This would extend the deadline for a decision to J anuary 9, 2018. The second meeting in D ec ember has been canc elled for the Christmas holiday. An ordinanc e amendment requires two readings, therefore, any delay will push a final dec ision out until at least J anuary 10, 2018. I f the C ounc il wants to postpone a decision, the applic ant must consent at the meeting on November 28. D.F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: The applic ant estimates that the proposed dealership will generate approximately $700,000 in annual property taxes. Staff analy sis (provided to the Council in a memo dated November 17, 2017) estimates that this would theoretic ally equate to a tax reduction of $20.35 per year for the average Ric hfield homeowner. E.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION : A public hearing was held before the P lanning C ommission on Oc tober 23, 2017. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the proposed rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal. The C ity Attorney will be present and available for questions at the meeting. ALT E R N AT IV E R E C O MME N D AT IO N(S): Articulate required findings and recommend approval of a first reading of an ordinanc e rezoning the property. Direct staff to return with a resolution to approve the proposed projec t. P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S EXP E C T E D AT ME E T IN G: Representatives of Morrie's Automotive Group AT TAC H ME N TS : D escripti on Type Resolution Resolution L etter Required F i ndings E xhibit J aguar/L and Rover - A udi C ode C omparison Response C hart E xhibit P roposed P lans - 1 of 3 E xhibit P roposed P lans - 2 of 3 E xhibit P roposed P lans - 3 of 3 E xhibit P roject Renderi ng E xhibit P roject Narrati ve E xhibit A dler Graduate S chool L etter E xhibit Ordinance Ordinance RESOLUTION NO. ______ RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUEST FOR REZONING, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AT 1550 78TH STREET EAST WHEREAS, Morrie’s Automotive Group (“Applicant”) has submitted applications for a rezoning, conditional use permit, and final development plan for a planned unit development to the City of Richfield for real property legally described in the attached Exhibit A (“the Property): WHEREAS, the rezoning application proposes to amend Appendix I of the Richfield City Code to change the zoning designation of the Property from Mixed Use – Regional (MU-R) to Planned Mixed Use (PMU); and WHEREAS, the proposal further requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Final Development Plans for a Planned Unit Development consisting of an automobile dealership and related site modifications; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code permits a rezoning to a Planned Unit Development District in order to encourage creative and innovative projects; WHEREAS, approval of a rezoning to a Planned Unit Development District requires the City Council to make the following findings: a. The proposed development conforms to the goals and objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and any applicable redevelopment plans. b. The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. c. The development is in substantial conformance with the purpose and intent of the guiding district, and departures from the guiding district regulations are justified by the design of the development. d. The development will not create an excessive burden on parks, schools, streets or other public facilities and utilities that serve or area proposed to serve the development. e. The development will not have undue adverse impacts on neighboring properties. f. The terms and conditions proposed to maintain the integrity of the plan are sufficient to protect the public interest. WHEREAS, the underlying Zoning District regulations guide development within a Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, in addition to compliance with the Findings required for a rezoning to a PUD District, approval of a Planned Unit Development requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit; and WHEREAS, approval of a Conditional Use Permit requires the City Council to make the following findings: a. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. c. The proposed use is consistent with any officially adopted redevelopment plans or urban design guidelines. d. The proposed use is or will be in compliance with the performance standards specified in Section 544 of this code. e. The proposed use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities, utilities, services, or existing or proposed improvements. f. The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the public health, safety, or welfare. g. There is a public need for such use at the proposed location. h. The proposed use meets or will meet all the specific conditions set by this code for the granting of such conditional use permit. WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan calls for a mix of uses to include residential, commercial, retail, employment, civic, recreational, and educational uses within the I-494 Corridor; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan calls for a unique and identifiable, urban, pedestrian-friendly, economically sustainable and ultimately, more livable area and specifically states that the area should not look like a collection of stand-alone, single- use buildings that take advantage of its strategic location; and WHEREAS, Section 537 establishes regulations that are intended to discourage auto oriented uses in favor of pedestrian-friendly mixed use development, provide appropriate transitions between uses, promote greater pedestrian and bicycle access and connections throughout the I-494 corridor and along the length of the corridor, have new buildings address the street and emphasize enticing street level architecture; and encourage public open spaces within the corridor by allowing and encouraging taller buildings for high-density uses within the Mixed Use Districts; and WHEREAS, Section 544 establishes performance standards intended to ensure high standards of development and promote compatibility among various uses of land; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Richfield held a public hearing to consider the requested rezoning, final development plan and conditional use permit at its October 23, 2017 meeting; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun-Current on October 5, 2017 and mailed to properties within 350 feet of the subject property on October 10, 2017; and WHEREAS, on October 23, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the applications by a vote of 3 to 1; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a first reading of the requested amendment to Appendix I of the City Code to rezone the Property and considered the application for a conditional use permit and final development plans for a planned unit development on November 28, 2017; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed all of the materials submitted by the Applicant and city staff and has now reached a decision which it believes is in compliance with the law and is in the best interest of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 1. Findings of Fact. The City Council hereby makes the following findings of fact: A. The City’s zoning ordinance establishes zoning classifications for individual property. The property legally described in Exhibit A (“the Property”) is designated as Mixed Use – Regional (MU-R). B. Morrie’s Automotive Group has submitted an application to the City to rezone the property to a planned unit development district and for a conditional use permit and final development plan approval on the Property. C. Planned unit development zoning districts are intended to encourage “innovative and creative developmentA” and “efficient use of land and resources, to promote efficiency in public and utility services, and to encourage innovation in the planning and building of all types of development.” Flexibility in the application of zoning regulations can be granted when a project offers a superior public benefit. The proposed use is for a standard car dealership with “amenities” that fail to meet minimum Zoning Code standards and are located away from the residential property that would most-benefit from them. D. Planned unit development plans are required to conform to the goals and objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan for the I-494 Corridor calls for a mix of uses to include residential, commercial, retail, employment, civic, recreational, and educational uses. A stated policy of the I-494 Comprehensive Plan language is to avoid a corridor that “look[s] like a collection of standalone, single-use buildings that take advantage of [the area’s] strategic locationA” There already exist three auto dealerships spread throughout the 2.3 mile-long I-494 Corridor; the City finds that additional auto dealerships would constitute a concentration of these uses and impede the vision of a mixed use corridor. Thus, the City Council finds that the proposed rezoning does not conform to the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. E. The City’s Comprehensive Plan envisions the corridor “as an exciting and complete communityA” There are over 700, primarily affordable, apartments in this area. An exciting and complete community will offer a variety of opportunities for work and leisure to these neighborhood residents. The proposed automobile dealership does not provide new (different) or enhanced opportunities for either work or play. F. Planned unit developments are required to be in substantial conformance with the purpose and intent of the guiding district, and departures from guiding district regulations must be justified by the design of the development. The proposed development fails to meet 12 identified requirements of the underlying zoning district (MU-R) and general performance standards of Section 544 of the Zoning Code without any off-setting benefits to the immediate neighborhood. Proposed “amenities” are oriented away from the adjacent residential parcel and fail to meet minimum size requirements to be considered as “usable open space” by the Zoning Code. The proposed development fails to meet performance standards related to: building stories, building coverage, usable open space, street level active use, rear building setback, landscape buffer, principal entrance design, lighting, compatibility and separation of commercial activities that could be disruptive to adjacent residential use, parking lot setbacks, and provision of cross access agreements. The proposed plan is not in substantial conformance with the guiding district (MU-R) regulations. Departures from those Code requirements are not justified by the design of development because the departures are not used to provide additional public benefit, but rather to accommodate the desires of the Applicant at the expense of the neighborhood. G. Planned unit developments may not create undue adverse impacts on neighboring properties. The proposed project will leave a small apartment complex at 7700 Bloomington Avenue boxed in between two large automobile dealerships making it an undesirable place to live, which is the opposite of the City’s intent as described by the comprehensive plan. The proposed development also leaves no opportunity for cross access for the property at 1600 78th St E. Not only does this property become difficult to access in the immediate future, but plans for the expansion of I-494 call for the elimination of the 78th Street frontage road and would leave this property with no access whatsoever. 2. On the basis of the foregoing findings: A) The application to rezone the Property from Mixed Use – Regional (MU-R) to Planned Mixed Use (PMU) is denied; and B) The application for a conditional use permit and approval of final development plans are denied. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 28th day of November, 2017. Pat Elliott, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk EXHIBIT A The North 180.26 feet of the West 490 feet of the South ½ of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; That part of the West 330 feet of the South ½ of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter lying South of the North 180.26 feet thereof; All in Section 35, Township 28, Range 24. Hennepin County, Minnesota Required Findings Part 1: The following findings are necessary for approval of a PUD application (542.09 Subd. 3): 1. The proposed development conforms to the goals and objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and any applicable redevelopment plans. The property is designated as Regional Commercial in the Comprehensive Plan and is within the I-494 Corridor Master Plan area. a. The Comprehensive Plan for the I-494 Corridor calls for a mix of uses to include residential, commercial, retail, employment, civic, recreational, and educational uses. A stated policy of the I-494 Comprehensive Plan language is to avoid a corridor that “looks like a collection of standalone, single-use buildings that take advantage of [the area’s] strategic location4” There are three existing auto dealerships spread throughout the 2.3 mile-long I-494 Corridor; the City finds that additional auto dealerships would constitute a concentration of these uses and impede implementation of the vision of a mixed use corridor. The proposal does not conform to the goals and objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. b. The Comprehensive Plan for the I-494 Corridor envisions an “exciting and complete community4” There are over 700, primarily affordable, apartments in this area. An exciting and complete community will offer a variety of opportunities for work and leisure to the area residents. The proposed auto dealership does not provide new (different) or enhanced opportunities for either work or play. 2. The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. Within the boundaries of the development, there are a number of instances of non- compliance with Mixed Use District and Performance Standard requirements. These deficiencies include insufficient buffering and landscaping, architectural deficiencies, absence of “usable open space,” and more. 3. The development is in substantial conformance with the purpose and intent of the guiding district, and departures from the guiding district regulations are justified by the design of the development. The proposed development is inconsistent with the following requirements: • Parking structures do not count toward minimum building height of two stories. Single story portions of structures may be allowed provided they are attached to a principal structure that is two or more stories in height and that the footprint of the single story portion of the structure is no more than 40 percent of the total structure's footprint (537.07). Only 2.2% of the second floor area is not dedicated to parking; the remainder of the building is considered a single story. • Minimum building coverage of 50 percent; proposed 41.9 percent (537.07). • Minimum 5 percent usable open space required (defined as an area that is at least 1,000 square feet in area and a minimum of 20 feet in width in all directions). Proposed pathways and benches do not meet dimensional requirements to be considered "usable open space." (537.11 Subd. 9). • Minimum 60 percent "street level active use" required. Defined as "the space of a building that front a primary street and contains a use that provides for a significant level of pedestrian activity from morning to late evening hours on weekdays and evenings (537.07). Building does not provide/contain a use that provides for a significant level of pedestrian activity. • Maximum rear setback is 15 feet; 37.4 feet proposed (537.07). • Minimum 15-foot landscape buffer along I-494 required; 6.3 feet proposed (537.07). • Principal entrances should be architecturally emphasized and visible from the street. Principal patron entrances should be clearly defined and highly visible utilizing such design features as awnings, canopies, pillars, special building materials or architectural details (537.11). Principal customer entrances do not do this. A pedestrian walking down 77th Street would not immediately recognize where the door is located. • Lighting levels exceed allowable limits (544.09). • Commercial developments shall use plant materials, berms, slopes, retaining walls, fences, low masonry walls, and public art to enhance the appearance of buildings and parking areas; to provide visual relief from long blank walls; to improve the environment for pedestrians; and to improve compatibility with adjacent housing. In particular special attention should be paid to providing visual and auditory separation between commercial and residential land uses and in hiding features such as truck docks and rooftop mechanical equipment (544.03, Subd. 6). Bloomington side of building (adjacent to housing) has seven roll-up service bays. There is minimal landscaping between the housing and the auto-centric commercial use. Failure to meet the parking lot setback leaves little room for effective buffering. • Building entrances shall incorporate arcades, roofs, porches, alcoves, porticoes, and awnings that protect pedestrians from rain and sun (537.11, Subd. 4). One covered entrance has been added along Bloomington Avenue. No other entrances are covered. • Required parking lot setback from property line is 8ft. (544.13, Subd. 4). Not met. Proposed setback varies from 3.8-4.5 ft. • Cross access and circulation across adjoining parcels is required, where appropriate and feasible (537.11, Subd.7h). Proposal will isolate EcoSmarte property and without access agreement may lead to taking of property by State when I-494 expanded. While Planned Unit Developments allow from departures from Code requirements, this flexibility is given in exchange for superior design and integration into the neighborhood. The proposed development does not represent superior design and integration into the neighborhood. The proposed design is specifically detrimental to the two adjacent parcels. 4. The development will not create an excessive burden on parks, schools, streets or other public facilities and utilities that serve or area proposed to serve the development. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposal and that adequate services are or will be available. 5. The development will not have undue adverse impacts on neighboring properties. The proposal isolates both the 40-unit apartment to the west and the EcoSmarte property to the east. The proposal focuses loading and service functions toward the residential property and fails to meet buffering and screening requirements. The proposal eliminates the possibility for a cross access agreement allowing EcoSmarte customers and employees to access that property. The expansion of I-494 and elimination of the frontage road could lead to a loss of this business in the future. 6. The terms and conditions proposed to maintain the integrity of the plan are sufficient to protect the public interest. N/A. Staff recommends denial of the proposal in that it does not meet requirements. Part 2: All uses are conditional uses in the PC-2 District. The findings necessary to issue a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) are as follows (Subd. 547.09, Subd. 6): 1. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. See above: Part 1, #1. 2. The proposed use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. The purpose of planned unit development regulations is to provide an opportunity for innovative and creative development, while assuring that the development will complement existing neighborhood character. The proposed development does not include innovative or creative development solutions and has potential negative impacts on adjacent properties. 3. The proposed use is consistent with any officially adopted redevelopment plans or urban design guidelines. The design guidelines of the Mixed Use District are not met. See above – Part 1, #3 4. The proposed use is or will be in compliance with the performance standards specified in Section 544 of this code. This requirement is not met. See above – Part 1, #3. 5. The proposed use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities, utilities, services, or existing or proposed improvements. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposal and adequate services are or will be available. 6. The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the public health, safety, or welfare. No undue adverse impacts are anticipated. 7. There is a public need for such use at the proposed location. An increased tax base is beneficial to the community; however, the proposal fails to meet a number of other requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance and negatively impacts adjacent properties. 8. The proposed use meets or will meet all the specific conditions set by this code for the granting of such conditional use permit. This requirement is not met. RequirementPrevious PlanMorrie's Response Revised Plans Audi1Minimum 15-foot buffer to separate auto sales uses from all other parcels (537.05, Subd. 6);Not metYes. Plans have been revised to meet the 15' buffer requirement.Met Met2Parking structures do not count toward minimum building height of two stories. Single story portions of structures may be allowed provided they are attached to a principal structure that is two (2) or more stories in height and that the footprint of the single story portion of the structure in no more than 40 percent of the total structure's footprint.; second level entirely parking (537.07);Not metYes. Second floor showroom and office space have been added to meet this requirement.Not met. The applicant has added approx. 1200 square feet of office space to the second floor. This is 2.2% of the second floor area. Audi = 22.8% of second floor area dedicated to non-parking uses (most of rest is open to level below). Third floor entirely parking. No parking on ground floor - JLR 20,000sf parking ground floor. JLR is approx. 35,000 sf of non-parking total in building. Audi is approx.. 57,000 sf3Minimum building coverage of 50 percent; proposed 39 percent (537.07);Not metSimilar non compliance as Audi project. Audi was approved at 29%. We proposed 41.9%. 8.1% short, so we ask for this variance.Proposal has added approx. 3,800 sf to raise coverage to 41.9%. Remains non-compliant. Audi was approved at 43.8% (parking ramp is Phase 2 of same approved project).4Maximum impervious surface is 85 percent; proposed 89%, existing 75% (537.07);Not metYes. Permeable pavers have been added to the site plan. This reduces the impervious coverage to 85%. Met. (Policy has not allowed pervious pavers in parking lots due to maintenance, 85% met without parking area.)Met5Minimum 5 percent usable open space; (537.11, Subd. 9 - "Usable open space shall be a minimum of 1,000 square feet in size and a minimum of 20 feet wide in any direction")Not metYes. A linear pedestrian greenway is proposed to connect 77th Street to 78th Street along the east side of the property meeting the 5% usable open space requirement.Path and seating area added, but neither of these meet them minimum dimensional requirements to be counted as useable open space per code.Met (11,000 plaza), also had linear path, but width doesn't qualify it to count for this requirement. RequirementPrevious PlanMorrie's Response Revised Plans Audi6Minimum 60 percent "street level active use" required. Defined as "The space of a buildings that fronts a primary street and contains a use that provides for a significant level of pedestrian activity from morning to late evening hours on weekdays and evenings. Such uses could include retail, service commercial, restaurants, coffee shops, libraries, post offices, common space or lobbies, and conference rooms or party rooms of office or high-density residential developments."Not metSimilar noncompliance as Audi project. Trailhead connection between 77th and 78th Street has been added to increase the active use.Not met. Staff would not find that 60% of the building or site frontage provides/contains a use that provides for a significant level of pedestrian activity. Under the flexibility allowed by a PUD the applicant is requesting that benches and interpretative signage/public art along 77th Street be counted as this requirement. Audi's answer to not providing a pedestrian oriented retail business was to construct an 11,000 square foot plaza with water feature, benches and paths.7Maximum rear setback is 15 feet; 37.4 feet proposed (537.07)Not metSimilar noncompliance as Audi project. The proposed setback is similar to the Audi building that was approved.Not met. Similar to Audi. Yes, similar, but Audi was approved as PUD for providing an innovative and creative use (mainly the incorporation of the quasi-public space.) 8Minimum 15-foot landscape buffer along I-494 required; 6.3 feet proposed (537.07);Not metSimilar non compliance as Audi project. Our landscape buffer is 6.3 feet. Audi was approved at 5 feet.Not met. Similar to Audi Audi approved as PUD for innovation and creativity.9Parking lot screening does not meet requirements (544.03, Subd. 7);Not metYes. The Landscape Plan has been revised to meet this requirement.Met Met10Maximum allowable parking exceeded. Only permitted if impervious surface requirements can be met (not met, see above) (544.13);Not metYes. Parking has been reduced to meet 110% of the required parking stalls.Met Met11Principal entrances should be architecturally emphasized and visible from the street. Principal patron entrances should be clearly defined and highly visible utilizing such design features as awnings, canopies, pillars, special building materials or architectural details (537.11);Not metYes. Principal entry is emphasized by different material and offset plane.Principal entrances do not utilize awnings, canopies, pillars, special building materials or architectural details to call attention to entrance. A pedestrian walking along 77th Street would not immediately recognize where the door was located; it is recessed.Similar to Audi entrance - Audi is PUD. RequirementPrevious PlanMorrie's Response Revised Plans Audi12Changes in relief required along 15 percent of their street facades such as cornices, bases, window treatments, fluted masonry or other designs for pedestrian interest and scale (537.11, Subd.4). Not metYes. This requirement is met by current design. Code calls for 15% relief on all street sides the current design has 24% relief at Bloomington, 24% at 77th Street, and 22% at 78th Street.Applicant has made improvements to address pedestrian along Bloomington Avenue. Although there are still 7 overhead doors, a significant bank of windows has been added in the center of the building and additional ground floor level windows added.Met13Ground floor windows required along street sides of building (537.11);Not metYes. Ground floor windows have been added at all street sides of the building.Met Met14Pedestrian connections and circulation does not meet minimum requirements (537.11 and 544.15);Not metYes. Sidewalk connections from 77th Street to 78th Street have been added on the east side of the site and on the west side of the site along Bloomington Avenue.Met. Met15Bicycle parking required (544.17);Not metYes. A bike rack has been added to meet this requirement.Met Met16Sidewalks required along all rights-of-way (537.11, Subd. 8); andNot met.Yes. A sidewalk has been added along Bloomington Avenue.Met. Audi met17Lighting levels exceed allowable limits (544.09).Not metYes. Lighting levels have been revised to that of what was approved at the Audi facility.Exceed allowable limits. Similar - difficult to compare18Building facades greater than 100 feet in length shall have offset jogs, using elements such as bay windows and recessed entrances or other articulation so as to provide pedestrian scale to the first floor and to avoid long continuous unbroken building facades.Not met.Met RequirementPrevious PlanMorrie's Response Revised Plans Audi19Commercial developments shall use plant materials, berms, slopes, retaining wall, fences, low masonry walls and public art to enhance the appearance of buildings and parking areas; to provide visual relief from long blank walls; to improve the environment for pedestrians; to improve compatibility with adjacent housing (544.03 Subd. 6). In particular, special attention should be paid to providing visual and auditory separation between commercial and residential land uses and in hiding features such as truck docks and rooftop mechanical equipment.Not met.Not met. Bloomington side adjacent to housing has seven roll-up doors. There is minimal landscaping/separation between the adj. housing and proposed auto-centric use. Failure to meet parking lot setback leaves little room for buffering. Green space between parking and sidewalk cannot support larger trees, berm, etc.Parking structure won't be far from part of building. Ped path installed between.20All delivery and loading operations and other utility and service functions shall be grouped and arranged away from the public right-of-way and fully screening from ground level observation at any point on the property, adjacent property, or from adjacent right-of-way. (544.05)Not met. There are seven overhead service doors on the Bloomington side of the building (facing adjacent housing). The proposed landscaping will not screen these service functions.21Building entrances shall incorporate arcades, roofs, porches, alcoves, porticoes and awnings that protect pedestrians from rain and sun. (537.11 Subd. 4)Not metNot met; however, one covered entrance has been added along Bloomington Avenue.Not met. PUD22Parking lot setback from ROW is 8 ft. (544.13, Subd. 5)Not met Not met - reduced to meet different (sidewalk) requirement.Audi met23Cross access and circulation across adjoining parcels is required, where appropriate and feasible. 537.11 Subd 7hNot metNot met. Proposal will isolate EcoSmarte property and may lead to eventual taking of property by State when I-494 expanded.24The applicant has requested a change in the zoning from Mixed Use - Regional to a Planned Unit Development District (PMR). Planned Unit Development (PUD) designations offer flexibility in the application of zoning requirements (like those listed in items 1-22) in exchange for "innovative and creative development..." A PUD designation is intended "to encourage efficient use of land and resources, to promote efficiency in public and utility services, and to encourage innovation in the planning and building of all types of development." Required findings listed below:Staff does not feel that the proposed development achieves the goals intended by the PUD regulations and recommends denial of the request to rezone the property. Without a rezoning, the applicant would need to request variances from the list of items above.Required findings to rezone to PUD: RequirementPrevious PlanMorrie's Response Revised Plans Audia) Development conforms to comp planAutomobile dealerships can be part of a thriving, pedestrian-friendly, mixed use development; however, a proliferation of car dealerships does not meet the mixed use guidance for this area. Further, auto dealerships do not tend to invite pedestrian activity or provide services to the immediate neighborhood. The proposed plans attempt to make up for this by providing open space that does not meet the requirements of the code and is situated to provide minimal benefit to the existing residents. There are over 700 apartments in the area between Portland Avenue and Truck Hwy 77. As stated in the I-494 Plan, this area is envisioned as a vibrant area that includes a diverse array of options for shopping, services, restaurants, hotels, and park space for its residents.b) Development designed in manner to form desirable and unified environment within own boundariesYes.c) Development in substantial conformance with purpose and intent of guiding district and departures from guiding district regulations are justified by design of the development.No. Development not in substantial conformance. Nothing exceptional about design of development that would justify departures from so many regulations.d) Development will not create excessive burden on parks, schools, streets or other public facilities.None anticipated.e) Development will not have undue adverse impacts on neighboring properties.Undue adverse impacts to apartments and EcoSmartef) Terms and conditions proposed are sufficient to protect public interest. ProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientMORRIE'SAUTOMOTIVEGROUPMORRIE'SJAGUARLAND ROVERRICHFIELD,MINNESOTAJEBJEBBDBPRELIMINARY07/28/201720847Registration No.I hereby certify that this plan, specification orreport was prepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a duly licensedprofessional ENGINEER under the laws of the stateof Minnesota.If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of thisplan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,Minnetonka, MN office.Date:44579Brady D. Busselman07/28/2017PRE L IM INAR Y09/07/17JEBOFF-SITE DRAINAGE11/16/17JEBCITY RE-SUBMITTAL Nov 16, 2017 - 11:25am - User:jbalzer L:\PROJECTS\20847\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20847-C1-TITLE.dwgC1.01TITLE SHEETDEVELOPER/OWNERMORRIE'S AUTOMOTIVE GROUP12520 WAYZATA BLVDMINNETONKA, MN 55305TEL 952-797-1344CONTACT: LYNN ROBSONARCHITECTGRIES ARCHITECTURAL GROUP, INC.500 N. COMMERCIAL ST.NEENAH, WITEL 920-722-2445FAX 920-722-6605CONTACT: BRANNIN GRIESCIVIL ENGINEERSAMBATEK12800 WHITEWATER DRIVE, SUITE 300MINNETONKA, MN 55343TEL 763-476-6010FAX 763-476-8532CONTACT: BRADY BUSSELMANLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSAMBATEK12800 WHITEWATER DRIVE, SUITE 300MINNETONKA, MN 55343TEL 763-476-6010FAX 763-476-8532CONTACT: JOSH MCKINNEYSURVEYORSUNDE LAND SURVEYING9001 EAST BLOOMINGTON FREEWAY (35W), SUITE 118BLOOMINGTON, MN 55420TEL 952-881-2455FAX 952-888-9526CONTACT: MARK HANSONSHEET INDEXSHEETDESCRIPTIONC1.01TITLE SHEETC2.01EXISTING CONDITIONSC3.01SITE PLANC4.01GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANC5.01PHASE 1 EROSION CONTROL PLANC5.02PHASE 2 EROSION CONTROL PLANC5.03EROSION CONTROL DETAILSC6.01UTILITY PLANL1.00TREE PRESERVATION AND REMOVAL PLANL1.01LANDSCAPE PLANL2.01LANDSCAPE DETAILSforPreliminary Site Development PlansMorrie's Jaguar Land RoverMorrie's AutomotiveRichfield, MinnesotaPresented by:NO SCALEVICINITY MAPCONSULTANT CONTACT LIST:SITE SCALE IN FEET06030ProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientMORRIE'SAUTOMOTIVEGROUPMORRIE'SJAGUARLAND ROVERRICHFIELD,MINNESOTAJEBJEBBDBPRELIMINARY07/28/201720847PRE L IM INAR Y09/07/17JEBOFF-SITE DRAINAGE11/16/17JEBCITY RE-SUBMITTAL Nov 16, 2017 - 11:25am - User:jbalzer L:\PROJECTS\20847\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20847-C2-EXCND.dwgC2.01EXISTINGCONDITIONS1.SUBJECT PROPERTIES ADDRESS IS 1550 78TH ST E, RICHFIELD, MN 55423, ITS PROPERTYIDENTIFICATION NUMBER IS 3502824440010.TOTAL = 244,923 SQUARE FEET OR 5.623 ACRES (EXCLUDING INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 494 EASEMENT)GROSS = 165,887 SQUARE FEET OR 3.808 ACRES (EXCLUDING ROADS AND ROAD EASEMENTS)NET = 139,628 SQUARE FEET OR 3.205 ACRES (DOES NOT INCLUDE EASEMENTSFOR STREET AND HIGHWAY RIGHT-OF WAYS)(PER FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE COMMITMENTNO. NCS-848094-MPLS, COMMITMENT DATE MAY 01, 2017)THE NORTH 180.26 FEET OF THE WEST 490 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OFTHE SOUTHEAST QUARTER;THAT PART OF THE WEST 330 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEASTQUARTER LYING SOUTH OF THE NORTH180.26 FEET THEREOF;ALL IN SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 28, RANGE 24, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA.TORRENS PROPERTY-CERTIFICATE OF TITLE NO. 13111802.THE SURVEY IS BASED ON THE ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE PREPARED BY SUNDE LAND SURVEYING DATEDMAY 24, 2017.3.FIELD WORK WAS COMPLETED BY SUNDE LAND SURVEYING ON MAY 8, 2017.FOUND MONUMENTSET MONUMENTMARKED LS 47481ELECTRIC METERLIGHTSANITARY SEWERSTORM SEWERWATERMAINFLARED END SECTIONELECTRIC TRANSFORMERAIR CONDITIONERGUY ANCHORHANDICAP STALLUTILITY POLEPOSTSIGNTELEPHONE PEDESTALGAS METEREASEMENT LINESETBACK LINERESTRICTED ACCESSBUILDING LINEBUILDING CANOPYCONCRETE CURBBITUMINOUS SURFACECONCRETE SURFACELANDSCAPE SURFACEDECIDUOUS TREECONIFEROUS TREEOVERHEAD WIRECHAIN LINK FENCEIRON FENCEWIRE FENCEWOOD FENCE1.THE VERTICAL DATUM IS BASED ON NGVD29:BENCHMARK #1TOP OF TOP NUT OF FIRE HYDRANT SW QUADRANT OF EAST 77TH STREET & BLOOMINGTON AVENUESOUTH.ELEVATION = 832.21 FEETBENCHMARK #2TOP OF TOP NUT OF FIRE HYDRANT NW QUADRANT OF EAST 78TH STREET & BLOOMINGTON AVENUESOUTH.ELEVATION = 833.61 FEETBENCHMARK #3TOP OF TOP NUT OF FIRST FIRE HYDRANT SOUTH SIDE OF EAST 77TH STREET, EAST OF BLOOMINGTONAVENUE SOUTHELEVATION = 825.82 FEETLEGENDDESCRIPTIONPROPERTY SUMMARYBENCHMARKSSURVEY NOTES SCALE IN FEET06030ProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientMORRIE'SAUTOMOTIVEGROUPMORRIE'SJAGUARLAND ROVERRICHFIELD,MINNESOTAJEBJEBBDBPRELIMINARY07/28/201720847Registration No.I hereby certify that this plan, specification orreport was prepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a duly licensedprofessional ENGINEER under the laws of the stateof Minnesota.If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of thisplan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,Minnetonka, MN office.Date:44579Brady D. Busselman07/28/2017PRE L IM INAR Y09/07/17JEBOFF-SITE DRAINAGE11/16/17JEBCITY RE-SUBMITTAL Nov 16, 2017 - 11:25am - User:jbalzer L:\PROJECTS\20847\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20847-C3-SITE.dwgC3.01SITE PLANAREAGROSS SITE AREAZONINGEXISTING ZONINGPROPOSED ZONINGBUILDING REQUIREMENTSBUILDING FOOTPRINTBUILDING LOT COVERAGEPARKINGSURFACE PARKING STALLS PROVIDEDSTRUCTURE PARKING STALLS PROVIDEDTOTAL PARKING PROVIDEDIMPERVIOUS COVERAGEEXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREAEXISTING IMPERVIOUS PERCENTAGEPROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREAPROPOSED IMPERVIOUS PERCENTAGEIMPERVIOUS COVERAGE CONSIDERATIONSPERMEABLE PAVER AREATRAIL AND PLAZA AREAPROPOSED IMPERVIOUS (EXCLUDING TRAIL, PLAZA, AND PERMEABLE PAVERS)USABLE OPEN SPACEUSABLE OPEN SPACE AREAUSABLE OPEN SPACE AREA PERCENTAGE1.ALL DIMENSIONS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST TENTH FOOT.2.ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.3.KEdZdKZ^,>>Zs/tWsDEd'Z/EdEKE^dZhd͞'hddZKhd͟t,ZtdZZ/E^tz&ZKDhZ͘>>Kd,ZZ^^,>>KE^dZhd^͞'hddZ/E͟hZ͘COORDINATE WITH GRADING CONTRACTOR.4.ALL AREAS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST SQUARE FOOT.5.ALL PARKING STALLS TO BE 9' IN WIDTH AND 18' IN LENGTH UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.6.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OFEXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCELOCATIONS.7.SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR PYLON SIGN DETAILS8.SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION DETAIL AND FOR EXACT LOCATIONS OF LIGHTPOLE.9.REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, LOT NUMBERS, LOT AREAS, AND LOT DIMENSIONS.10.ALL GRADIENTS ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL SLOPEOF 5% (1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB RAMPS (1:12), AND A MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE OF 2.08% (1:48). THEMAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION ON AN ADA PARKING STALL OR ACCESS ISLE SHALL BE 2.08% (1:48).THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADA ROUTESPRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THEENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD VERSUS THEDESIGN GRADIENT AND COORDINATE WITH GRADING CONTRACTOR.11."NO PARKING" SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED ALONG ALL DRIVEWAYS AS REQUIRED BY CITY.LEGENDEASEMENTCURB & GUTTERBUILDINGRETAINING WALLSAWCUT LINENUMBER OF PARKINGSTALLS PER ROWSIGNPIPE BOLLARDSTANDARD DUTYASPHALT PAVINGCONCRETE PAVINGPROPERTY LIMITEXISTINGPROPOSEDKEY NOTEDEVELOPMENT SUMMARYDEVELOPMENT NOTESKEY NOTESWETLAND LIMITSTREELINEA.BUILDING DOORS, STOOPS, STAIRS SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANSB.MEET AND MATCH EXISTING CURB & GUTTERC.B-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTERD.CONCRETE APRONE.FLAT CURB SECTIONF.CONCRETE WALKG.ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING, SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANSH.MONUMENT SIGNAGE, SEE ARCHITECTURE PLANSI.ADA SIGNAGE IN BOLLARDJ.MEET AND MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALKK.ADA PEDESTRIAN RAMPL.BIKE RACKM.PLAZA, SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR DETAILS139,628 SF3.21 ACMU-R PUD58,485 SF 41.9%128 STALLS148 STALLS276 STALLS104,215 SF 75%118,596 SF 85%6,579 SF (5%)3,892 SF (3%)115,038 SF (83%)10,481 SF 8%THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL XX. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINEDACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTINGSUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTINGUTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THECONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BYHIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE,INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.CONCRETE SIDEWALKPERMEABLE PAVERSUSABLE OPEN SPACE SCALE IN FEET06030ProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientMORRIE'SAUTOMOTIVEGROUPMORRIE'SJAGUARLAND ROVERRICHFIELD,MINNESOTAJEBJEBBDBPRELIMINARY07/28/201720847Registration No.I hereby certify that this plan, specification orreport was prepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a duly licensedprofessional ENGINEER under the laws of the stateof Minnesota.If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of thisplan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,Minnetonka, MN office.Date:44579Brady D. Busselman07/28/2017PRE L IM INAR Y09/07/17JEBOFF-SITE DRAINAGE11/16/17JEBCITY RE-SUBMITTAL Nov 16, 2017 - 11:25am - User:jbalzer L:\PROJECTS\20847\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20847-C4-GRDE.dwgC4.01GRADING ANDDRAINAGEPLAN1.PROPOSED CONTOURS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION. SPOT ELEVATIONS ALONG PROPOSED CURB DENOTEGUTTER GRADE.2.KEdZdKZ^,>>Zs/tWsDEd'Z/EdEKE^dZhd͞'hddZKhd͟t,ZtdZZ/E^tz&ZKDhZ͘>>Kd,ZZ^^,>>KE^dZhd^͞'hddZ/E͟hZ͘3.ALL GRADIENT ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL SLOPE OF 5% (1:20),EXCEPT AT CURB RAMPS (1:12), AND A MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE OF 2.08% (1:48). MAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTIONON AN ADA PARKING STALL OR ACCESS AISLE SHALL BE IN 2.08% (1:48). CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THEGRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADA ROUTES PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS. CONTRACTOR SHALLNOTIFY THE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD VERSUS THEDESIGN GRADIENT. COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PAVING CONTRACTOR.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIESDURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYDAMAGES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.5.SAFETY NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES,CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ON THE JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETYOF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLYCONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS. THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPERTO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OF THE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEWOF THE ADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY MEASURES IN, ON OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.6.CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THEOWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. ALL SOIL TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. CONTRACTORSHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER.A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SOILS REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY:COMPANY: ADDRESS: PHONE: DATED: CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE SOILS REPORT.7.CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE DEWATERING AS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION.8.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL SHALL BE PERFORMED ON THE STREET AND PARKINGAREA SUBGRADE. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS.THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS ASDIRECTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITHTHE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER.9.REPLACE ALL SUBGRADE SOIL DISTURBED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION THAT HAVE BECOME UNSUITABLE AND WILL NOTPASS A TEST ROLL. REMOVE UNSUITABLE SOIL FROM THE SITE AND IMPORT SUITABLE SOIL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TOTHE OWNER.10.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFICCONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO CONTROLTHE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATEMINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS.11.EXISTING TREES AND OTHER NATURAL VEGETATION WITHIN THE PROJECT AND/OR ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT ARE OFPRIME CONCERN TO THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS AND SHALL BE A RESTRICTED AREA. CONTRACTOR SHALLPROTECT TREES TO REMAIN AT ALL TIMES. EQUIPMENT SHALL NOT NEEDLESSLY BE OPERATED UNDER NEARBY TREESAND EXTREME CAUTION SHALL BE EXERCISED WHEN WORKING ADJACENT TO TREES. SHOULD ANY PORTION OF THETREE BRANCHES REQUIRE REMOVAL TO PERMIT OPERATION OF THE CONTRACTOR'S EQUIPMENT, CONTRACTOR SHALLOBTAIN THE SERVICES OF A PROFESSIONAL TREE TRIMMING SERVICE TO TRIM THE TREES PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OFOPERATION. SHOULD CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS RESULT IN THE BREAKING OF ANY LIMBS, THE BROKEN LIMBSSHOULD BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY AND CUTS SHALL BE PROPERLY PROTECTED TO MINIMIZE ANY LASTING DAMAGETO THE TREE. NO TREES SHALL BE REMOVED WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION BY THE ENGINEER. COSTS FOR TRIMMINGSERVICES SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO THE GRADING CONSTRUCTION AND NO SPECIAL PAYMENT WILL BEMADE.12.EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FROM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXCAVATED OR REGRADED AND STOCKPILE IN AREAS DESIGNATED ONTHE SITE. CONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH TOPSOIL FOR RESPREADING ON THE SITE AS SPECIFIED. EXCESSTOPSOIL SHALL BE PLACED IN EMBANKMENT AREAS, OUTSIDE OF BUILDING PADS, ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS.CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBCUT CUT AREAS, WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED, TO A DEPTH OF 6 INCHES. RESPREADTOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6 INCHES.13.dZE,KZZKtKE^dZhd/KE͗/&>>Ktzd,KtEZ͕KEdZdKZ^,>>KDW>d͞dZE,KZZKt͟EXCAVATION IN AREAS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER IN ORDER TO OBTAIN STRUCTURAL MATERIAL. TREES SHALL NOT BEREMOVED OR DAMAGED AS A RESULT OF THE EXCAVATION, UNLESS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. THE EXCAVATIONSHALL COMMENCE A MINIMUM OF 10 FEET FROM THE LIMIT OF THE BUILDING PAD. THE EXCAVATION FROM THISLIMIT SHALL EXTEND AT A MINIMUM SLOPE OF 1 FOOT HORIZONTAL TO 1 FOOT VERTICAL (1:1) DOWNWARD ANDOUTWARD FROM THE FINISHED SURFACE GRADE ELEVATION. THE TRENCH BORROW EXCAVATION SHALL BE BACKFILLEDTO THE PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION, AND SHALL BE COMPACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OFTHE QUALITY COMPACTION METHOD AS OUTLINED IN MN/DOT SPECIFICATION 2105.3F2. SNOW FENCE SHALL BEFURNISHED AND PLACED ALONG THE PERIMETER OF THE TRENCH BORROW AREA WHERE THE SLOPES EXCEED 2 FOOTHORIZONTAL TO 1 FOOT VERTICAL (2:1).14.FINISHED GRADING SHALL BE COMPLETED, CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING,INCLUDING ADJACENT TRANSITION AREAS. PROVIDE A SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITHIN SPECIFIED TOLERANCES,WITH UNIFORM LEVELS OR SLOPES BETWEEN POINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN, OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS ANDEXISTING GRADES. AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN FINISHED GRADED SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SUBSEQUENTCONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND EROSION. REPAIR ALL AREAS THAT HAVE BECOME RUTTED, ERODED OR HASSETTLED BELOW THE CORRECT GRADE. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTOREDTO EQUAL OR BETTER THAN ORIGINAL CONDITION OR TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW WORK.15.TOLERANCES15.a.THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.30FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.30 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION AT ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT ISMADE.15.b.THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.10FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.10 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION AT ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT ISMADE.15.c.THE STREET OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.05FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.10 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION OF ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT ISMADE.15.d.AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE OR BELOW THEREQUIRED ELEVATION, UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE ENGINEER.15.e.TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS 1/2 INCH OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS.16.AFTER THE SITE GRADING IS COMPLETED, IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF SOIL MATERIAL EXISTS, CONTRACTOR SHALLTRANSPORT ALL EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL OFF THE SITE TO AN AREA SELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR, OR IMPORTSUITABLE MATERIAL TO THE SITE.17.CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE LOCATION OF ANY HAUL ROADS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE SITE'Z/E'KE^dZhd/KEE^,>>/E/d,h>ZK^KEZK^/KEE^/DEdKEdZK>͞^/dDW͘͟CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GOVERNING AUTHORITY OF EACH ROADWAY.CONTRACTOR SHALL POST WHATEVER SECURITY, AND COMPLY WITH ALL CONDITIONS WHICH ARE REQUIRED BY EACHGOVERNING AUTHORITY OF EACH ROADWAY.18.RETAINING WALL(S) SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF _________________ (MODULAR BLOCK, TREATED TIMBER, BOULDER,ETC.) MATERIAL. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT TO THE ENGINEER AND LOCAL AUTHORITY CERTIFIED ENGINEERINGDRAWINGS, DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND SOIL BORINGS. THE CERTIFIED ENGINEER FOR THE RETAINING WALL(S) SHALLPROVIDE CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS OF THE RETAINING WALL IMPROVEMENT, AND A LETTER CERTIFYING THEINSTALLATION OF THE WALL(S) WAS CONSTRUCTED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.902.5X902SPOT ELEVATIONCONTOURRIP RAPOVERFLOW ELEV.CURB & GUTTERBUILDINGRETAINING WALLPROPERTY LIMITEXISTINGPROPOSEDLEGENDWETLAND LIMITSTREELINESTORM SEWERSOIL BORINGSGRADING NOTESDRAINTILEEOF902.5DTHE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL XX. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINEDACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTINGSUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTINGUTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THECONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BYHIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE,INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. SCALE IN FEET06030ProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientMORRIE'SAUTOMOTIVEGROUPMORRIE'SJAGUARLAND ROVERRICHFIELD,MINNESOTAJEBJEBBDBPRELIMINARY07/28/201720847Registration No.I hereby certify that this plan, specification orreport was prepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a duly licensedprofessional ENGINEER under the laws of the stateof Minnesota.If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of thisplan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,Minnetonka, MN office.Date:44579Brady D. Busselman07/28/2017PRE L IM INAR Y09/07/17JEBOFF-SITE DRAINAGE11/16/17JEBCITY RE-SUBMITTAL Nov 16, 2017 - 11:25am - User:jbalzer L:\PROJECTS\20847\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20847-C5-EROS.dwgC5.01PHASE 1EROSIONCONTROL PLANTEMPORARY STABILIZATION MEASURES(SEED, MULCH, MATS OR BLANKETS ASOUTLINED IN THE SWPPP)TEMPORARY STORAGE AND PARKING AREADIRECTION OFOVERLAND FLOWTEMPORARY DIVERSIONDITCHLIMITS OF DRAINAGESUB-BASININLET PROTECTION DEVICE 1INLET PROTECTION DEVICE 2TEMPORARY STONECONSTRUCTION ENTRANCETEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINLIMITS OF DISTURBANCEOVERFLOW ELEV.CONTOURRIP RAPCHECK DAMSILT FENCESOIL BORINGSEXISTINGPROPOSEDSTORM SEWERCURB & GUTTERDRAINTILESOIL EROSION / SEDIMENTATION CONTROL OPERATION TIME SCHEDULECONSTRUCTION SEQUENCEJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNTEMPORARY CONTROL MEASURESSTRIP & STOCKPILE TOPSOILROUGH GRADE / SEDIMENT CONTROLTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ROADSFOUNDATION / BUILDING CONSTRUCTIONSITE CONSTRUCTIONPERMANENT CONTROL STRUCTURESFINISH GRADINGLANDSCAPING / SEED / FINAL STABILIZATIONSTORM FACILITIESNOTE: CONTRACTOR OR GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE TABLE WITH THEIR SPECIFIC PROJECT SCHEDULETHE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE SWPPP MUST BE KEPT ONSITE UNTILTHE NOTICE OF TERMINATION IS FILED WITH THE MPCA, THE CONTRACTOR MUST UPDATE THE SWPPP,INCLUDING THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS AS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS,SUCH AS ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS DESIGNED TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED. AFTER FILING THENOTICE OF TERMINATION, THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS, AND ALLREVISIONS TO IT MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER, TO BE KEPT ON FILE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THERECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN THE SWPPP NARRATIVE.TSMTSSBEROSION CONTROL MATERIALSQUANTITIESITEMUNITQUANTITYSILT FENCELINEAR FEET971SILT DIKELINEAR FEET0BIO-ROLLLINEAR FEET0CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEUNIT1INLET PROTECTION DEVICE (IP-1)UNIT0INLET PROTECTION DEVICE (IP-2)UNIT6SILT DIKEBIO-ROLLLEGENDNOTE TO CONTRACTORIP-1EOF902.5DTHE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL XX. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINEDACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTINGSUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTINGUTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THECONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BYHIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE,INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.902* REFER TO SHEET C5.03 FOR GENERAL NOTES, MAINTENANCENOTES, LOCATION MAPS, AND STANDARD DETAILS SCALE IN FEET06030ProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientMORRIE'SAUTOMOTIVEGROUPMORRIE'SJAGUARLAND ROVERRICHFIELD,MINNESOTAJEBJEBBDBPRELIMINARY07/28/201720847Registration No.I hereby certify that this plan, specification orreport was prepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a duly licensedprofessional ENGINEER under the laws of the stateof Minnesota.If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of thisplan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,Minnetonka, MN office.Date:44579Brady D. Busselman07/28/2017PRE L IM INAR Y09/07/17JEBOFF-SITE DRAINAGE11/16/17JEBCITY RE-SUBMITTAL Nov 16, 2017 - 11:25am - User:jbalzer L:\PROJECTS\20847\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20847-C5-EROS.dwgC5.02PHASE 2EROSIONCONTROL PLANTEMPORARY STABILIZATION MEASURES(SEED, MULCH, MATS OR BLANKETS ASOUTLINED IN THE SWPPP)TEMPORARY STORAGE AND PARKING AREADIRECTION OFOVERLAND FLOWTEMPORARY DIVERSIONDITCHLIMITS OF DRAINAGESUB-BASININLET PROTECTION DEVICE 1INLET PROTECTION DEVICE 2TEMPORARY STONECONSTRUCTION ENTRANCETEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINLIMITS OF DISTURBANCEOVERFLOW ELEV.CONTOURRIP RAPCHECK DAMSILT FENCESOIL BORINGSEXISTINGPROPOSEDSTORM SEWERCURB & GUTTERDRAINTILESOIL EROSION / SEDIMENTATION CONTROL OPERATION TIME SCHEDULECONSTRUCTION SEQUENCEJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNTEMPORARY CONTROL MEASURESSTRIP & STOCKPILE TOPSOILROUGH GRADE / SEDIMENT CONTROLTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ROADSFOUNDATION / BUILDING CONSTRUCTIONSITE CONSTRUCTIONPERMANENT CONTROL STRUCTURESFINISH GRADINGLANDSCAPING / SEED / FINAL STABILIZATIONSTORM FACILITIESNOTE: CONTRACTOR OR GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE TABLE WITH THEIR SPECIFIC PROJECT SCHEDULETHE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE SWPPP MUST BE KEPT ONSITE UNTILTHE NOTICE OF TERMINATION IS FILED WITH THE MPCA, THE CONTRACTOR MUST UPDATE THE SWPPP,INCLUDING THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS AS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS,SUCH AS ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS DESIGNED TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED. AFTER FILING THENOTICE OF TERMINATION, THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEETS, AND ALLREVISIONS TO IT MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER, TO BE KEPT ON FILE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THERECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN THE SWPPP NARRATIVE.TSMTSSBEROSION CONTROL MATERIALSQUANTITIESITEMUNITQUANTITYSILT FENCELINEAR FEET971SILT DIKELINEAR FEET0BIO-ROLLLINEAR FEET0CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEUNIT1INLET PROTECTION DEVICE (IP-1)UNIT14INLET PROTECTION DEVICE (IP-2)UNIT20SILT DIKEBIO-ROLLLEGENDNOTE TO CONTRACTORIP-1EOF902.5DTHE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL XX. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINEDACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTINGSUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTINGUTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THECONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BYHIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE,INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.902* REFER TO SHEET C5.03 FOR GENERAL NOTES, MAINTENANCENOTES, LOCATION MAPS, AND STANDARD DETAILS ProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientMORRIE'SAUTOMOTIVEGROUPMORRIE'SJAGUARLAND ROVERRICHFIELD,MINNESOTAJEBJEBBDBPRELIMINARY07/28/201720847Registration No.I hereby certify that this plan, specification orreport was prepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a duly licensedprofessional ENGINEER under the laws of the stateof Minnesota.If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of thisplan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,Minnetonka, MN office.Date:44579Brady D. Busselman07/28/2017PRE L IM INAR Y09/07/17JEBOFF-SITE DRAINAGE11/16/17JEBCITY RE-SUBMITTAL Nov 16, 2017 - 11:25am - User:jbalzer L:\PROJECTS\20847\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20847-C5-EROS.dwgC5.03EROSIONCONTROLDETAILSALL MEASURES STATED ON THIS EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN, AND IN THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN FULLY FUNCTIONAL CONDITION UNTIL NOLONGER REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETED PHASE OF WORK OR FINAL STABILIZATION OF THE SITE. THE DESIGNATED CONTACT PERSON NOTED ON THIS PLAN MUST ROUTINELY INSPECT THE CONSTRUCTIONON SITE ONCE EVERY SEVEN DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES IN 24 HOURS. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATIONCONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE CLEANED AND REPAIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING:1.ALL SILT FENCES MUST BE REPAIRED, REPLACED, OR SUPPLEMENTED WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1/3 OF THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE. THESE REPAIRS MUST BEMADE WITHIN 24 HOURS OF DISCOVERY, OR AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW ACCESS.2.TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASINS MUST BE DRAINED AND THE SEDIMENT REMOVED WHEN THE DEPTH OF SEDIMENT COLLECTED IN THE BASIN REACHES 1/2 THE STORAGEVOLUME. DRAINAGE AND REMOVAL MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN 72 HOURS OF DISCOVERY, OR AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW ACCESS (SEE PART IV.D. OF THE GENERAL PERMIT).3.SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE DITCHES AND CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS, MUST BE INSPECTED FOR EVIDENCE OF SEDIMENT BEING DEPOSITED BY EROSION. CONTRACTOR MUST REMOVE ALLDELTAS AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITED IN SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE WAYS, CATCH BASINS, AND OTHER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, AND RESTABILIZE THE AREAS WHERE SEDIMENT REMOVALRESULTS IN EXPOSED SOIL. THE REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS OF DISCOVERY UNLESS PRECLUDED BY LEGAL, REGULATORY, OR PHYSICAL ACCESSCONSTRAINTS. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE ALL REASONABLE EFFORTS TO OBTAIN ACCESS. IF PRECLUDED, REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS OFOBTAINING ACCESS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AUTHORITIES AND RECEIVING ANY APPLICABLE PERMITS, PRIOR TO CONDUCTINGANY WORK.4.CONSTRUCTION SITE VEHICLE EXIT LOCATIONS MUST BE INSPECTED FOR EVIDENCE OF OFF-SITE SEDIMENT TRACKING ONTO PAVED SURFACES. TRACKED SEDIMENT MUST BE REMOVED FROM ALLOFF-SITE PAVED SURFACES, WITHIN 24 HOURS OF DISCOVERY, OR IF APPLICABLE, WITHIN A SHORTER TIME TO COMPLY WITH PART IV.C.6 OF THE GENERAL PERMIT.5.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT BMPS, AS WELL AS ALL EROSION PREVENTION ANDSEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS, FOR THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION WORK AT THE SITE. THE PERMITTEE(S) ARE RESPONSIBLE UNTIL ANOTHER PERMITTEE HAS ASSUMED CONTROL (ACCORDINGTO PART II.B.5 OF THE MPCA GENERAL PERMIT) OVER ALL AREAS OF THE SITE THAT HAVE NOT BEEN FINALLY STABILIZED OR THE SITE HAS UNDERGONE FINAL STABILIZATION, AND A (N.O.T.) HASBEEN SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA.6.IF SEDIMENT ESCAPES THE CONSTRUCTION SITE, OFF-SITE ACCUMULATIONS OF SEDIMENT MUST BE REMOVED IN A MANNER AND AT A FREQUENCY SUFFICIENT TO MINIMIZE OFF-SITE IMPACTS(E.G., FUGITIVE SEDIMENT IN STREETS COULD BE WASHED INTO STORM SEWERS BY THE NEXT RAIN AND/OR POSE A SAFETY HAZARD TO USERS OF PUBLIC STREETS).7.ALL INFILTRATION AREAS MUST BE INSPECTED TO ENSURE THAT NO SEDIMENT FROM ONGOING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IS REACHING THE INFILTRATION AREA AND THESE AREAS ARE PROTECTEDFROM COMPACTION DUE TO CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT DRIVING ACROSS THE INFILTRATION AREA.1.CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE GOVERNING CODES AND BE CONSTRUCTED TO SAME. WHERE A CONFLICT EXISTS BETWEEN LOCAL JURISDICTIONAL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONSAND SAMBATEK STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, THE MORE STRINGENT SPECIFICATION SHALL APPLY.2.THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) IS COMPRISED OF THIS DRAWING (EROSION & SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN-ESC PLAN), THE STANDARD DETAILS, THE PLANNARRATIVE, AND ITS APPENDICES, PLUS THE PERMIT AND ALL SUBSEQUENT REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETING & SUBMITTING THE APPLICATION FOR THE MPCA GENERAL STORMWATER PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. ALL CONTRACTORS ANDSUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE SWPPP AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATIONSYSTEM GENERAL PERMIT (NPDES PERMIT) AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THE CONTENTS. THE SWPPP AND ALL OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION.(NOTE TO THE PREPARER: EDIT APPLICATION PROCESS PER PROJECT REQUIREMENTS)4.CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP'S) AS REQUIRED BY THE SWPPP & PERMITS. CONTRACTOR SHALL OVERSEE THE INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE OF THE BMP'SAND EROSION PREVENTION FROM BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND UNTIL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED, IS APPROVED BY ALL AUTHORITIES, AND THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION (NOT) HAS BEENFILED WITH THE MPCA BY EITHER THE OWNER OR OPERATOR AS APPROVED ON PERMIT. ADDITIONAL BMP'S SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED AS DICTATED BY CONDITIONS AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TOOWNER THROUGHOUT ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION. (NOTE TO THE PREPARER: REVISE INSPECTION RESPONSIBILITY PER OPTIONS IN SWPPP NARRATIVE (SECTION 02370))5.CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH TRAINING REQUIREMENTS IN PART III.A.2 OF THE GENERAL PERMIT.6.BMP'S AND CONTROLS SHALL CONFORM TO FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL REQUIREMENTS OR MANUAL OF PRACTICE, AS APPLICABLE. CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT ADDITIONAL CONTROLS ASDIRECTED BY PERMITTING AGENCY OR OWNER.7.ESC PLAN MUST CLEARLY DELINEATE ALL STATE WATERS. PERMITS FOR ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IMPACTING STATE WATERS OR REGULATED WETLANDS MUST BE MAINTAINED ON SITE AT ALLTIMES.8.CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE CLEARING TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICAL OR AS REQUIRED BY THE GENERAL PERMIT. THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CLEARING LIMITS SHOWN ON THE ESC PLANSSHALL BE CLEARLY DELINEATED (E.G. WITH FLAGS, STAKES, SIGNS, SILT FENCE, ETC.) ON THE DEVELOPMENT SITE BEFORE WORK BEGINS. GROUND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES MUST NOT OCCUR OUTSIDETHE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE.9.GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL DENOTE ON PLAN THE TEMPORARY PARKING AND STORAGE AREA WHICH SHALL ALSO BE USED AS THE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND CLEANING AREA, EMPLOYEEPARKING AREA, AND AREA FOR LOCATING PORTABLE FACILITIES, OFFICE TRAILERS, AND TOILET FACILITIES.10.ALL WASH WATER (CONCRETE TRUCKS, VEHICLE CLEANING, EQUIPMENT CLEANING, ETC.) MUST BE LIMITED TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE AND SHALL BE CONTAINED AND PROPERLY TREATED ORDISPOSED. NO ENGINE DEGREASING IS ALLOWED ON SITE.11.ALL LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES GENERATED BY CONCRETE WASHOUT OPERATIONS MUST BE CONTAINED IN A LEAK-PROOF CONTAINMENT FACILITY OR IMPERMEABLE LINER. A COMPACTED CLAYLINER IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. THE LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES MUST NOT CONTACT THE GROUND, AND THERE MUST NOT BE RUNOFF FROM THE CONCRETE WASHOUT OPERATIONS OR AREAS. LIQUIDAND SOLID WASTES MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH MPCA REGULATIONS. A SIGN MUST BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO EACH WASHOUT FACILITY TO INFORM CONCRETEEQUIPMENT OPERATORS TO UTILIZE THE PROPER FACILITIES. SELF-CONTAINED CONCRETE WASHOUTS ON CONCRETE DELIVERY TRUCKS ARE ALLOWED.12.SUFFICIENT OIL AND GREASE ABSORBING MATERIALS AND FLOTATION BOOMS SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON SITE OR READILY AVAILABLE TO CONTAIN AND CLEAN-UP FUEL OR CHEMICAL SPILLS ANDLEAKS.13.DUST ON THE SITE SHALL BE CONTROLLED. THE USE OF MOTOR OILS AND OTHER PETROLEUM BASED OR TOXIC LIQUIDS FOR DUST SUPPRESSION OPERATIONS IS PROHIBITED.14.SOLID WASTE: COLLECTED SEDIMENT, ASPHALT & CONCRETE MILLINGS, FLOATING DEBRIS, PAPER, PLASTIC, FABRIC, CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION DEBRIS & OTHER WASTES MUST BE DISPOSED OFPROPERLY & MUST COMPLY WITH MPCA DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS.15.HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: OIL, GASOLINE, PAINT & ANY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES MUST BE PROPERLY STORED, INCLUDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENT, TO PREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS OR OTHERDISCHARGE. RESTRICTED ACCESS TO STORAGE AREAS MUST BE PROVIDED TO PREVENT VANDALISM. STORAGE & DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MPCAREGULATIONS.16.ALL STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES PRESENTED ON THIS PLAN, AND IN THE SWPPP, SHALL BE INITIATED AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE AND PRIOR TO SOIL DISTURBING ACTIVITIESUPSLOPE.17.DISTURBED PORTIONS OF THE SITE WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS STOPPED SHALL BE TEMPORARILY SEEDED, WITHIN 14 DAYS OF INACTIVITY. SEEDING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITHMN/DOT SEED MIXTURE NUMBER 21-111 OR 21-112 DEPENDING ON THE SEASON OF PLANTING ( SEE MN/DOT SPECIFICATION SECTION 2575.3) SEEDING METHOD AND APPLICATION RATE SHALLCONFORM TO MN/DOT SPECIFICATION SECTION 2575.3. TEMPORARY MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPECIFICATION SECTION 2575.3F1 AND 2575.3G. ALTERNATIVELY,HYDRAULIC SOIL STABILIZER IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT SPECIFICATION SECTION 2575.3H MAY BE USED IN PLACE OF TEMPORARY MULCH.18.DISTURBED PORTIONS OF THE SITE WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS PERMANENTLY STOPPED SHALL BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. THESE AREAS SHALL BE STABILIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITHTHE TIME TABLE DESCRIBED ABOVE. REFER TO THE GRADING PLAN AND/OR LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR VEGETATIVE COVER. (NOTE TO THE PREPARER: WHERE PERMANENT SEEDING IS NOT CALLED OUTIN THE GRADING AND/ OR LANDSCAPE PLAN, REPLACE THE LAST SENTENCE IN THIS ITEM WITH THE FOLLOWING: SEED WET PONDS WITH MN/DOT SEED MIXTURE 310 "NATIVE WET TALL" BELOW THEHWL. SEED ALL OTHER AREAS WITH SEED MIXTURE 260 "COMMERCIAL TURF". SEEDING METHOD AND APPLICATION RATE SHALL CONFORM TO MN/DOT SPECIFICATION SECTION 2573.3.)19.CONTRACTORS OR SUBCONTRACTORS WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVING SEDIMENT FROM CONVEYANCES & FROM TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS THAT ARE TO BE USED AS PERMANENTWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT BASINS. SEDIMENT MUST BE STABILIZED TO PREVENT IT FROM BEING WASHED BACK INTO THE BASIN, CONVEYANCES, OR DRAINAGEWAYS DISCHARGING OFF-SITE ORTO SURFACE WATERS. THE CLEANOUT OF PERMANENT BASINS MUST BE SUFFICIENT TO RETURN THE BASIN TO DESIGN CAPACITY.20.ON-SITE & OFF-SITE SOIL STOCKPILE AND BORROW AREAS SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION OF BMP'S. STOCKPILE AND BORROW AREALOCATIONS SHALL BE NOTED ON THE SITE MAP AND PERMITTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERAL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.21.TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS & CANNOT BE PLACED IN SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING STORMWATER CONVEYANCES SUCH ASCURB & GUTTER SYSTEMS OR CONDUITS & DITCHES.22.SLOPES SHALL BE LEFT IN A ROUGHENED CONDITION DURING THE GRADING PHASE TO REDUCE RUNOFF VELOCITIES AND EROSION.23.DUE TO THE GRADE CHANGES DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT, CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ADJUSTING THE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES (SILT FENCES, CHECK DAMS,INLET PROTECTION DEVICES, ETC.) TO PREVENT EROSION.24.ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE STABILIZED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY, THIS INCLUDES BACKFILLING OF TRENCHES FOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTION AND PLACEMENT OF GRAVEL OR BITUMINOUSPAVING FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION.DEVELOPER/OWNER:MORRIE'S AUTOMOTIVE GROUPXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX-XXX-XXXXSITE OPERATOR / GENERAL CONTRACTORSUPERINTENDENT:CROSS BRACEMIN.15"18"MAX.2" X 4" STAKE3' MIN.DROP INLETWITH GRATE2" X 4" WOOD(TYP.)5' MIN.SECURELY FASTEN OVERLAPPINGENDS OF SILT FENCE MATERIALTO ADJACENT STAKES WITHTHREE WIRE TIES OR OTHERFASTENERSATTACH THE WOVEN WIREFENCE TO EACH POST WITHTHREE WIRE TIES OR OTHERFASTENERS (SEE NOTE 1)1. ATTACH THE WOVEN WIRE FENCE TO EACH POST AND THE GEOTEXTILE TO THE WOVEN WIRE FENCE(SPACED EVERY 30") WITH THREE WIRE TIES OR OTHER FASTENERS, ALL SPACED WITHIN THE TOP 8" OFTHE FABRIC. ATTACH EACH TIE DIAGONALLY 45 DEGREES THROUGH THE FABRIC, WITH EACH PUNCTUREAT LEAST 1" VERTICALLY APART.2. WHEN TWO SECTIONS OF SILT FENCE MATERIAL ADJOIN EACH OTHER, THEY SHALL BE OVERLAPPEDACROSS TWO POSTS.3. MAINTENANCE SHALL BE PERFORMED AS NOTED IN THE SWPPP. DEPTH OF ACCUMULATED SEDIMENTSMAY NOT EXCEED ONE-HALF THE HEIGHT OF THE FABRIC. MAINTENANCE CLEANOUT MUST BECONDUCTED REGULARLY TO PREVENT ACCUMULATED SEDIMENTS FROM REACHING ONE-HALF THEHEIGHT OF THE SILT FENCE MATERIAL ABOVE GRADE.4. ALL SILT FENCE INLETS SHALL INCLUDE WIRE SUPPORT.OVERLAP5' MIN.SILT FENCE MATERIAL TO BEFASTENED SECURELY TO WOVENWIRE FENCE WITH THREE TIESSPACED AT 30" ON CENTER (SEENOTE 1)DEFLECTOR PLATEOVERFLOW 2 - TOP OF CURB BOXOVERFLOW 1 - CENTER OF FILTER ASSEMBLY10" FILTER ASSEMBLYCURBCG 3067HIGH-FLOW FABRICMIRAFI FF101ROAD DRAIN CASTING APPLICABILTYxNEENAH R-3067xNEENAH R-3512NOT TO SCALE50' MIN.ROAD6" MIN.CONSTRUCT 2' HIGH BERM WITHMAXIMUM SIDE SLOPE OF 4:12" TO 3" GRAVELNOTE: ROCK EXITS SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THESTART OF ANY SITE WORK. ROCK EXITS SHALL BEINSPECTED FOLLOWING EACH RAINFALL.MAINTENANCE OF ROCK EXITS SHALL INCLUDE A TOPDRESSING OF NEW GRAVEL, OR REMOVAL ANDREPLACEMENT OF THE GRAVEL AS NEEDED, TO KEEPTHE EXITS FREE FROM COLLECTED MUD.ASREQUIRED MIN 0.5% GRADE8' X 8' MIN OR ASREQUIRED TOCONTAIN WASTECONCRETESIGN TO INDICATE THE LOCATION OFTHE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA2'-0" MINBERM AROUND PERIMETERGROUND SURFACE12" MIN12" MINCOMPACTED EMBANKMENTMATERIAL (TYP.)3:1 OR FLATTERSIDE SLOPESNOTES:1.CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANY CONCRETE PLACEMENTON SITE.2.CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA SHALL BE LINED WITH MINIMUM 10 MIL THICK PLASTICLINER.3.VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL IS REQUIRED IF ACCESS TO CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA ISOFF PAVEMENT.4.SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED AT THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE, AT THE WASHOUT AREA,AND ELSEWHERE AS NECESSARY TO CLEARLY INDICATE THE LOCATION OF THECONCRETE WASHOUT AREA TO OPERATORS OF CONCRETE TRUCKS AND PUMP RIGS.5.THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA SHALL BE REPAIRED AND ENLARGED OR CLEANED OUTAS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN CAPACITY FOR WASTED CONCRETE.6.AT THE END OF CONSTRUCTION, ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITEAND DISPOSED OF AT AN ACCEPTED WASTE SITE.7.WHEN THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA IS REMOVED, THE DISTURBED AREA SHALL BESEEDED AND MULCHED OR OTHERWISE STABILIZED IN A MANNER ACCEPTED BY THECITY.WOVEN WIREFENCE WITH SILTFENCE MATERIALCOVEREXTEND WIRE FENCEA MIN. OF 3" INTOGROUNDEXTEND SILT FENCEMATERIAL A MIN. OF1'-0" INTO GROUNDEROSION & SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES & DETAILS / "SITE MAP"SITE LOCATION MAPNOT TO SCALEUSGS MAPGENERAL EROSION NOTES:NOT TO SCALEROCK EXIT DRIVENOT TO SCALECONCRETE WASHOUT AREAROAD DRAIN INLET PROTECTION (IP-2)SILT FENCE INLET PROTECTION (IP-1)NOT TO SCALEPOSTS: 2 X 4 WOODEN STAKE FENCE:WOVEN WIRE, 14-1/2 GA., 6" MAX. MESHOPENING FABRIC: IN ACCORDANCE WITHASTM D 6461 LATEST EDITION.NOT TO SCALEGET MAP FROM HEREGET MAP FROM HEREPHASE I:1.INSTALL STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES.2.PREPARE TEMPORARY PARKING AND STORAGE AREA.3.CONSTRUCT THE SILT FENCES ON THE SITE.4. CONSTRUCT THE SEDIMENTATION AND SEDIMENT TRAP BASINS.5. HALT ALL ACTIVITIES AND CONTACT THE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT TO PERFORM INSPECTION OF BMPs. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL SCHEDULEAND CONDUCT STORM WATER PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH ENGINEER AND ALL GROUND DISTURBING CONTRACTORS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITHCONSTRUCTION.6. CLEAR AND GRUB THE SITE.7. BEGIN GRADING THE SITE.8. START CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING PAD AND STRUCTURES.PHASE II:1.TEMPORARILY SEED DENUDED AREAS.2.INSTALL UTILITIES, UNDERDRAINS, STORM SEWERS, CURBS AND GUTTERS.3.INSTALL RIP RAP AROUND OUTLET STRUCTURES.4.INSTALL INLET PROTECTION AROUND ALL STORM SEWER STRUCTURES.5.PREPARE SITE FOR PAVING.6.PAVE SITE.7.INSTALL INLET PROTECTION DEVICES.8.COMPLETE GRADING AND INSTALL PERMANENT SEEDING AND PLANTING.9.REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES (ONLY IF SITE IS STABILIZED), IF REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACTAREA SUMMARY IN ACRESPAVEMENT AREAϭ͘ϱϵцBUILDING AREAϭ͘ϮϲцSEEDED AREAϬ͘ϱϱцTOTAL DISTURBEDϯ͘ϲϭцPRE - CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUSϮ͘ϯϵцPOST - CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUSϮ͘ϴϱцFRAMEMAINTENANCE NOTES:SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTIONSITESITECROSS-SECTIONFLOWFLOWELEVATIONFLOWFINISH GRADENOTES:1.WOVEN WIRE FENCE TO BE FASTENED SECURELY TO FENCEPOSTS WITH WIRE TIES.2.FILTER CLOTH TO BE FASTENED SECURELY TO WOVEN WIREFENCE WITH TIES SPACED EVERY 24" AT TOP AND MIDSECTION.3.WHEN TWO SECTIONS OF FILTER CLOTH ADJOIN EACHOTHER THEY SHALL BE OVERLAPPED BY SIX INCHES ANDFOLDED.4.MAINTENANCE SHALL BE PERFORMED AS NOTED IN THEEROSION CONTROL PLAN. COLLECTED MATERIAL SHALL BEREMOVED WHEN "BULGES" DEVELOP IN THE SILT FENCE.5.ALL SILT FENCE SHALL INCLUDE WIRE SUPPORT UNLESSINDICATED OTHERWISE.FENCE: WOVEN WIRE, 14-1/2GA. 6" MAX. MESH OPENINGFILTER FABRIC:1.AMOCO 11982.BELTECH 8103.MIRAFI 130X4.LING GTF 1905.SI 915 SCPOSTS: STEEL EITHER T OR UTYPEFILTERFABRICOVERWIREFENCE54" MINFENCEPOSTS,DRIVENMIN 20"INTOGROUND5'-0" MAX C-C5'-0" MAX C-C6"4"20" MIN 6"3'-0" MAXIMUM2'-0" MINIMUMN.T.S. SCALE IN FEET06030ProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientMORRIE'SAUTOMOTIVEGROUPMORRIE'SJAGUARLAND ROVERRICHFIELD,MINNESOTAJEBJEBBDBPRELIMINARY07/28/201720847Registration No.I hereby certify that this plan, specification orreport was prepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a duly licensedprofessional ENGINEER under the laws of the stateof Minnesota.If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of thisplan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,Minnetonka, MN office.Date:44579Brady D. Busselman07/28/2017PRE L IM INAR Y09/07/17JEBOFF-SITE DRAINAGE11/16/17JEBCITY RE-SUBMITTAL Nov 16, 2017 - 11:25am - User:jbalzer L:\PROJECTS\20847\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20847-C6-UTIL.dwgC6.01UTILITY PLANTELEPHONEELECTRICGAS LINEFORCEMAIN (SAN.)EASEMENTWATERMAINSANITARY SEWEREXISTINGPROPOSEDSTORM SEWERCURB & GUTTERDRAINTILEDSSSLSLEGENDUTILITY CONSTRUCTION NOTESTHE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL XX. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINEDACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTINGSUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTINGUTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THECONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BYHIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE,INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.1.THE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE"STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATIONS" AS PUBLISHED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OFMINNESOTA (CEAM), EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THESESPECIFICATIONS.1.1.ALL UTILITIES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS.1.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT OPEN, TURN OFF, INTERFERE WITH, OR ATTACH ANY PIPE OR HOSE TOOR TAP WATERMAIN BELONGING TO THE CITY UNLESS DULY AUTHORIZED TO DO SO BY THECITY. ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY SCHEDULED OR UNSCHEDULED DISRUPTIONS OFSERVICE TO THE PUBLIC ARE THE LIABILITY OF CONTRACTOR.1.3.A MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION OF 18 INCHES AND HORIZONTAL SEPARATION OF 10-FEETBETWEEN OUTSIDE PIPE DIAMETERS IS REQUIRED AT ALL WATERMAIN AND SEWER MAIN(BUILDING, STORM AND SANITARY) CROSSINGS.2.ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED IN CEAM SPECIFICATIONS EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREIN.2.1.ALL MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.2.2.ALL SANITARY SEWER TO BE PVC SDR-35, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.2.2.1.ALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICES TO BUILDING SHALL BE PVC SCH 40 CONFORMING TOASTM D2665.2.3.ALL WATERMAIN TO BE DUCTILE IRON - CLASS 52, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.2.3.1.ALL WATERMAIN TO HAVE 7.5-FEET OF COVER OVER TOP OF WATERMAIN.2.3.2.PROVIDE THRUST BLOCKING AND MECHANICAL JOINT RESTRAINTS ON ALL WATERMAINJOINTS PER CITY STANDARDS.2.4.ALL STORM SEWER PIPE TO BE SMOOTH INTERIOR DUAL WALL HDPE PIPE WITH WATER TIGHTGASKETS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.2.4.1.ALL STORM SEWER PIPE FOR ROOF DRAIN SERVICES TO BUILDING SHALL BE PVC SCH 40CONFORMING TO ASTM D2665.2.5.RIP RAP SHALL BE Mn/DOT CLASS 3.3.COORDINATE ALL BUILDING SERVICE CONNECTION LOCATIONS AND INVERT ELEVATIONS WITHMECHANICAL CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.4.ALL BUILDING SERVICE CONNECTIONS (STORM, SANITARY, WATER) WITH FIVE FEET OR LESS COVER ARETO BE INSULATED FROM BUILDING TO POINT WHERE 5-FEET OF COVER IS ACHIEVED.5.CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENTPROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELDSOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THECONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.6.SAFETY NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTIONPRACTICES, CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ON THEJOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK.THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS.THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OFCONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OFCONTRACTOR'S SAFETY MEASURES IN, ON OR NEAR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE.7.ALL AREAS OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES THAT ARE DISTURBED BY UTILITY CONSTRUCTIONSHALL BE RESTORED IN KIND. SODDED AREAS SHALL BE RESTORED WITH 6 INCHES OF TOPSOIL PLACEDBENEATH THE SOD.8.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICESSUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THEMOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TOAPPROPRIATE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS.9.ALL SOILS TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY AN INDEPENDENT SOILS ENGINEER. EXCAVATION FOR THEPURPOSE OF REMOVING UNSTABLE OR UNSUITABLE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED AS REQUIRED BY THESOILS ENGINEER. THE UTILITY BACKFILL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OFTHE SOILS ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOILSTESTS AND SOIL INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER.A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY:COMPANY: ___________________________________________ADDRESS: ____________________________________________PHONE: _______________________________________________DATED: _______________________________________________CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THIS SOILS REPORT.10.CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT 2 COPIES OF SHOP DRAWINGS FOR MANHOLE AND CATCH BASINSTRUCTURES TO ______________. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALLOW 5 WORKING DAYS FOR SHOP DRAWINGREVIEW.11.CONTRACTOR AND MATERIAL SUPPLIER SHALL DETERMINE THE MINIMUM DIAMETER REQUIRED FOREACH STORM SEWER STRUCTURE.12.(REMOVE IF THERE IS NO UNDERGROUND SYSTEM)THE UNDERGROUND STORMWATER SYSTEM SHOWN ON THE UTILITY PLAN AND THE DETAIL SHEETS ISFOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND DEPICTS THE MINIMUM STORAGE REQUIREMENTS ANDTHE SYSTEM ELEVATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR (WITH THEIR SUPPLIER OR DESIGNER) SHALL SUBMITDESIGN DRAWINGS TO THE ENGINEER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THEDESIGN DRAWINGS SHALL DEPICT THE FINAL LAYOUT AND DETAILS FOR CONSTRUCTION. THEDRAWINGS SHALL BE CERTIFIED BY A LICENSED ENGINEER FOR THE STATE IN WHICH THE PROJECT ISCONSTRUCTED. THE SUBMITTAL SHALL INCLUDE ALL NECESSARY PRODUCT INFORMATION, DESIGNCALCULATIONS AND BEDDING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED STORMWATER SYSTEM. FOLLOWINGCONSTRUCTION, THE CERTIFYING ENGINEER SHALL SUBMIT A LETTER TO THE OWNER AND ENGINEERINDICATING THEY OBSERVED THE INSTALLATION AND THE INSTALLATION OF THE STORMWATER SYSTEMWAS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CERTIFIED DRAWINGS.NOTE:THE ECO-STORM PLUS STRUCTUREMAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR AN APPROVEDEQUAL PRODUCT THAT ACHIEVES 60%PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL OR GREATER.UNDERGROUND STORAGE SYSTEMECOSTORM PLUSPERMEABLE PAVERS SCALE IN FEET06030ProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientMORRIE'SAUTOMOTIVEGROUPMORRIE'SJAGUARLAND ROVERRICHFIELD,MINNESOTAJEBJEBBDBPRELIMINARY07/28/201720847PRE L IM INAR Y09/07/17JEBOFF-SITE DRAINAGE11/16/17JEBCITY RE-SUBMITTAL Nov 16, 2017 - 11:25am - User:jbalzer L:\PROJECTS\20847\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20847-L1-LAND.dwgL1.00TREEPRESERVATIONAND REMOVALPLAN SCALE IN FEET06030ProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientMORRIE'SAUTOMOTIVEGROUPMORRIE'SJAGUARLAND ROVERRICHFIELD,MINNESOTAJEBJEBBDBPRELIMINARY07/28/201720847PRE L IM INAR Y09/07/17JEBOFF-SITE DRAINAGE11/16/17JEBCITY RE-SUBMITTAL Nov 16, 2017 - 11:26am - User:jbalzer L:\PROJECTS\20847\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20847-L1-LAND.dwgL1.01LANDSCAPEPLANTHE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL XX. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINEDACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF ASCE/CI 38-02, TITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTINGSUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA." THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTINGUTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA). THECONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR AGREE TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES, WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BYHIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION, SIZE,INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.QUANTITY REQUIRED:i.ONE (1) TREE PER 2,500 SQUARE FEET OF DEVELOPABLE LANDSCAPING AREA; ANDii.ONE (1) SHRUB PER 1,000 SQUARE FEET OF DEVELOPABLE LANDSCAPING AREADEVELOPABLE LANDSCAPING AREA IS DEFINED AS THE TOTAL AREA OF A DEVELOPMENT SITE OR PHASE MINUSTHE PORTION OF THAT AREA WITHIN A NATURAL WATER BODY OR A PROTECTED WETLAND.DEVELOPABLE LAND ON SITE= 139,629 SQ. FT.PLANT TYPEREQUIREDPROVIDEDTREES 56 67SHRUBS 140 642RICHFIELD, MN LANDSCAPE CODETREESCODEBOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAMECONTCALQTYSGAcer freemanii `Sienna Glen` / Sienna Glen MapleB & B4.5"8JMAcer rubrum `Bailcraig` / Scarlet Jewell MapleB & B2.5"Cal10DPBetula platyphylla `Fargo` TM / Dakota Pinnacle BirchB & B2"Cal11GBGinkgo biloba `Autumn Gold` TM / Maidenhair TreeB & B2.5"Cal8HLGleditsia triacanthos `Skyline` / Skyline Honey LocustB & B2.5"Cal7SOQuercus bicolor / Swamp White OakB & B2.5"Cal8BLTilia americana `Boulevard` / Boulevard LindenB & B2.5"Cal4PEUlmus americana `Princeton` / American ElmB & B3.5" Cal6ORN. TREESCODEBOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAMECONTCALQTYSBAmelanchier canadensis `Autumn Brilliance` / Autumn Brilliance ServiceberryB & B2"Cal5SHRUBSCODEBOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAMECONTH` X W`QTYBCAronia melanocarpa `Autumn Magic` / Autumn Magic Black Chokeberry5 gal9BXBuxus x `Chicagoland Green` TM / Glencoe Boxwood10 gal48BHDiervilla lonicera / Dwarf Bush Honeysuckle5 gal72CEEuonymus alatus `Compactus` / Compact Burning Bush5 gal11LHHydrangea paniculata `Jane` / Little Lime Hydrangea5 gal95MJJuniperus chinensis `Mint Julep` / Mint Julep Juniper5 gal65GLRhus aromatica `Gro-Low` / Gro-Low Fragrant Sumac5 gal56RRRosa x `Radtko` / Double Knock Out Rose1 gal3`x3`34GSSpiraea japonica `Goldflame` / Spirea5 gal65LBSyringa x `Bloomerang` / Lilac5 gal79HAThuja occidentalis `Holmstrup` / Holmstrup Cedar10 gal69CVViburnum opulus `Compactum` / Compact European Cranberrybush5 gal18GRASSESCODEBOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAMECONTH` X W`QTYKFGCalamagrostis x acutiflora `Karl Foerster` / Feather Reed Grass1 gal44PDSSporobolus heterolepis / Prairie Dropseed1 gal98PERENNIALSCODEBOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAMECONTH` X W`QTYBDLHemerocallis x `Baja` / Baja Daylily1 gal42BESRudbeckia fulgida `Goldstrum` / Black Eyed Susan1 gal26AFSSedum x `Autumn Fire` / Autumn Fire Sedum1 gal58GROUND COVERSCODEBOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAMEQTYTUR HIGTurf Sod Highland Sod / Sod12,110 sfPLANT SCHEDULELANDSCAPE LEGENDDOUBLE SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH - NATURAL COLOR, 4" DEPTH6' BENCH (2) PLACED ON 30" X 80" CONCRETE PADS 12STEEL EDGERPLANT MATERIAL SIZE REQUIREMENTS:SHRUBS:5 GAL.ORNAMENTAL TREES: 1.5" CALIPEROVERSTORY TREES:9 TREES OR FEWER: 2.5" CALIPERMORE THAN 9 TREES: UNDERGROUND STORAGEHWL = 821.49BOTTOM = 818.022ProjectLocationCertificationSheet TitleSummaryRevision HistorySheet No.RevisionProject No.DateSubmittal / RevisionNo.ByDesigned:Drawn:Approved:Book / Page:Phase:Initial Issued:ClientMORRIE'SAUTOMOTIVEGROUPMORRIE'SJAGUARLAND ROVERRICHFIELD,MINNESOTAJEBJEBBDBPRELIMINARY07/28/201720847PRE L IM INAR Y09/07/17JEBOFF-SITE DRAINAGE11/16/17JEBCITY RE-SUBMITTAL Nov 16, 2017 - 11:26am - User:jbalzer L:\PROJECTS\20847\CAD\Civil\Sheets\20847-L1-LAND.dwgL2.01LANDSCAPEDETAILSGENERAL NOTES:1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT THE SITE AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THE EXISTINGCONDITIONS RELATING TO THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE WORK.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY PLAN LAYOUT AND BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPEARCHITECT DISCREPANCIES WHICH MAY COMPROMISE THE DESIGN OR INTENT OF THE LAYOUT.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLYING WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES,REGULATIONS, AND PERMITS GOVERNING THE WORK.4.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT EXISTING ROADS, CURBS/GUTTERS, TRAILS, TREES, LAWNS ANDSITE ELEMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION. DAMAGE TO SAME SHALL BE REPAIRED AND/ORREPLACED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.5.LOCATE AND VERIFY ALL UTILITIES, INCLUDING IRRIGATION LINES, WITH THE OWNER FORPROPRIETARY UTILITIES AND GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 48 HOURS BEFORE DIGGING. CONTRACTORSHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROTECTION AND REPAIR OF ANY DAMAGES TO SAME. NOTIFYTHE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY CONFLICTS TO FACILITATE PLANT RELOCATION.6.THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE THE PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION ANDPLANTING INSTALLATION WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS WORKING ON SITE.7.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW THE SITE FOR DEFICIENCIES IN SITE CONDITIONS WHICH MIGHTNEGATIVELY AFFECT PLANT ESTABLISHMENT, SURVIVAL OR WARRANTY. UNDESIRABLE SITECONDITIONS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TOBEGINNING OF WORK.8.THE PLAN TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THE LANDSCAPE LEGEND IF DISCREPANCIES EXIST.QUANTITIES SHOWN IN THE PLANTING SCHEDULE ARE FOR THE CONTRACTOR'S CONVENIENCE.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY QUANTITIES SHOWN ON THE PLAN.9.THE SPECIFICATIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER THE PLANTING NOTES AND GENERAL NOTES.10.EXISTING TREES AND SHRUBS TO REMAIN SHALL BE PROTECTED TO THE DRIP LINE FROM ALLCONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC, STORAGE OF MATERIALS ETC. WITH 4' HT. ORANGE PLASTIC SAFETYFENCING ADEQUATELY SUPPORTED BY STEEL FENCE POSTS 6' O.C. MAXIMUM SPACING.11.LONG-TERM STORAGE OF MATERIALS OR SUPPLIES ON-SITE WILL NOT BE ALLOWED.12.CONTRACTOR SHALL REQUEST IN WRITING, A FINAL ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION.PLANTING NOTES:1.NO PLANTS SHALL BE INSTALLED UNTIL FINAL GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEENCOMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA.2.A GRANULAR PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDE SHALL BE APPLIED TO ALL PLANT BEDS AT THEMANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDED RATE PRIOR TO PLANT INSTALLATION.3.ALL PLANTING STOCK SHALL CONFORM TO THE "AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK,"ANSI-Z60, LATEST EDITION, OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN, INC. AND SHALLCONSTITUTE MINIMUM QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR PLANT MATERIALS.4.OVERSTORY TREES SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING NO LOWER THAN 6' ABOVE PAVED SURFACES.5.ALL PLANTS MUST BE HEALTHY, VIGOROUS MATERIAL, FREE OF PESTS AND DISEASE AND BECONTAINER GROWN OR BALLED AND BURLAPPED AS INDICATED IN THE LANDSCAPE LEGEND.6.PLANT MATERIALS TO BE INSTALLED PER PLANTING DETAILS.7.ALL TREES MUST BE STRAIGHT TRUNKED AND FULL HEADED AND MEET ALL REQUIREMENTSSPECIFIED.8.THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECT ANY PLANTS WHICH ARE DEEMEDUNSATISFACTORY BEFORE, DURING, OR AFTER INSTALLATION.9.NO SUBSTITUTIONS OF PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE ACCEPTED UNLESS APPROVED IN WRITING BYTHE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.10.ALL PLANT MATERIAL QUANTITIES, SHAPES OF BEDS AND LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETE COVERAGE OF ALL PLANTING BEDS ATSPACING SHOWN AND ADJUSTED TO CONFORM TO THE EXACT CONDITIONS OF THE SITE. THELANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SHALL APPROVE THE STAKING LOCATION OF ALL PLANT MATERIALS PRIORTO INSTALLATION.11.ALL PLANTING AREAS MUST BE COMPLETELY MULCHED AS SPECIFIED.12.MULCH: SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH, CLEAN AND FREE OF NOXIOUS WEEDS OR OTHERDELETERIOUS MATERIAL, IN ALL MASS PLANTING BEDS AND FOR TREES, UNLESS INDICATED ASROCK MULCH ON DRAWINGS. SUBMIT SAMPLE TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO DELIVERYON-SITE FOR APPROVAL. DELIVER MULCH ON DAY OF INSTALLATION. USE 4" FOR SHRUB BEDS,AND 3" FOR PERENNIAL/GROUND COVER BEDS, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED.13.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL MULCHES AND PLANTING SOIL QUANTITIES TOCOMPLETE THE WORK SHOWN ON THE PLAN.14.USE ANTI-DESICCANT (WILTPRUF OR APPROVED EQUAL) ON DECIDUOUS PLANTS MOVED IN LEAFAND FOR EVERGREENS MOVED ANYTIME. APPLY AS PER MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTION. ALLEVERGREENS SHALL BE SPRAYED IN THE LATE FALL FOR WINTER PROTECTION DURING WARRANTYPERIOD.14.PLANTING SOIL FOR TREES, SHRUBS AND GROUND COVERS: FERTILE FRIABLE LOAMCONTAINING A LIBERAL AMOUNT (4% MIN.) OF HUMUS AND CAPABLE OF SUSTAININGVIGOROUS PLANT GROWTH. IT SHALL COMPLY WITH MNDOT SPECIFICATION 3877 TYPE BSELECT TOPSOIL. MIXTURE SHALL BE FREE FROM HARDPACK SUBSOIL, STONES,CHEMICALS, NOXIOUS WEEDS, ETC. SOIL MIXTURE SHALL HAVE A PH BETWEEN 6.1 AND 7.5AND 10-0-10 FERTILIZER AT THE RATE OF 3 POUNDS PER CUBIC YARD. IN PLANTING BEDSINCORPORATE THIS MIXTURE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE BED IN A 6" LAYER ANDROTO-TILLING IT INTO THE TOP 12" OF SOIL AT A 1:1 RATIO.ANY PLANT STOCK NOT PLANTEDON DAY OF DELIVERY SHALL BE HEELED IN AND WATERED UNTIL INSTALLATION. PLANTS NOTMAINTAINED IN THIS MANNER WILL BE REJECTED.15.ALL PLANTS SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR TWO COMPLETE GROWING SEASONS (APRIL 1 -NOVEMBER 1), UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. THE GUARANTEE SHALL COVER THE FULL COST OFREPLACEMENT INCLUDING LABOR AND PLANTS.16.CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AT LEAST 3 DAYS PRIOR TO PLANNEDDELIVERY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AT LEAST 24 HOURS INADVANCE OF BEGINNING PLANT INSTALLATION.17.SEASONS/TIME OF PLANTING AND SEEDING: NOTE: THE CONTRACTOR MAY ELECT TO PLANT INOFF-SEASONS ENTIRELY AT HIS/HER RISK. DECIDUOUS17.1.POTTED PLANTS: 4/1 - 6/1; 9/21 - 11/117.2.DECIDUOUS /B&B: 4/1 - 6/1; 9/21 - 11/117.3.EVERGREEN POTTED PLANTS: 4/1 - 6/1; 9/21-11/117.4.EVERGREEN B&B: 4/1 - 5/1; 9/21 - 11/1 17.5.TURF/LAWN SEEDING: 4/1 - 6/1; 7/20 - 9/2017.6.NATIVE MIX SEEDING: 4/1 - 7/20; 9/20-10/2018.MAINTENANCE SHALL BEGIN IMMEDIATELY AFTER EACH PORTION OF THE WORK IS IN PLACE.PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE PROTECTED AND MAINTAINED UNTIL THE INSTALLATION OF THEPLANTS IS COMPLETE, INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE, AND PLANTINGS ARE ACCEPTED EXCLUSIVEOF THE GUARANTEE. MAINTENANCE SHALL INCLUDE WATERING, CULTIVATING, MULCHING,REMOVAL OF DEAD MATERIALS, RE-SETTING PLANTS TO PROPER GRADE AND KEEPING PLANTS INA PLUMB POSITION. AFTER ACCEPTANCE, THE OWNER SHALL ASSUME MAINTENANCERESPONSIBILITIES. HOWEVER, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTINUE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FORKEEPING THE TREES PLUMB THROUGHOUT THE GUARANTEE PERIOD.19.ANY PLANT MATERIAL WHICH DIES, TURNS BROWN, OR DEFOLIATES (PRIOR TO TOTALACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK) SHALL BE PROMPTLY REMOVED FROM THE SITE AND REPLACED WITHMATERIAL OF THE SAME SPECIES, QUANTITY, AND SIZE AND MEETING ALL LANDSCAPE LEGENDSPECIFICATIONS.20.WATERING: MAINTAIN A WATERING SCHEDULE WHICH WILL THOROUGHLY WATER ALL PLANTSONCE A WEEK. IN EXTREMELY HOT, DRY WEATHER, WATER MORE OFTEN AS REQUIRED BYINDICATIONS OF HEAT STRESS SUCH AS WILTING LEAVES. CHECK MOISTURE UNDER MULCH PRIORTO WATERING TO DETERMINE NEED. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE THE NECESSARYARRANGEMENTS FOR WATER.TURF NOTES:TURF ESTABLISHMENT SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONSOF THE MN/DOT 2105 AND 2575 EXCEPT AS MODIFIED BELOW:1.ALL AREAS TO RECEIVE SOD SHALL ALSO RECEIVE 4" OF TOPSOIL PRIOR TOINSTALLING SOD. TOPSOIL SHALL BE FREE OF TREE ROOTS, STUMPS, BUILDING MATERIAL,AND TRASH, AND SHALL BE FREE OF STONES LARGER THAN 1 12" INCHES IN ANY DIMENSION.2.WHERE SOD ABUTS PAVED SURFACES, FINISHED GRADE OF SOD/SEED SHALL BE HELD 1" BELOWSURFACE ELEVATION OF TRAIL, SLAB, CURB, ETC.3.SOD SHALL BE LAID PARALLEL TO THE CONTOURS AND SHALL HAVE STAGGERED JOINTS. ONSLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR IN DRAINAGE SWALES, SOD SHALL BE STAKED SECURELY.4.TURF ON ALL OTHER AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RESTORED BY SEEDING,MULCHING AND FERTILIZING. SEED MIXTURE NO.25-121 (FORMERLY MnDOT 240) WILL BEPLACED AT THE RATE OF 70 POUNDS PER ACRE.5.ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE TURF SEEDED, ARE TO RECEIVE 4" TOP SOIL, SEED, MULCH, ANDWATER UNTIL A HEALTHY STAND OF GRASS IS OBTAINED. FOR SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR INDRAINAGE SWALES INSTALL EROSION CONTROL BLANKET.6.ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO RECEIVE NATIVE SEED, ARE TO RECEIVE PLANTING SOIL, SEED, MULCH,AND WATER UNTIL A HEALTHY STAND OF GRASS IS OBTAINED. FOR SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 ORIN DRAINAGE SWALES INSTALL EROSION CONTROL BLANKET.IRRIGATION NOTES:1.IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO BE DESIGN/BUILD. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGSFOR APPROVAL OF SYSTEM LAYOUT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.2.ALL SOD TO RECEIVE SPRAY OR ROTOR IRRIGATION HEADS WITH MINIMUM DESIGN OF1" IRRIGATION PER WEEK.3.ALL PLANT BEDS TO RECEIVE DRIP LINE IRRIGATION , WITH A MINIMUM DESIGN OF .25"IRRIGATION PER WEEK.4.CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL A TOTAL OF 4 QUICK COUPLERS AT THE CORNERS OF THEPROPERTY. A 2.5" TYPE K SOURCE PIPE IS PROVIDED BY MECHANICAL.NOTESPROVIDE & INSTALL RODENT PROTECTION1/2" HARDWIRE CLOTH, MESH CYLINDER, 8" DIA ORGREATER X 36" HT.. STAKE IN PLACEINSTALL TREE WITH ROOT FLARE VISIBLE AT TOP OFTHE ROOT BALL. REMOVE SOIL IN LEVEL MANNER FROMTOP OF ROOT BALL TO EXPOSE 1ST 1/2" OR LARGER MAINORDER ROOT IF NEEDED. SET ROOT BALL WITH MAINORDER ROOT 1" ABOVE ADJACENT GRADE. DO NOTCOVER TOP OF ROOT BALL WITH SOIL.PLACE NO MULCH IN CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNKREMOVE BURLAP, TWINE, ROPE AND WIRE FROMTOP HALF OF ROOT BALLBUILD 4" HIGH EARTH SAUCER BEYOND EDGE OFROOT BALLEDGE CONDITION VARIESPLACE ROOT BALL ON UNDISTURBED ORCOMPACTED SOILSCARIFY SIDES OF TREE PIT WITH SPADE BY HANDTO BIND WITH PREPARED SOILPLANTING SOIL, REFER TO SPECIFICATIONS, COMPACT TO 85%OF MAX. DRY UNIT WEIGHT ACCORDING TO ASTM D 698TAMP SOIL AROUND ROOT BALL BASE FIRMLY WITH FOOTPRESSURE SO THAT ROOT BALL DOES NOT SHIFTDIG PLANTING PIT 4" TO 6"DEEPER THAN ROOT BALLUNDISTURBEDSUBGRADENOTE:CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN TREES IN A PLUMBPOSITION THROUGHOUT THE WARRANTY PERIOD. IFSTAKING IS REQUIRED BY SITE CONDITIONS,CONTRACTOR TO USE 2 OR 3 STAKE METHOD WITH 1"WEBBING AROUND TRUNK OF THREE (NO WIRE ORCABLING TO BE USED)WRAP TREE TRUNKS ONLY UPON APPROVAL BYLANDSCAPE ARCHITECT11TREE PLANTING DETAILNTSL2.011INSTALL 2" LAYER OF MULCH, DO NOT PLACE INCONTACT W/ SHRUB STEMAPPLY PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDEEDGE CONDITION VARIESEDGER, REFER TO PLAN AND SPECIFICATIONLOOSEN ROOTS OF CONTAINER GROWN PLANTSEXCAVATE PLANT BED MIN. 4" DEEPER THANROOT BALL HT.SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF PLANTING BEDWITH SPADEUNDISTURBED SUBGRADESHRUB PLANTING DETAILNTSL2.012INSTALL 1" LAYER OF SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH OR 2"LAYER OF FINELY SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. DO NOTPLACE IN CONTACT WITH PLANTEDGE CONDITION VARIESEDGER, REFER TO PLAN AND SPECIFICATIONLOOSEN ROOTS OF CONTAINER GROWN PLANTSPLANTING SOILSCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF PLANTING BED WITH SPADEUNDISTURBED SUBGRADENOTE:REFER TO EXTERIOR PLANTING SPECIFICATIONPERENNIAL PLANTING DETAILNTSL2.013 UNDERGROUND STORAGE HWL = 821.49 BOTTOM = 818.0 PROPOSED BUILDING FFE=829.00 TNH=833.61 TNH=832.21 TNH=825.82 OWNER:494 BUILDING PARTNERSHIP LLC OWNER:OLIN 2 LLCS 1/2 OF SE 1/4 OF SE 1/4PART OF SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SOUTHWEST QUARTER SEC. 35PART OF SOUTH HALF OF SOUTHEAST QUARTER OFSOUTHEAST QUARTER SEC. 35That part of the East 150 feet of the West 480 feet of the South 1/2 of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 35, Township 28, Range 24, lying South of the North 180.26 feet thereof.That part of the East 150 feet of the West 630 feet of the South 1/2 of theSoutheast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 35, Township 28,Range 24, lying South of the North 180.26 feet thereof. The North 180.26feet of the East 140 feet of the West 630 feet of the South½ of theSoutheast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 35, Township 28,Range 24.EAST 77TH STREET BLOOMINGTON AVENUE SOUTHINTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 494 EAST 78TH STREET EXISTING BUILDINGEXISTING BUILDINGOHE UGC UGCUGC 3" GAS3" GAS3" GASUGC GAS GAS GASGAS GAS GASOHEOHE OHE OHEGASGASGAS U G C UGC UGC UGCUGEUGE UGE UGE UGCUGC UGCGAS GASGASGASGASUGCUGCCBX HHC HHC TB TB UGCUGCUGCUGCTB 12"ASH 12"ASH 12"ASH 10"ASH 12"ASH 10"ASH 12"ASH 10"ASH 12"ASH 24"ASH 27"ASH 24"ASH 24"MPL 8" CIP W 8" CIP W6" W6" WW8" W 12" DIP W 12" DIP W 8" CIP W8" CIP W 6" W4" W4" WW4" WBM #1 BM #3 BM #2 VANJLR 34,972 SF9 STALLS25 STALLSRAMP UP5 STALLSSERVICE RECEPTION4 STALLS7 STALLSSIGNSIGN14 STALLS 22 STALLS 9 STALLS12 STALLS14 STALLS 4' HIGH DECORATIVE BRICK FENCE SOLAR CHARGING STATION (CANOPY SYSTEM)6 STALLSBIKE RACK BENCHES INDOOR VEHICLE DISPLAY 20,865 SF ROOF SCREEN AREA: ALL ROOF TOP EQUIPMENT SHALL BE PLACED WITHIN THIS AREA TO ALLOW FOR SCREENING BY PARAPET WALL. Reproducing Is Prohibited. Return Upon Request. ©Copyright. This Print/Computer File Gries Architectural Group, Inc. Use Only For Purpose Which Loaned. Copying Or Is The Exclusive Property Of date: job: d. by: rev.:GriesArchitectural Group Inc.500 North Commercial StreetNeenah, Wisconsin 54956Phone: 920-722-2445 Fax: 920-722-6605www.gries.design11/16/2017 12:05:56 PMZ:\2017\17-023 Morries JLR\17-023 Revit\17-023 Morries JLR-topo -.rvtA-0.1 BJG, LCF, KJF 11/15/17 17-023A NEW AUTOMOTIVE FACILITY FOR:MORRIES JAGUAR LAND ROVERRICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 1" = 30'-0"A-0.1 1 SITE PLAN APPROX. SURFACE STALLS 128 APPROX. PARKING STRUCTURE STALLS 148 PARKING TOTAL STALLS 276 JRL FINISHED 34,972 SF 1ST FLOOR PARKING STRUCTURE 20,865 SF BUILDING AREA 2ND FLOOR PARKING STRUCTURE 52,851 SF TOTAL AREA 111,336 SF OVERALL SITE SF 139,628 SF BUILDING FOOTPRINT 58,485 SF SITE AREA BUILDING LOT COVERAGE 41.9% SOLAR CHARGING STATION CANOPY STRUCT.2,648 SF 1" = 30'-0"A-0.1 2 ROOF PLAN- SCREEN AREA UPUP ELEV VEHICLE HANDOVER VEHICLE HANDOVER ELEC. GENERAL OFFICE CPO MGR SALES MGR M. TOI. W. TOI. SERVICE RECEPTION TECHBREAK RM W. TECH M. TECHOIL/FLUIDS/ COMP PARTS PARTS. MGR SPECIAL TOOLS 21 BAYS SERVICE DEPARTMENT SALES SALES SALES GM JAN.SERV. MGRRETAIL/CASHIERRAMP DETAIL CAR WASH WASHEQUIP.TOOL STORAGEMECH INDOOR VEHICLE DISPLAY CONSULT. CONSULT. SERVICE ADVISORS 1 32 SHOWROOM LOADING DOORSSHOWROOM LOADING DOORSVEST. RAMP DN HIGHWAY DISPLAY ELEV. ROOF BELOW RAMP STORAGEFEATURED VEHICLE SHOWROOM OPEN SALES/ CONSULT ATTEND. OFFICE INDOOR VEHICLE DISPLAY Reproducing Is Prohibited. Return Upon Request. ©Copyright. This Print/Computer File Gries Architectural Group, Inc. Use Only For Purpose Which Loaned. Copying Or Is The Exclusive Property Of date: job: d. by: rev.:GriesArchitectural Group Inc.500 North Commercial StreetNeenah, Wisconsin 54956Phone: 920-722-2445 Fax: 920-722-6605www.gries.design11/16/2017 9:13:19 AMZ:\2017\17-023 Morries JLR\17-023 Revit\17-023 Morries JLR-topo -.rvtA-1.1 BJG, LCF, KJF 11/15/17 17-023A NEW AUTOMOTIVE FACILITY FOR:MORRIES JAGUAR LAND ROVERRICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 1/16" = 1'-0"A-1.1 1 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 1/16" = 1'-0"A-1.1 2 SECOND FLOOR 1 = 6'-10 11/16" 2 = 23'-7 7/16" 3 = 6'-10 11/16" TOTAL = 24% OF FRONT FACADE FACADE ARTICULATION FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" SECOND FLOOR 120' - 8"45'-0"21'-2"FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" SECOND FLOOR 120' - 8" Reproducing Is Prohibited. Return Upon Request. ©Copyright. This Print/Computer File Gries Architectural Group, Inc. Use Only For Purpose Which Loaned. Copying Or Is The Exclusive Property Of date: job: d. by: rev.:GriesArchitectural Group Inc.500 North Commercial StreetNeenah, Wisconsin 54956Phone: 920-722-2445 Fax: 920-722-6605www.gries.design11/16/2017 9:15:30 AMZ:\2017\17-023 Morries JLR\17-023 Revit\17-023 Morries JLR-topo -.rvtA-4.1 BJG, LCF, KJF 11/15/17 17-023A NEW AUTOMOTIVE FACILITY FOR:MORRIES JAGUAR LAND ROVERRICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 1/8" = 1'-0"A-4.1 1 NORTH ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"A-4.1 2 SOUTH ELEVATION A-4.1 3 NE PERSPECTIVE VIEW FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" SECOND FLOOR 120' - 8"45'-0"21'-2"FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" SECOND FLOOR 120' - 8" Reproducing Is Prohibited. Return Upon Request. ©Copyright. This Print/Computer File Gries Architectural Group, Inc. Use Only For Purpose Which Loaned. Copying Or Is The Exclusive Property Of date: job: d. by: rev.:GriesArchitectural Group Inc.500 North Commercial StreetNeenah, Wisconsin 54956Phone: 920-722-2445 Fax: 920-722-6605www.gries.design11/16/2017 9:07:17 AMZ:\2017\17-023 Morries JLR\17-023 Revit\17-023 Morries JLR-topo -.rvtA-4.1 BJG, LCF, KJF 11/15/17 17-023A NEW AUTOMOTIVE FACILITY FOR:MORRIES JAGUAR LAND ROVERRICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 1/8" = 1'-0"A-4.1 1 NORTH ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"A-4.1 2 SOUTH ELEVATION A-4.1 3 NE PERSPECTIVE VIEW FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" SECOND FLOOR 120' - 8"40'-0"45'-0"FIRST FLOOR 100' - 0" SECOND FLOOR 120' - 8"40'-0"45'-0"Reproducing Is Prohibited. Return Upon Request. ©Copyright. This Print/Computer File Gries Architectural Group, Inc. Use Only For Purpose Which Loaned. Copying Or Is The Exclusive Property Of date: job: d. by: rev.:GriesArchitectural Group Inc.500 North Commercial StreetNeenah, Wisconsin 54956Phone: 920-722-2445 Fax: 920-722-6605www.gries.design11/16/2017 8:58:33 AMZ:\2017\17-023 Morries JLR\17-023 Revit\17-023 Morries JLR-topo -.rvtA-4.2 BJG, LCF, KJF 11/15/17 17-023A NEW AUTOMOTIVE FACILITY FOR:MORRIES JAGUAR LAND ROVERRICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 1/16" = 1'-0"A-4.2 1 WEST ELEVATION 1/16" = 1'-0"A-4.2 2 EAST ELEVATION A-4.2 3 SW PERSPECTIVE VIEW 4.86.67.87.06.67.08.08.77.67.07.28.17.67.07.28.17.67.07.28.18.77.56.97.17.98.57.37.27.78.47.60.75.16.47.07.17.17.37.78.07.77.57.57.88.07.77.57.57.88.07.77.57.57.88.07.77.47.47.67.77.26.96.97.46.50.74.55.05.35.76.06.26.16.26.36.46.46.26.26.36.46.46.26.26.36.46.46.26.26.26.36.26.06.06.25.95.65.64.90.73.83.83.84.24.74.84.64.54.75.15.04.74.64.85.15.04.74.64.85.15.04.74.54.75.05.04.74.84.84.33.73.32.70.72.82.22.42.82.82.62.52.73.03.02.72.62.83.03.02.72.62.83.13.02.72.62.83.13.13.02.92.72.52.21.91.50.62.10.80.91.01.11.01.01.11.21.21.11.11.11.21.21.11.11.11.21.21.11.11.21.31.41.41.31.21.11.00.90.80.50.4 0.48.88.81.71.71.61.11.21.31.51.61.41.41.51.61.51.31.21.22.02.42.52.52.42.83.33.43.12.93.13.43.22.72.42.51.62.23.03.63.94.14.55.05.14.94.84.95.24.94.34.04.11.62.33.34.35.15.55.96.26.46.46.46.46.46.25.75.45.12.33.64.96.37.27.17.27.57.88.17.67.37.37.27.06.02.13.24.56.47.56.96.56.97.97.56.76.77.27.45.80.9 0.98.51.21.21.11.11.11.21.11.00.90.91.61.61.41.31.41.41.21.10.90.72.22.01.81.71.81.61.51.31.10.82.52.62.42.42.32.11.91.71.41.10.63.52.21.71.41.31.82.52.83.03.23.53.43.33.12.72.42.21.81.50.90.33.82.91.91.41.11.01.92.73.03.44.04.44.03.83.93.52.92.62.32.01.20.2 0.24.74.04.64.73.93.74.03.93.43.34.14.95.05.45.24.23.94.24.34.34.34.53.75.46.35.95.75.24.23.93.94.34.95.35.95.07.57.56.45.54.63.53.23.34.05.06.07.17.08.18.06.75.64.32.92.93.95.26.37.67.66.87.66.96.04.52.93.04.35.66.57.26.46.37.36.86.14.83.12.73.24.65.76.46.96.06.47.36.86.04.93.32.83.34.65.76.46.96.06.67.66.96.25.23.83.53.64.55.76.57.26.27.98.17.16.45.64.44.14.24.85.66.57.67.57.87.97.06.86.04.74.44.75.25.76.47.57.46.17.17.07.47.05.75.45.86.26.36.36.75.74.96.06.47.47.97.16.87.06.96.35.85.54.55.56.67.67.77.67.46.85.95.04.65.97.07.87.66.35.44.23.84.85.97.16.95.54.53.52.6 2.68.3 8.32.5 2.63.42.83.12.32.52.52.52.93.02.63.23.22.82.72.92.52.32.32.12.32.01.92.32.01.72.22.01.72.32.01.72.12.01.92.42.52.22.93.02.63.13.22.72.62.72.42.02.11.91.91.71.61.71.61.53.50.20.20.10.10.10.10.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.10.20.40.60.70.60.50.60.70.70.70.50.60.70.70.70.50.60.70.70.70.50.60.70.70.60.50.60.70.70.60.40.30.20.10.10.1 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.10.10.10.20.30.40.50.60.50.40.50.60.60.50.50.50.60.60.50.30.20.20.30.50.8 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.10.20.50.60.70.91.01.11.11.00.90.70.50.40.20.10.10.20.30.40.50.70.90.90.80.60.50.60.80.90.80.50.30.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.01.21.2Plan ViewScale - 1" = 30ftScheduleSymbol Label Quantity Manufacturer Catalog Number WattageA14 Lithonia Lighting DSX1 LED 241A-11 Lithonia Lighting DSX1 LED 163B2 Lithonia Lighting DSX1 LED 241C2 Lithonia Lighting DSX1 LED 125StatisticsDescription Symbol Avg Max Min Max/Min Avg/MinEAST2.0 fc 4.7 fc 0.2 fc 23.5:1 10.0:1NORTHEAST5.6 fc 8.3 fc 2.6 fc 3.2:1 2.2:1PERIMETER0.4 fc 1.2 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/ASOUTH2.4 fc 3.5 fc 1.5 fc 2.3:1 1.6:1SOUTHEAST4.3 fc 8.5 fc 0.9 fc 9.4:1 4.8:1WEST4.7 fc 8.8 fc 0.4 fc 22.0:1 11.8:1 PEDESTRIAN PATH SOLAR CHARGING STATION PERVIOUS PAVEMENT MORRIE’S JAGUAR LAND ROVER PEDESTRIAN PATH SIDEWALK SEATING AND INTERPRETIVE DISPLAY PUBLIC ART PUBLIC ART ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING; AMENDING APPENDIX I TO THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE BY REZONING 1550 78TH STREET EAST AS PLANNED MIXED USE (PMU) THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Section 18, Paragraph (4) of Appendix I of the Richfield Zoning Code is amended to read as follows: (4) M-18 (S of 77th, Bloomington to Cedar). That area lying between the center lines of 77th and 78th Streets, and between the center lines of Cedar Avenue and Bloomington Avenue except: The North 180.26 feet of the West 490 feet of the South ½ of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; That part of the West 330 feet of the South ½ of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter lying South of the North 180.26 feet thereof; All in Section 35, Township 28, Range 24. . Sec. 2. Section 8, of Appendix I of the Richfield Zoning Code is amended by adding new Paragraphs (6) as follows: (6) The North 180.26 feet of the West 490 feet of the South ½ of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; That part of the West 330 feet of the South ½ of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter lying South of the North 180.26 feet thereof; All in Section 35, Township 28, Range 24. Sec. 3. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Pat Elliott, Mayor ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk