Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017/04/19 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - Planning Commission - RegularAGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:00 P.M. APRIL 19, 2017 1. Call to order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of March 15, 2017 3. Other Business A. Consideration of Resolution No. 90 – Wooddale Station TIF District Conformance with Comprehensive Plan 4. Hearings A. Special Permit Major Amendment Location: 2501 State Highway 7 Applicant: Benilde-St. Margaret’s School Case No.: 17-12-CUP B. Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness Location: 7210 Minnetonka Boulevard Applicant: Steven Cherney Case No.: 17-11-CUP C. Major Amendment to PUD – Parkway 25 Location: 4001 and 4025 State Highway 7 Applicant: Sela Group, LLC Case No.: 17-13-PUD 5. Communications 6. Adjournment If you cannot attend the meeting, please call the Community Development Office, 952/924-2575. Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call 952.928.2840 at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. UNOFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA MARCH 15, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member) MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Person, Carl Robertson STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Monson, Jack Sullivan, Sean Walther 1. Call to Order – Roll Call Chair Peilen called the meeting to order. 2. Approval of Minutes of February 1, 2017 Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion to approve the minutes of February 1, 2017. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0. 3. Public Hearings A. PLACE Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment; Preliminary and Final PUD; Preliminary and Final Plat Location: 5605 W. 36th Street Applicant: PLACE E-generation One, LLC Case No: 17-04-CP, 17-05-S, 17-06-PUD, 17-07-VAR Jennifer Monson, Planner, presented the staff report. Ms. Monson provided the development summary and site information. She said for the last 20 years the city has anticipated the site to redevelop and has actively purchased properties around the site for that redevelopment. The expectation is that it would redevelop into a transit oriented mixed use development. Ms. Monson spoke about the land use and transportation studies in the area which identify the site as future transit oriented development. Ms. Monson provided background on PLACE’s proposal which began with discussions in November, 2013. She reviewed the public process for PLACE which has occurred since that time. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission March 15, 2017 Page 2 The applicant requests a change to the future land use designation of the site to MX Mixed Use to create a pedestrian scale mixed use building with retail service or other commercial uses on the ground floor, and residential or office uses on upper floors. Ms. Monson stated that MX Mixed Use is intended to facilitate a diversity of uses in certain areas of the community. She reviewed the goals and vision of the Mixed Use designation in the Comprehensive Plan and the availability of infrastructure which staff uses to analyze requests. Ms. Monson spoke about the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) which has been completed. The comment period for the EAW ends on April 5, 2017. Ms. Monson discussed city improvements to be made to the transportation network related to SWLRT and the PLACE development. Ms. Monson provided staff analysis of the request for Preliminary and Final Plat which would combine nine properties in the northeast quadrant of Wooddale Ave. and W. 36th Street intersection. Ms. Monson discussed the PUD request, including the helical wind turbine to be located on the property. She discussed the robust mobility plan which includes a bike share and car share. She discussed parking, building materials, landscaping, sustainability and energy efficiency. Ms. Monson stated on Feb. 23, 2017 PLACE held its 8th neighborhood meeting with 60 people in attendance. Concerns included increased traffic, inadequate parking, density, hotel, number of affordable units and increase of neighborhood taxes. Support included the density near light rail, dedication to car-free living, building design, inclusion of affordable housing and the community offered by the project such as the woonerf and urban forest. Chris Velasco, applicant, PLACE E-generation One, stated that PLACE exists for the purpose of building healthy communities for all and specializes in creating communities that are for the arts and feature a high degree of sustainable design. He provided examples of live/work spaces in the project. Mr. Velasco spoke about Marriott’s interest in the proposed hotel. This would bundle housing and jobs together. He said three independent market studies completed for hotel at the site were positive. He spoke about PLACE and Marriott’s relationship with Park Nicollet Health Services. Patients and families could stay one-half mile from Park Nicollet clinics and the hospital. Mr. Velasco explained the sustainability features of the project. He discussed benefits of the development to the St. Louis Park community. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission March 15, 2017 Page 3 Commissioner Carper asked how residents would commute until 2021 when SWLRT is projected to begin. Ms. Monson responded that the city is requiring the developer to offer a shuttle for the first three years or until SWLRT is complete. The hotel will also be providing a shuttle to and from the airport. Commissioner Carper and Ms. Monson discussed standards, height, pole, location, sound and code regarding the proposed helical turbine. Mr. Velasco provided dimensions for the proposed turbine. Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, noted that code would allow a helical style turbine, however the ordinance contemplated a rotary style. The main modification being requested through PUD is to allow a rooftop mounted turbine rather than a ground mounted turbine. He said staff believes that would also reduce the overall height of the turbine that is required. Commissioner Rickert asked if apartments would be sound proofed for musicians. Mr. Velasco responded that is very difficult to do for apartment units. Four soundproof rooms will be built, however. Commissioner Rickert asked who would have access to the Urban Forest area. Mr. Velasco said anyone in the community would have access to the Urban Forest area, all year long. Commissioner Kanne asked what would happen if the hotel fails. Mr. Velasco responded he thinks the relationship PLACE has with Park Nicollet and Methodist Hospital would prevent that from happening. Their use of the hotel will assure high occupancy. He said the three feasibility studies done on a proposed hotel do not indicate failure. Commissioner Kanne spoke about the email sent by resident Janet Zastrow, 3700 Wooddale Ave. S., which referenced the Schmidt Artist Lofts in St. Paul as a development community for artists. Commissioner Kanne said she understands one of the problems with that development is that artists are resisting rules and regulations. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission March 15, 2017 Page 4 Mr. Velasco stated he has a great deal of experience in development for the arts and live/work units. He spoke about very specific rules called house privileges and commitments which are shared with applicants. Chair Peilen asked how traffic would proceed south on Wooddale Ave. Jack Sullivan, staff engineer reviewing PLACE, and staff liaison for SWLRT, said a small percentage of drivers will want to make a left turn. He said driver behavior and habits will transition over time for right turn movements at that location. Vehicle movements will use Hwy. 100 and Hwy. 7 access locations. He said he anticipates very little traffic heading to or from the Sorensen neighborhood. He added that the removal of the left turn out would have happened with or without the PLACE development. Chair Peilen said the number of required parking spots has been reduced but less car-use is an experiment. She asked if that doesn’t work is there a way to get more parking spaces. Ms. Monson said the developer has been required to provide a Proof of Parking document which shows they could provide another 55 parking spaces. There are also other opportunities where spaces could be leased in the neighborhood. Chair Peilen said two-thirds of the units are affordable housing. She asked if PLACE would have the budget to maintain the building with those lower rents. Mr. Velasco said developers must contribute heavily to capitalized operating and replacement reserves upfront and those are deemed sufficient for maintenance and improvements. Chair Peilen commented that her biggest concern is that so much of the project is predicated on light rail occurring. Commissioner Johnston-Madison read from Walker Parking consultant conclusion on page eight. She said she is concerned about the lag time between light rail operation and the time people start moving into PLACE. She said she is concerned during those three years there will be parking and traffic in the neighborhood. She said she’s concerned that this is an experiment. She asked about the Level of Service summary. Mr. Sullivan stated that the Level of Service designation is per intersection. Level of Service D or better is what the Council and Engineering department have historically used as acceptable. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission March 15, 2017 Page 5 Commissioner Johnston-Madison said the city needs to have developments that don’t perpetuate Level of Service D throughout this entire quadrant. She said the City Council has heard from many people that they are unhappy with this and it doesn’t seem the issue is being listened to. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about incentives for not driving. Mr. Velasco said the car-free perks include a $70/month stipend to not have a car. Commissioner Johnston-Madison spoke about poor bus service prior to light rail. Mr. Velasco spoke about discussions held with Metro Transit about improved levels of bus service prior to light rail operation. Commissioner Johnston-Madison spoke about a January 2016 neighborhood meeting where PLACE spoke about additional organic waste to be shipped in for the generator. She asked why this has been dropped from plans. Mr. Velasco said PLACE had been discussing working with the City’s organic program for this but there was a mis-match in sorting. He said it seems the best thing to do was to scale down the E-generation facility. Spent grain will also be provided by Steel Toe Brewery to bolster PLACE’s local collection. Commissioner Carper asked about shading. Mr. Walther responded that there are exceptions to shading when the shadow occurs within the PUD. On this site the northwest corner of 36th & Yosemite would be impacted. The west wall of the existing one-story commercial building would be impacted. Chair Peilen opened the public hearing. Roger Onken, 3600 Wooddale Ave. S. #212, stated he loves the philosophy and design. He doesn’t like the height of the building. He said he thinks six stories for St. Louis Park is too high. Reducing the height would reduce the number of units and parking spaces. He doesn’t feel assured that enough people would choose to go car-free at the development, particularly with the delay of light rail. He said he doesn’t like the inadequate tree and shrub count. He said the employees and customers related to live/work units would require more parking. He said he is concerned about the impact of a hotel of that size on the neighborhood. He said he felt there is a lot of unknown with the proposal. He stated he is concerned about his building’s driveway exit to get on to Highway 7. There will be a better sense of the perfect scenario with light rail in 2021. He Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission March 15, 2017 Page 6 said he thought the turbine would be intrusive with the height of the building. He said he didn’t like the proposed setback on 36th and Wooddale. Sheila Asato, Monkey Bridge Arts, 6801 W. Lake St., said PLACE sounds ideal for studio space and light rail. She asked if units are rental or for sale. James McDonough, 2840 Cavell, a 42-year resident, said he is heavily involved in the arts in St. Louis Park. He said he is fully supportive of the project and understands creative visioning involves a risk. He said that is the way with all progress and development. Mr. McDonough said his hope is that PLACE’s rental apartment development will be his next destination. He said he encourages the Commission’s strong and full support for the project. Russell Griesner, 3700 Wooddale Ave S. #14, commented that as a creative he couldn’t be more excited about PLACE. He said it is exactly what St. Louis Park needs and it is the reason he was attracted to this community. He said he doesn’t think it is an experiment with the traffic. He said we live in a time where car-free desire is here, now. He stated members of his family would love to have living space which is car-free. Alonso Ramos, 3738 Dakota Ave. S., stated that he just bought his first house and is new in the neighborhood. He said he is concerned about decrease of property values related to affordable. He said the project minimizes winter and car concerns. He said he used to live in affordable housing in Minnesota. He spoke about problems and disrespect he experienced. He said he is concerned about security and safety with affordable housing with light rail. He said the Lake and Hiawatha rail station is scary. He spoke about a study which shows higher housing property crimes in areas with affordable housing. He said he isn’t opposed to the project but the location is the wrong location. Mr. Ramos distributed copies of his notes. Danielle Griesner, 3700 Wooddale Ave. S., #14, stated her background is public health and she works to better the health of families and communities to make the healthy choice the easy choice. She said is excited about walkability and sustainability which is why her family moved to St. Louis Park and she is in full support of the project. J.W. Starrett, 5825 Goodrich Ave. S., said his concern is traffic and parking. He said it is a very exciting project for the community. He said he feels like they’ve been backed into this. The expectations and innovation are good in the beginning. He said the expectations have all moved backwards to a point where an adequate level is met for right now. He said he is excited about the future but we aren’t ready for 2021. He said he doesn’t think the traffic numbers are giving the right picture and he recommends that the Planning Commission conduct another traffic Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission March 15, 2017 Page 7 study. It will make a big difference as to why this works. Mr. Starrett said he has concerns about all the new rental units in the city which are at full occupancy which affects traffic and parking. He said Fair Housing will make sure everyone gets in and the management won’t be able to force everyone to be an artist or to follow the rules. He said the city needs to be realistic about the numbers and that we haven’t backed ourselves into a project. Chair Peilen acknowledged the receipt of an email dated March 14, 2017, from Janet Zastrow, 3700 Wooddale Ave. S., #5, expressing concerns about the project. Also received is a letter dated March 13, 2017, from Joel A. Hilgendorf, attorney representing Standal Properties, objecting to the request for variance to the shading requirement. Chair Peilen closed the public hearing as no one else was present wishing to speak. Chair Peilen stated that the city has very stringent rental regulations and she is assured that PLACE will be required to do background checks on all rental applicants. She said there is a very strong inspections and complaint process in the city as well as very strong rental housing laws. Mr. Walther said the live/work spaces for employee parking was factored in to studies. Peak times are studied as largest demand in parking studies. Peak time for live/work spaces is daytime. Peak time for hotel is around 9 p.m. Parking is not public; it is for commercial uses, for residents and for hotel guests on the site. Mr. Walther spoke about hotel experience in the city. The city’s parking requirement for hotels is recognized by staff as being high and is routinely reviewed for reductions. Hotel market professionals say .8 or 1 space per room is the going demand for parking for most of the hotel chains. The city’s requirement is 1.5 spaces which covered other mixed uses on a site. He said PLACE’s hotel is a limited service hotel and restaurant parking is calculated separately. Mr. Walther said all units are rental apartments and there are no for sale units included. Mr. Walther said if the turbine is located on the E-generation building it would be closer to the range of 64-66 ft. tall which is not out of line with the height of the buildings which are proposed for the project. Ms. Monson said the 10 feet which was mentioned as setback is the amount of land that PLACE is dedicating to the city for right-of-way, it’s not the setback Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission March 15, 2017 Page 8 from the curb line. The setback on Wooddale is 15 feet and on 36th Street the setback is significantly more than 26 feet. Ms. Monson stated the way the PUD is written all live/work type 1 cannot have any outside employees working there. The maximum number of employees for live/work type 2 is two. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about car sharing. Ms. Monson said PLACE is looking at using HourCar. If for some reason there isn’t a company offering those services the developer could purchase ten cars and those could serve as car shares for the development. Ten parking spaces have been included in the requirements. Mr. Walther reviewed the Environmental Action Worksheet (EAW) process and timeline. Commissioner Carper asked for heights of the area residential developments. Ms. Monson said the proposed Elmwood development on the east side of 36th Street is 77 feet tall (6 stories). Hoigaard Village to the north is approximately 67 ft tall (5 stories). Tower Light directly south is 5 stories tall. Buildings kitty corner to PLACE are approximately 3 ½ stories tall. Ms. Monson commented that the city did a streetscape plan in 2006 looking at landscaping and setbacks on 36th St. as well as building setbacks and how the road would function with the lane width. The dedication required on 36th St. is being required to meet that plan. Chair Peilen said the project is so bold and progressive but her biggest concern are challenges if light rail doesn’t happen. The success of project seems completely linked to light rail. Mr. Velasco replied that PLACE has been working closely with SWLRT and they have said they are moving forward and have given no indication PLACE has anything to worry about in that regard. He added that if something should go wrong and there is no light rail, a good transit oriented development can still be done. He said the nature of car ownership and mobility is changing dramatically and PLACE will be able to take advantage of new technologies coming. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she has always liked the project and thinks it’s a great experiment. But all the numbers that make the project work on paper are right up to the edge on everything. She said she likes the north side of the project. But there are too many questions about hotel and wind turbine. She said Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission March 15, 2017 Page 9 she doesn’t think the project is ready. She said we can’t afford as a city to approve a project when the viability relates to unanswered questions. She said she can’t recommend approval for the plat and PUD. Commissioner Carper said he was concerned prior to the meeting but his issues have been satisfactorily cleared up. Regarding concern of concentration of affordable housing, he said developers have been encouraged to provide affordable housing through TIF. He commented that affordable housing is scarce in the city. He said he is uncomfortable with a turbine so enormous in the area but there are other existing large structures within the city. Regarding light rail, he said PLACE could be delayed three years at great expense and three years of an innovative project will have been lost. He said all developments come with a risk. Commissioner Kanne said her biggest worry has always been about traffic. She lives in the Elmwood neighborhood and has children who ride bikes in the area. She said she has watched all the new development happen in Elmwood and said the intersection is a nightmare. She added that she is proud to live in a city that would bring such a project to the city and she is in total support of it. Commissioner Tatalovich made a motion to recommend approval of The PLACE Comprehensive Plan Amendment changing the land use designation from OFC – Office, BP – Business Park, RRR – Railroad, and Right-of-way to MX – Mixed Use. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0. Chair Peilen made a motion to recommend approval of The PLACE Preliminary and Final Plat subject to conditions. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Johnston-Madison opposed). Commissioner Carper made a motion to recommend approval of The PLACE Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development subject to conditions. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Johnston-Madison opposed). Mr. Walther discussed the process and schedule for EAW comments and consideration by City Council. 4. Other Business: None 5. Communications Commissioner Carper asked if the turbine issue might come up for a zoning ordinance amendment. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission March 15, 2017 Page 10 Mr. Walther said the PLACE PUD ordinance would create the rules for that site to allow that particular use. But it does open up a larger policy question for other sites in the community. He suggested that might be discussed in the upcoming revision of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Walther spoke about upcoming events including Town Hall for Vision 3.0, Facebook Live for Vision 3.0, and the State of the City. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Planning Commission Meeting Date: April 19 2017 Agenda Item: 3A REQUEST: : Requested is a recommendation of approval of the resolution finding that the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plans for the proposed Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District conform to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the city. The proposed Wooddale Station TIF District would incorporate PLACE’s proposed plans to construct a major mixed-use redevelopment at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave, and the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave. which are in conformance with the land use designation within the 2030 Comprehensive Plan for the subject site which is Mixed-Use. BACKGROUND: PLACE E-generation One, LLC (PLACE), a 501(c)(3), (“Developer”) proposes to acquire nine properties from the EDA and City, raze the former McGarvey Coffee and Nash Frame buildings, and redevelop property north and south of the future SWLRT Wooddale Station into a mixed-income, mixed-use, multigenerational, environmentally sustainable, transit-oriented development with live/work units. Location of PLACE redevelopment at SWLRT Wooddale Station PLACE-Wooddale Station TIF District Plan Conformance to City’s Comprehensive Plan Location: Southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave and the northeast corner of West 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue Applicant: PLACE E-generation One, LLC Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the resolution finding the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the proposed Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District to be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of St. Louis Park. Agenda Item No. 3A – PLACE-Wooddale Station TIF Distruct Plan Conformance to Comprehensive Plan Page 2 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Current plans depict four buildings split on the north and south sides of the future SWLRT Wooddale Station. The proposed PLACE project consists of the following components: § 299 apartments (200 affordable, 99 market-rate), including 99 mixed-income live/work § 110-room Fairfield by Marriott hotel hiring community members § Café, coffee house, bike shop, and five microbusinesses § PLACE’s E-Generation facility on the northern site, which uses PLACE’s patent-pending portfolio of renewable energy systems to convert locally-sourced organic waste into energy for the project and a soil amendment byproduct that will be used in the onsite greenhouse. § 0.88 acres of urban forest, for public access to nature, stormwater management, and habitat § 29,500 square feet of green roof for additional stormwater management and habitat § Buildings, site and program designed to support a multigenerational community where households at all stages in life and income feel welcome § Mobility Plan with car/bike sharing, shuttle, and car-free living incentives § 447 parking stalls (surface and structured) which leaves ground space for a “woonerf/place-making plaza” adjacent to the LRT station to provide pedestrian-oriented § The entire project is being designed to achieve LEED Silver or Gold certification. Developer’s Request for Public Financing Assistance The Total Development Cost (TDC) to construct the proposed PLACE redevelopment is approximately $123 million. There are significant extraordinary costs associated with redeveloping the subject site. These include: environmental investigation and reporting, asbestos abatement, building demolition, contaminated soil removal and disposal, site preparation, underground stormwater retention, circulation enhancements and structured parking. Altogether, Agenda Item No. 3A – PLACE-Wooddale Station TIF Distruct Plan Conformance to Comprehensive Plan Page 3 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 these costs exceed $9.5 million and prevent the project from achieving financial feasibility. Consequently PLACE applied to the EDA for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance to offset a portion of these costs. Tax increment financing uses the increased future property taxes generated by a new development to finance certain qualified development costs incurred by that project for a limited period of time. Level and Type of Financial Assistance PLACE’s sources and uses statements, cash flow projections, and investor rate of return (ROR) related to each component of the PLACE project were reviewed by staff and Ehlers (the EDA’s financial consultant). Based upon its analysis of the PLACE project proformas, Ehlers determined that the PLACE project is not financially feasible but/for the provision of $5.66 million in tax increment financing. The assistance would be provided in the form of a TIF Note and would be made available to exclusively reimburse PLACE for a portion of the extraordinary site preparation costs cited above. Providing TIF assistance to the proposed redevelopment makes it possible to: construct a transit- oriented, highly sustainable project consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; bring the subject properties to optimal market value; provide the community with additional housing choices (both market rate and affordable); and create new employment opportunities and significant tax base. Such assistance would represent less than 5% of total project costs and is in-line with other similar mixed-use developments the EDA has aided in the past. Upon project completion, tax increment generated from the increased value of the property would be provided to the Developer on a "pay-as-you-go" basis, which is the preferred financing method under the City's TIF Policy. Upon completion, the proposed project would generate the requested assistance in approximately 15 years. Property Value and Taxes and Employment All the parcels in the proposed redevelopment site are currently tax exempt. The total taxable market value of these parcels (estimated for establishing the proposed TIF district’s base value) is currently pending but an earlier estimate had established the district’s base value at $8.7 million (which is likely high). The total taxable market value of the site upon redevelopment is projected to be approximately $61.6 million. Most of the new value would be captured as tax increment and used to make payments on the TIF Note until it is paid off and the TIF district is decertified. It is estimated that PLACE would generate over $1,063,000 in total property taxes annually. The City, County and School District would receive the property taxes collected on the subject site’s Base Value. The project is estimated to generate a total of $631,976 in gross tax increment annually. Once the TIF Note is retired, the additional property taxes generated by the project would be paid to the local taxing jurisdictions. It should be noted that the value of the project could be much higher than the estimated $61.6 million once it is assessed for tax purposes. This was a conservative value utilized only for estimating the amount of TIF the project would generate. Should the value of the project at the time of completion be higher than the estimated amount, the principal amount of the TIF Note would be paid back sooner than the projected 15 years and local taxing jurisdictions would receive the benefit of having the full value for tax purposes sooner than anticipated. Agenda Item No. 3A – PLACE-Wooddale Station TIF Distruct Plan Conformance to Comprehensive Plan Page 4 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 The proposed project is expected to create 118.5 new FTE living wage jobs in the city. TIF Application Review The EDA/City Council reviewed PLACE’s TIF Application for the proposed PLACE project at the February 13th and April 3rd Study Sessions. Following discussion there was consensus support for favorably considering the Developer’s request for tax increment assistance. As a result, staff was directed to call for a public hearing on the proposed Redevelopment TIF District and to begin drafting a formal purchase and redevelopment contract with PLACE. TIF District Approvals At its March 20th meeting, the City Council set a public hearing date of May 1, 2017 for consideration of the proposed Redevelopment TIF District. The EDA and City Council will consider the approval of the purchase and redevelopment contract that same evening. Proposed Redevelopment TIF District The subject site is located within the City’s Redevelopment Project Area which is the portion of the city where the EDA may statutorily establish TIF districts. In order to provide the proposed PLACE project with tax increment a new Redevelopment TIF District needs to be established. Such a TIF district could allow up to 26 years of tax increment. As shown in the attached TIF District maps, the proposed Wooddale Station TIF District consists of the following nine parcels: • 5925 State Hwy No 7 • 5815 State Hwy No 7 • 5725 State Hwy No 7 • 3520 Yosemite Ave S • 3565 Wooddale Ave • 3548 Xenwood Ave S • 3575 Wooddale Ave • 5816 36th St W • 5814 36th St W The 5925 Highway 7 property currently lies within the Elmwood TIF District. Therefore, that property will need to be decertified from the Elmwood TIF District in order to include it in the proposed Wooddale Station TIF District. The proposed Wooddale Station TIF District meets the necessary statutory requirements of a Redevelopment TIF District as determined by LHB architects in its report: Report of Inspection Procedures and Results for Determining Qualifications of a Tax Increment Financing District as a Redevelopment District: Highway 7 and Wooddale TIF District St. Louis Park, Minnesota dated November 22, 2016. Additional details pertaining to the proposed Wooddale Station TIF District may be found in the attached TIF Plan. Agenda Item No. 3A – PLACE-Wooddale Station TIF Distruct Plan Conformance to Comprehensive Plan Page 5 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Is the proposed Redevelopment TIF district in conformance with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the city? The intent of the Mixed Use land use designation and the City’s Livable Communities design principles is to create compact, pedestrian-scale, mixed-use buildings, typically with retail, service or other commercial uses on the ground floor and residential or office uses on upper floors. Mixed-use is intended to accommodate mixed-income housing, a mix of housing types on the same block, and higher density development. The subject site is suitable for the proposed mixed-use redevelopment and multiple-family housing. The Comprehensive Plan also calls for an increase in the availability of neighborhood housing choices, mixed-use redevelopment, a connected community and transit-oriented development. The proposed PLACE redevelopment is a mixed-use project that provides a higher density apartment housing, (including affordable units), a hotel, ground floor commercial spaces, and live/work units in a building that enhances the street frontage along 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue as they demonstrate principles of pedestrian- and transit-oriented development. It also incorporates E-generation/co-generation/greenhouse facility, a one acre “urban forest”, a green roof, car/bike sharing, shuttle, and car-free living incentives, underground parking, additional sidewalks and a “woonerf/place-making plaza” making the project sustainable, connected, walkable and multi-modal. All of these proposed uses will be allowed through the proposed PUD rezoning Thus, the proposed project as specified in the attached TIF Plan conforms to the land use designation within the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan for the subject site. On March 15th the Planning Commission recommended approval of PLACE’s application for a Comprehensive Plan 2030 Land Use Map Amendment, Preliminary and Final Plat, Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development subject to the conditions recommended by Staff. On April 17th the City Council will consider approving the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment and the First Reading of Ordinance adding Section 36-268-PUD 9 to the Zoning Code and amending the Zoning Map from IG-General Industrial and MX-Mixed Use to PUD 9 for the property located at the southeast quadrant of highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue and the northeast corner of West 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue, and set the second reading for May 1, 2017. Upon final approval the proposed project is allowable under the City’s Zoning Ordinance. The Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act requires planning commissions to determine if a proposed TIF district is in conformance with its city’s Comprehensive Plan. In light of the information presented above, the Planning Commission is being asked to find that the proposed Wooddale Station TIF District Plan conforms to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the city. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed resolution finding that the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan for the establishment of Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District conform to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City. Agenda Item No. 3A – PLACE-Wooddale Station TIF Distruct Plan Conformance to Comprehensive Plan Page 6 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Attachments: • Resolution of Approval • Wooddale Station TIF District Map • Land Use Map • Tax Increment Financing Plan for Wooddale Station TIF District Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Agenda Item No. 3A – PLACE-Wooddale Station TIF Distruct Plan Conformance to Comprehensive Plan Page 7 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 90 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 AND A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE WOODDALE STATION TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT CONFORM TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY. WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "EDA") and the City of St. Louis Park (the "City") have proposed to adopt a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Redevelopment Plan Modification") and a Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (the "TIF Plan") therefor (the Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Plans") and have submitted the Plans to the City Planning Commission (the "Commission") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subd. 3, and WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the Plans to determine their conformity with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as described in the comprehensive plan for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that the Plans conform to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Adopted by the St. Louis Park Planning Commission April 19, 2017 ATTEST: Lisa Peilen, Chair Sean Walther Planning and Zoning Supervisor ´ Wooddale Station TIF District Legend Wooddale Station TIF District Redevelopment Project Area No 1 Parcels March 14, 2017 Prepared by the St. Louis Park Community Development Department 0.45 0 0.450.225 Miles Proposed TIF District 3575 Wooddale Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-0024 5618 36th St W PID: 16-117-21-34-0041 5814 36th St W PID: 16-117-21-34-0042 3565 Wooddale Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-0069 3548 Xenwood Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-00765816357558143565 5925 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0071 5815 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0079 5725 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0078 3520 Yosemite Ave PID: 16-117-21-31-0031 5925 5725 5815 3520 3548 36TH ST W HIGHWAY 7HAMILTON ST 37TH ST W HIGHWAY 100 SWALKE R S T ´ Wooddale Station TIF District Legend Road Centerlines Parcels Proposed TIF District March 14, 2017 Prepared by the St. Louis Park Community Development Department 330 0 330165 FeetWo o d d a l e A v e ¯0 450 900 Feet Comprehensive Plan2030 Land Use Map Proposed 2030 Land Use MX Mixed Use Legend CompPlan30 RL - Low Density Residential RM - Medium Density Residential RH - High Density Residential MX - Mixed Use OFC - Office BP - Business Park CIV - Civic RRR - Railroad 36th Street West Wo o d d a l e A v e Wooddale LRT Station Site Location As of April 12, 2017 Draft for Planning Commission Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (a redevelopment district) within Redevelopment Project No. 1 St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County State of Minnesota Public Hearing: May 1, 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 Redevelopment Project No. 1 ........................................... 1-1 Foreword ............................................................. 1-1 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District ....................... 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........... 2-4 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 ........................................... 2-6 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................................ 2-11 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.............................................. 2-16 Appendix A Project Description ...................................................... A-1 Appendix B Map of Redevelopment Project No. 1 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 Redevelopment Qualifications for the District .................................. F-1 Appendix G Findings Including But/For Qualifications..................................... G-1 Section 1 - Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 Foreword The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. Generally, the substantive changes include the establishment of Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 is recommended. It is available from the Economic Development Coordinator at the City of St. Louis Park. Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within Redevelopment Project No. 1. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 1-1 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Subsection 2-1. Foreword The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "EDA"), the City of St. Louis Park (the "City"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (the "District"), a redevelopment tax increment financing district, located in Redevelopment Project No. 1. 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 EDA and City have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ("M.S."), Sections 469.090 to 469.1082, 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 Redevelopment Project No. 1. Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives The District currently consists of ten parcels of land and adjacent and internal rights-of-way. The District is being created to facilitate the development of approximately 200 affordable apartment units, 99 market rate apartment units, a 110 room hotel, 16,261 square feet of commercial property, and 10,800 square feet of a greenhouse/e-generation facility in the City. Please see Appendix A for further District information. The EDA has not entered into an agreement but anticipates entering into an agreement with PLACE, a 501(c)3 nonprofit corporation. Development is likely to occur in late 2017 or early 2018. This TIF Plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. 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 Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the District. Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview 1. Property to be Acquired - The EDA or City currently owns ten parcels of property within the District. The remaining property located within the District may be acquired by the EDA 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 EDA 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 EDA 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. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-1 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 EDA 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 EDA 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 EDA 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 EDA and City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended, inclusive, find that the District, to be established, is a redevelopment district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10(a)(1) as defined below: (a) "Redevelopment district" means a type of tax increment financing district consisting of a project, or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that one or more of the following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists: (1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; (2) The property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used rail yards, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way; (3) tank facilities, or property whose immediately previous use was for tank facilities, as defined in Section 115C, Subd. 15, if the tank facility: (i) have or had a capacity of more than one million gallons; (ii) are located adjacent to rail facilities; or (iii)have been removed, or are unused, underused, inappropriately used or infrequently used; or (4) a qualifying disaster area, as defined in Subd. 10b. (b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-2 (c) A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs or other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard. (d) A parcel is deemed to be occupied by a structurally substandard building for purposes of the finding under paragraph (a) or by the improvement described in paragraph (e) if all of the following conditions are met: (1) the parcel was occupied by a substandard building or met the requirements of paragraph (e), as the case may be, within three years of the filing of the request for certification of the parcel as part of the district with the county auditor; (2) the substandard building or the improvements described in paragraph (e) were demolished or removed by the authority or the demolition or removal was financed by the authority or was done by a developer under a development agreement with the authority; (3) the authority found by resolution before the demolition or removal that the parcel was occupied by a structurally substandard building or met the requirement of paragraph (e) and that after demolition and clearance the authority intended to include the parcel within a district; and (4) upon filing the request for certification of the tax capacity of the parcel as part of a district, the authority notifies the county auditor that the original tax capacity of the parcel must be adjusted as provided by § 469.177, subdivision 1, paragraph (f). (e) For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. (f) For districts consisting of two or more noncontiguous areas, each area must qualify as a redevelopment district under paragraph (a) to be included in the district, and the entire area of the district must satisfy paragraph (a). In meeting the statutory criteria the EDA and City rely on the following facts and findings: • The District is a redevelopment district consisting of ten parcels. • An inventory shows that parcels consisting of more than 70 percent of the area in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. • An inspection of the buildings located within the District finds that more than 50 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix F). St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-3 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 EDA or City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The EDA 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 EDA or City reserves the right to decertify the District prior to 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 2016 for taxes payable 2017. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 2019) 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 EDA or City. The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2017, assuming the request for certification is made before June 30, 2017. 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 Redevelopment Project No. 1, upon completion of the projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table below. The EDA 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. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-4 Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $1,332,706 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) $84,410 Fiscal Disparities Contribution $146,425 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $1,101,871 Original Local Tax Rate 1.24745 Pay 2017 Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $1,374,529 Percent Retained by the EDA 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 $327,802. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the EDA shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building permit was issued. The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District and found some building permits that have been issued in the past 18 months, but none that should increase the original tax capacity. 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 EDA 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 bond issue, pay-as-you-go note, and interfund loan. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification. This provision does not obligate the EDA or City to incur debt. The EDA 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 $24,189,701 Interest $2,418,970 TOTAL $26,608,671 The EDA 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 $16,998,906. 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. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-5 Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate the development of approximately 200 affordable apartment units, 99 market rate apartment units, a 110 room hotel, 16,261 square feet of commercial property, and 10,800 square feet of a greenhouse/e-generation facility in the City. The EDA and City have determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District costs, as described. The EDA 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 TAX INCREMENT FUNDS TOTAL Land/Building Acquisition $6,547,600 Site Improvements/Preparation $2,830,000 Utilities $1,700,000 Other Qualifying Improvements $3,502,336 Administrative Costs (up to 10%)$2,418,970 PROJECT COST TOTAL $16,998,906 Interest $9,609,765 PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $26,608,671 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. 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 Redevelopment Project No. 1, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of the District) subject to the limitations as described in this TIF Plan. Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, the EDA 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 St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-6 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 EDA 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). 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 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999; St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-7 (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; (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 EDA 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 EDA 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 EDA or City within forty- five days of receipt of this TIF Plan. In the opinion of the EDA 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 EDA 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 EDA 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: St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-8 IMPACT ON TAX BASE 2016/Pay 2017 Total Net Tax Capacity Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) Upon Completion Percent of CTC to Entity Total Hennepin County 1,573,060,731 1,101,871 0.0700% City of St. Louis Park 60,531,990 1,101,871 1.8203% St. Louis Park ISD No. 283 57,161,713 1,101,871 1.9276% IMPACT ON TAX RATES Pay 2017 Extension Rates Percent of Total CTC Potential Taxes Hennepin County 0.440870 35.34% 1,101,871 485,782 City of St. Louis Park 0.478610 38.37% 1,101,871 527,366 St. Louis Park ISD No. 283 0.217400 17.43% 1,101,871 239,547 Other 0.110570 8.86%1,101,871 121,834 Total 1.247450 100.00%1,374,529 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 actual Pay 2017 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2017 rates, assuming certification of the District is made before June 30, 2017. 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 $24,189,701; (2) Probable impact of the District on city provided services and ability to issue debt. A minor 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. The City estimates an increase of 50 to 100 calls per year based on development population estimates. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment. The development will be incorporated into police district operations. 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, which will be eliminated by the new development, have public safety concerns that will be ameliorated by the new development. 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 St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-9 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 $2,485 in sanitary sewer (SAC) fees per unit and $750 in water (WAC) connection fees per WAC unit. 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. (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 $4,216,265; (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 $8,548,640; (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 EDA and City's findings: • Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study (2003) 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 St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-10 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); 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 EDA 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 EDA 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, 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 EDA 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 EDA 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 EDA 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). St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-11 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 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 EDA 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 St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-12 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 EDA or City or a property owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately May 2021 and report such actions to the County Auditor. Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment The EDA 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 the cost of redevelopment of the Redevelopment Project No. 1 pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.090 to 469.1082; 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 EDA or City or for the benefit of Redevelopment Project No. 1 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. 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 EDA for the Tax Increment Fund of said District. The EDA 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 EDA 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 EDA or City must spend or return the excess increments under paragraph (c) within nine months after St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-13 the end of the year. In addition, the EDA or City may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in Redevelopment Project No. 1 or the District. Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer The EDA 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 EDA or City to demonstrate the conformance of the development with City plans and ordinances. The EDA 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 EDA 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 EDA or City concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the EDA or City should the development or redevelopment not be completed. Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the EDA 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 Economic Development Coordinator. Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subds. 5, 6, and 6b the EDA 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 St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-14 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 EDA 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 the cost of redevelopment of the Redevelopment Project No. 1 pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.090 to 469.1082. 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 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. Tax increments derived from the District shall be deemed to have satisfied the 75 percent test set forth in paragraph (2) above only if the five year rule set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 3, has been satisfied; and beginning with the sixth year following certification of the District, 75 percent of said tax increments that remain after expenditures permitted under said five year rule must be used only to pay previously committed expenditures or credit enhanced bonds as more fully set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 5. 4. Redevelopment District. At least 90 percent of the revenues derived from tax increment from a redevelopment district must be used to finance the cost of correcting conditions that allow designation of redevelopment and renewal and renovation districts under M.S., Section 469.176 Subd. 4j. These costs include, but are not limited to, acquiring properties containing structurally substandard buildings or improvements or hazardous substances, pollution, or contaminants, acquiring adjacent parcels necessary to provide a site of sufficient size to permit development, demolition and rehabilitation of structures, clearing of the land, the removal of hazardous substances or remediation necessary for development of the land, and installation of utilities, roads, sidewalks, and parking facilities for the site. The allocated administrative expenses of the EDA or City, including the cost of preparation of the development action response plan, may be included in the qualifying costs. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-15 Subsection 2-28. Summary The St. Louis Park Economic Development 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. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-16 Appendix A Project Description Nonprofit developer, PLACE, intends to redevelop the parcels in the District into a mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented, and environmentally sustainable development. Project components include two apartment buildings with a total of 299 residential units (200 affordable and 99 market rate), a 110-room hotels, a 10,800 square feet a greenhouse/e-generation facility and approximately 16,261 square feet of retail space. The City intends to issue a PAYGO TIF Note to offset qualified costs related to redevelopment of the site. Appendix A-1 Appendix B Map of Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the District Appendix B-1 ´ Wooddale Station TIF District Legend Wooddale Station TIF District Redevelopment Project Area No 1 Parcels March 14, 2017 Prepared by the St. Louis Park Community Development Department 0.45 0 0.450.225 Miles Proposed TIF District 3575 Wooddale Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-0024 5618 36th St W PID: 16-117-21-34-0041 5814 36th St W PID: 16-117-21-34-0042 3565 Wooddale Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-0069 3548 Xenwood Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-00765816357558143565 5925 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0071 5815 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0079 5725 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0078 3520 Yosemite Ave PID: 16-117-21-31-0031 5925 5725 5815 3520 3548 36TH ST W HIGHWAY 7HAMILTON ST 37TH ST W HIGHWAY 100 SWALKE R S T ´ Wooddale Station TIF District Legend Road Centerlines Parcels Proposed TIF District March 14, 2017 Prepared by the St. Louis Park Community Development Department 330 0 330165 FeetWo o d d a l e A v e 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 16-117-21-31-0079 5815 State Hwy No. 7 City of St. Louis Park 16-117-21-31-0078 5725 State Hwy No. 7 St. Louis Park EDA 16-117-21-31-0002 3520 Yosemite Ave S Hennepin County RRA 16-117-21-31-0071 5925 State Hwy No. 7 St. Louis Park EDA 16-117-21-34-0041 5816 36th St W City of St. Louis Park 16-117-21-34-0042 5814 36th St W City of St. Louis Park 16-117-21-34-0069 3565 Wooddale Ave Hennepin County RRA 16-117-21-31-0076 3548 Xenwood Ave S Hennepin County RRA ROW 16-117-21-34-0024 3575 Wooddale Ave City of St. Louis Park Appendix C-1 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District Appendix D-1 3/29/2017Base Value Assumptions - Page 1Woodale Station - PLACE DevelopmentCity of St. Louis Park200 Affordable Apts; 99 Market Rate Apts; 110 Unit Hotel; 16,261 sf Commercial; 10,800 sf Greenhouse/E-GenerationASSUMPTIONS AND RATESDistrictType:RedevelopmentDistrict Name/Number:County District #:Exempt Class Rate (Exempt)0.00%First Year Construction or Inflation on Value2018Commercial Industrial Preferred Class Rate (C/I Pref.)Existing District - Specify No. Years RemainingFirst $150,0001.50%Inflation Rate - Every Year:3.00%Over $150,0002.00%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 Ending1-Feb-20Affordable Rental Housing Class Rate (Aff. Rental)Tax Year District was Certified:Pay 2017First $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 Increment2045First $500,0001.00%Fiscal Disparities Election [Outside (A), Inside (B), or NA]Inside(B)Over $500,0001.25%Incremental or Total Fiscal DisparitiesIncrementalHomestead Residential Class Rate (Hmstd. Res.)Fiscal Disparities Contribution Ratio32.6027% Pay 2017 First $500,0001.00%Fiscal Disparities Metro-Wide Tax Rate150.0490% Pay 2017 Over $500,0001.25%Maximum/Frozen Local Tax Rate: 124.745% Pay 2017 Agricultural Non-Homestead1.00%Current Local Tax Rate: (Use lesser of Current or Max.)124.745%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)0.19126% Pay 2017 Building Total PercentageTax Year Property CurrentClassAfterLandMarket Market Of Value Used Original OriginalTaxOriginalAfterConversionMap # PIDOwner Address Market Value ValueValue for District Market Value Market Value Class Tax Capacity Conversion Orig. Tax Cap.11611721310079City of SLP 5815 Hwy 7115,2000 115,200100% 115,200 Pay 2017 Exempt- Exempt- 11611721310078SLP EDA5725 Hwy 7 2,477,0001,000 2,478,00027% 669,060 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental8,363 11611721310078SLP EDA5725 Hwy 7 2,477,0001,000 2,478,00063% 1,561,140 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental11,709 11611721310078SLP EDA5725 Hwy 7 2,477,0001,000 2,478,00010% 247,800 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.4,206 11611721310002HC RRA3520 Yosemite43,500043,50027%11,745 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental147 11611721310002HC RRA3520 Yosemite43,500043,50063%27,405 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental206 11611721310002HC RRA3520 Yosemite43,500043,50010%4,350 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.65 11611721310071SLP EDA5925 Hwy 7 1,761,0000 1,761,00070% 1,232,700 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental15,409 11611721310071SLP EDA5925 Hwy 7 1,761,0000 1,761,00030% 528,300 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.9,816 21611721340041City of SLP 5816 36th St W 348,0000 348,00041% 142,680 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental1,784 31611721340041City of SLP 5816 36th St W 348,0000 348,00059% 205,320 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental1,540 31611721340042City of SLP 5814 36th St W 343,5000 343,50041% 140,835 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental1,760 31611721340042City of SLP 5814 36th St W 343,5000 343,50059% 202,665 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental1,520 31611721340069 HC RRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00020% 236,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental2,950 31611721340069 HC RRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00030% 354,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental2,655 31611721340069 HC RRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00020% 236,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.3,970 4a1611721340069 HC RRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00030% 354,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.6,330 4b1611721310076HC RRA3548 Xenwood Ave 86,900086,90041%35,629 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental445 31611721310076HC RRA3548 Xenwood Ave 86,900086,90059%51,271 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental385 3ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40015%48,960 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental612 3ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40022%71,808 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental539 3ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40013%42,432 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.636 3ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40050% 163,200 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.2,514 4b1611721340024City of SLP3575 Wooddale417,5000 417,50060% 250,500 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.4,260 4a1611721340024City of SLP3575 Wooddale417,5000 417,50040% 167,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.2,590 4b19,408,100 211,000 19,619,1007,100,000 084,410Note:1. Base values provided by City Assessor on 3-17-17.Area/ PhaseTax Rates1098 BASE VALUE INFORMATION (Original Tax Capacity)245673Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\St. Louis Park\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\Wooddale Station TIF District\TIF Plan Run 3-27-17 - Final 3/29/2017Base Value Assumptions - Page 3Woodale Station - PLACE DevelopmentCity of St. Louis Park200 Affordable Apts; 99 Market Rate Apts; 110 Unit Hotel; 16,261 sf Commercial; 10,800 sf Greenhouse/E-GenerationEstimated Taxable Total Taxable PropertyPercentage Percentage Percentage Percentage First YearMarket Value Market Value Total Market Tax Project Project Tax Completed Completed Completed Completed Full TaxesArea/Phase New Use Per Sq. Ft./Unit Per Sq. Ft./Unit Sq. Ft./UnitsValueClass Tax CapacityCapacity/Unit 2018201920202021 Payable1Apartments 180,000180,000 66 11,880,000 Rental148,5002,250 50%100%100%100%20211Aff Apartments 160,000160,000 152 24,320,000Aff. Rental 148,200975 50%100%100%100%20211Bike Shop 150150 2,484 372,600 C/I Pref.6,7023 50%100%100%100%20211 Maker Space 150150 2,724 408,600C/I8,1723 50%100%100%100%20212E-Gen2020 10,800 216,000 C/I Pref.3,5700 50%100%100%100%20213Apartments 180,000180,000 285,040,000 Rental63,0002,250 50%100%100%100%20213 Live/Work Apts 180,000180,000 5900,000 Rental11,2502,250 50%100%100%100%20213Live/Work Retail150150 1,250 187,500C/I3,7503 50%100%100%100%20213Aff Apartments 160,000160,000 487,680,000Aff. Rental 46,800975 50%100%100%100%20213 Co-Working 150150 3,986 597,900C/I11,9583 50%100%100%100%20214aHotel85,00085,000 110 9,350,000 C/I Pref. 186,2501,693 50%100%100%100%20214bCafé/Coffee Shop150150 5,817 872,550C/I17,4513 50%100%100%100%2021TOTAL61,825,150 655,603 Subtotal Residential299 49,820,000 417,750 Subtotal Commercial/Ind.27,171 12,005,150 237,853 Note:1. Market values are based upon discussion with Assessor on 1-31-17. The apartment values assume all units have access to the same amenities and features. Total Fiscal Local Local Fiscal State-wide MarketTax Disparities Tax PropertyDisparities PropertyValueTotal Taxes PerNew UseCapacityTax CapacityCapacityTaxesTaxesTaxesTaxesTaxes Sq. Ft./UnitApartments 148,5000148,500 185,2460022,722 207,968 3,151.03Aff Apartments 148,2000148,200 184,8720046,514 231,387 1,522.28Bike Shop 6,7022,1854,5175,6353,2793,07071312,6965.11Maker Space 8,1722,6645,5086,8713,9983,74378115,3935.65E-Gen 3,5701,1642,4063,0011,7461,6354136,7960.63Apartments 63,000063,000 78,589009,64088,229 3,151.03Live/Work Apts 11,250011,250 14,034001,72115,755 3,151.03Live/Work Retail 3,7501,2232,5273,1531,8351,7183597,0635.65Aff Apartments 46,800046,800 58,3810014,689 73,069 1,522.28Co-Working 11,9583,8998,05910,0545,8505,4771,14422,5245.65Hotel 186,250 60,723 125,527 156,589 91,114 85,30617,883 350,892 3,189.93Café/Coffee Shop17,4515,68911,762 14,6728,5377,9931,66932,8715.65TOTAL 655,603 77,547 578,056 721,097 116,358 108,941 118,247 1,064,643Note: 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 Taxes1,064,643Current Market Value - Est.7,100,000less State-wide Taxes(108,941)New Market Value - Est.61,825,150less Fiscal Disp. Adj.(116,358) Difference54,725,150less Market Value Taxes(118,247)Present Value of Tax Increment13,561,004less Base Value Taxes(91,312) Difference41,164,146Annual Gross TIF 629,785Value likely to occur without Tax Increment is less than:41,164,146 WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM TIF?MARKET VALUE BUT / FOR ANALYSISTAX CALCULATIONSPROJECT INFORMATION (Project Tax Capacity)Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\St. Louis Park\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\Wooddale Station TIF District\TIF Plan Run 3-27-17 - Final 3/29/2017Tax Increment Cashflow - Page 3Woodale Station - PLACE DevelopmentCity of St. Louis Park200 Affordable Apts; 99 Market Rate Apts; 110 Unit Hotel; 16,261 sf Commercial; 10,800 sf Greenhouse/E-GenerationTAX INCREMENT CASH FLOWProject Original Fiscal CapturedLocal Annual Semi-Annual State Admin.Semi-Annual Semi-Annual PERIOD% of TaxTax Disparities TaxTax Gross Tax Gross Tax AuditoratNet Tax Present ENDING Tax PaymentOTC Capacity Capacity Incremental CapacityRate Increment Increment 0.36%10% Increment Value Yrs. Year Date- - - - 02/01/20100% 327,802 (84,410) (27,562) 215,830 124.745% 269,237 134,618 (485) (13,413) 120,720 116,033 0.52020 08/01/20100% 327,802 (84,410) (27,562) 215,830 124.745% 269,237 134,618 (485) (13,413) 120,720 229,790 12020 02/01/21100% 655,603 (84,410) (66,335) 504,858 124.745% 629,785 314,893 (1,134) (31,376) 282,383 490,668 1.52021 08/01/21100% 655,603 (84,410) (66,335) 504,858 124.745% 629,785 314,893 (1,134) (31,376) 282,383 746,431 22021 02/01/22100% 675,271 (84,410) (68,662) 522,200 124.745% 651,418 325,709 (1,173) (32,454) 292,083 1,005,792 2.52022 08/01/22100% 675,271 (84,410) (68,662) 522,200 124.745% 651,418 325,709 (1,173) (32,454) 292,083 1,260,068 32022 02/01/23100% 695,529 (84,410) (71,058) 540,062 124.745% 673,700 336,850 (1,213) (33,564) 302,074 1,517,885 3.52023 08/01/23100% 695,529 (84,410) (71,058) 540,062 124.745% 673,700 336,850 (1,213) (33,564) 302,074 1,770,647 42023 02/01/24100% 716,395 (84,410) (73,526) 558,459 124.745% 696,650 348,325 (1,254) (34,707) 312,364 2,026,894 4.52024 08/01/24100% 716,395 (84,410) (73,526) 558,459 124.745% 696,650 348,325 (1,254) (34,707) 312,364 2,278,117 52024 02/01/25100% 737,887 (84,410) (76,068) 577,409 124.745% 720,289 360,144 (1,297) (35,885) 322,963 2,532,771 5.52025 08/01/25100% 737,887 (84,410) (76,068) 577,409 124.745% 720,289 360,144 (1,297) (35,885) 322,963 2,782,432 62025 02/01/26100% 760,024 (84,410) (78,686) 596,927 124.745% 744,637 372,319 (1,340) (37,098) 333,880 3,035,471 6.52026 08/01/26100% 760,024 (84,410) (78,686) 596,927 124.745% 744,637 372,319 (1,340) (37,098) 333,880 3,283,550 7202602/01/27100% 782,824 (84,410) (81,383) 617,031 124.745% 769,715 384,858 (1,385) (38,347) 345,125 3,534,954 7.52027 08/01/27100% 782,824 (84,410) (81,383) 617,031 124.745% 769,715 384,858 (1,385) (38,347) 345,125 3,781,430 82027 02/01/28100% 806,309 (84,410) (84,161) 637,738 124.745% 795,546 397,773 (1,432) (39,634) 356,707 4,031,182 8.52028 08/01/28100% 806,309 (84,410) (84,161) 637,738 124.745% 795,546 397,773 (1,432) (39,634) 356,707 4,276,036 92028 02/01/29100% 830,498 (84,410) (87,022) 659,066 124.745% 822,152 411,076 (1,480) (40,960) 368,637 4,524,118 9.52029 08/01/29100% 830,498 (84,410) (87,022) 659,066 124.745% 822,152 411,076 (1,480) (40,960) 368,637 4,767,335 102029 02/01/30100% 855,413 (84,410) (89,969) 681,034 124.745% 849,556 424,778 (1,529) (42,325) 380,924 5,013,732 10.52030 08/01/30100% 855,413 (84,410) (89,969) 681,034 124.745% 849,556 424,778 (1,529) (42,325) 380,924 5,255,297 112030 02/01/31100% 881,076 (84,410) (93,005) 703,661 124.745% 877,782 438,891 (1,580) (43,731) 393,580 5,499,994 11.52031 08/01/31100% 881,076 (84,410) (93,005) 703,661 124.745% 877,782 438,891 (1,580) (43,731) 393,580 5,739,893 122031 02/01/32100% 907,508 (84,410) (96,131) 726,967 124.745% 906,855 453,427 (1,632) (45,180) 406,616 5,982,878 12.52032 08/01/32100% 907,508 (84,410) (96,131) 726,967 124.745% 906,855 453,427 (1,632) (45,180) 406,616 6,221,099 132032 02/01/33100% 934,733 (84,410) (99,351) 750,972 124.745% 936,800 468,400 (1,686) (46,671) 420,042 6,462,360 13.52033 08/01/33100% 934,733 (84,410) (99,351) 750,972 124.745% 936,800 468,400 (1,686) (46,671) 420,042 6,698,891 142033 02/01/34100% 962,775 (84,410) (102,668) 775,697 124.745% 967,643 483,822 (1,742) (48,208) 433,872 6,938,419 14.52034 08/01/34100% 962,775 (84,410) (102,668) 775,697 124.745% 967,643 483,822 (1,742) (48,208) 433,872 7,173,251 152034 02/01/35100% 991,658 (84,410) (106,085) 801,164 124.745% 999,412 499,706 (1,799) (49,791) 448,116 7,411,036 15.52035 08/01/35100% 991,658 (84,410) (106,085) 801,164 124.745% 999,412 499,706 (1,799) (49,791) 448,116 7,644,159 162035 02/01/36100% 1,021,408 (84,410) (109,604) 827,395 124.745% 1,032,133 516,067 (1,858) (51,421) 462,788 7,880,194 16.52036 08/01/36100% 1,021,408 (84,410) (109,604) 827,395 124.745% 1,032,133 516,067 (1,858) (51,421) 462,788 8,111,601 172036 02/01/37100% 1,052,050 (84,410) (113,228) 854,412 124.745% 1,065,837 532,918 (1,919) (53,100) 477,900 8,345,878 17.52037 08/01/37100% 1,052,050 (84,410) (113,228) 854,412 124.745% 1,065,837 532,918 (1,919) (53,100) 477,900 8,575,562 182037 02/01/38100% 1,083,612 (84,410) (116,961) 882,241 124.745% 1,100,551 550,276 (1,981) (54,829) 493,465 8,808,077 18.52038 08/01/38100% 1,083,612 (84,410) (116,961) 882,241 124.745% 1,100,551 550,276 (1,981) (54,829) 493,465 9,036,032 192038 02/01/39100%1,116,120 (84,410) (120,806) 910,904 124.745% 1,136,307 568,154 (2,045) (56,611) 509,497 9,266,778 19.52039 08/01/39100% 1,116,120 (84,410) (120,806) 910,904 124.745% 1,136,307 568,154 (2,045) (56,611) 509,497 9,493,001 202039 02/01/40100% 1,149,604 (84,410) (124,767) 940,427 124.745% 1,173,136 586,568 (2,112) (58,446) 526,011 9,721,975 20.52040 08/01/40100% 1,149,604 (84,410) (124,767) 940,427 124.745% 1,173,136 586,568 (2,112) (58,446) 526,011 9,946,460 212040 02/01/41100% 1,184,092 (84,410) (128,846) 970,836 124.745% 1,211,069 605,535 (2,180) (60,335) 543,019 10,173,660 21.52041 08/01/41100% 1,184,092 (84,410) (128,846) 970,836 124.745% 1,211,069 605,535 (2,180) (60,335) 543,019 10,396,404 222041 02/01/42100% 1,219,615 (84,410) (133,048) 1,002,157 124.745% 1,250,140 625,070 (2,250) (62,282) 560,538 10,621,827 22.52042 08/01/42100% 1,219,615 (84,410) (133,048) 1,002,157 124.745% 1,250,140 625,070 (2,250) (62,282) 560,538 10,842,829 232042 02/01/43100% 1,256,203 (84,410) (137,376) 1,034,417 124.745% 1,290,384 645,192 (2,323) (64,287) 578,582 11,066,473 23.52043 08/01/43100% 1,256,203 (84,410) (137,376) 1,034,417 124.745% 1,290,384 645,192 (2,323) (64,287) 578,582 11,285,732 242043 02/01/44100% 1,293,889 (84,410) (141,833) 1,067,646 124.745% 1,331,835 665,917 (2,397) (66,352) 597,168 11,507,596 24.52044 08/01/44100% 1,293,889 (84,410) (141,833) 1,067,646 124.745% 1,331,835 665,917 (2,397) (66,352) 597,168 11,725,111 252044 02/01/45100% 1,332,706 (84,410) (146,425) 1,101,871 124.745% 1,374,529 687,265 (2,474) (68,479) 616,311 11,945,196 25.52045 08/01/45100% 1,332,706 (84,410) (146,425) 1,101,871 124.745% 1,374,529 687,265 (2,474) (68,479) 616,311 12,160,966 262045 02/01/46 Total24,277,098 (87,398) (2,418,970) 21,770,731 Present Value From 08/01/2019 Present Value Rate 4.00%13,561,004 (48,820) (1,351,218) 12,160,966 Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\St. Louis Park\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\Wooddale Station TIF District\TIF Plan Run 3-27-17 - Final Appendix E Minnesota Business Assistance Form (Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development) A Minnesota Business Assistance Form (MBAF) should be used to report and/or update each calendar year's activity by April 1 of the following year. Please see the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) website at http://www.deed.state.mn.us/Community/subsidies/MBAFForm.htm for information and forms. Appendix E-1 Appendix F Redevelopment Qualifications for the District To be added to prior to the public hearing Appendix F-1 Appendix G Findings Including But/For Qualifications To be added to prior to the public hearing But-For Analysis Current Market Value 7,100,000 New Market Value - Estimate 61,825,150 Difference 54,725,150 Present Value of Tax Increment 13,561,004 Difference 41,164,146 Value Likely to Occur Without TIF is Less Than: 41,164,146 Appendix G-1 Planning Commission Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Agenda Item #4A 4A. Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s 2501 State Highway 100 Case No.: 17-12-CUP Applicant: Benilde-St. Margaret’s School (BSM) Recommended Action: Chair to close public hearing. Motion to recommend approval of a Major Amendment to the Special Permit to allow a building expansion at Benilde-St. Margaret’s (BSM) school with conditions recommended by staff. Comprehensive Plan: Civic Zoning: R-1 Single-Family Residence REQUEST: BSM is requesting an amendment to its existing Special Permit to add approximately 2,200 square feet of flex space within its building and to convert approximately 4,700 square feet of storage space into classroom space. LOCATION: Agenda Item No. 4A Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 2 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 ZONING ANALYSIS – SPECIAL PERMIT MAJOR AMENDMENT: Proposal: BSM is proposing to amend its Special Permit to: 1. Convert a courtyard into flex space. The courtyard is located within the existing building footprint of the school, so the addition does not expand the existing outer perimeter of the school building. The subject courtyard is pictured below. 2. Remodel storage space into science labs. The storage space is located in the basement level adjacent to the proposed courtyard infill project. Background: BSM has been part of the St. Louis Park community since 1956. The site was originally owned by the Christian Brothers, who started Benilde as an all-boys school. In 1974 Benilde merged with the Minneapolis all-girls school St Margaret’s, forming the basis for the current school. BSM has changed over time, as has the land surrounding the school. Single family housing developed to the north and south of the school, with some multi-family housing developed adjacent to the school’s southeast border. Today BSM has approximately 1,140 students, and does not plan to increase enrollment. The proposed improvements are meant to improve the quality of the facility, science labs, and classroom experience. Zoning Regulations: Educational facilities are a Conditional Use in the R-1 Single-Family Residence district. However, BSM operates under a Special Permit that was first approved in 1985, and has been amended several times since. BSM was last before the City in 2008/9 for a Major Amendment to its Special Permit to improve its athletic fields. Building Design: The conversion of the interior courtyard into finished flex space will require interior remodeling, including modification to interior walls. The only portion of the improvement visible from outside the building will be the roof. The roof will be 30 feet high, which is the Agenda Item No. 4A Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 3 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 maximum allowed in the R-1 district. It will extend 15 feet above the existing school roof, but still be approximately five feet below the roof of the auditorium, which is located adjacent to the proposed addition. As the picture illustrates, the interior walls will be extended above the existing roof line. The walls will be constructed of glass to allow natural light into the flex space within. Lights within the flex space will be down cast, so the light emanating from the new windows should be similar in appearance to other windows throughout the building. The new glass wall will step in approximately 10 feet from the existing exterior wall. Parking: A parking study was completed as part of the 2008/9 Special Permit amendment to improve the athletic fields. At the time BSM had a total of 544 spaces, 386 spaces on-site and 158 spaces under contract with Beth-El Synagogue, which is located across Barry Street. As a result of the Special Permit improvements, BSM added 46 spaces on-site, which increased the total available parking spaces to 590 (432 on-site and 158 at Beth-El). The study also showed that the total parking required by the city zoning ordinance was 363 spaces. The conversion of the lab space requires an additional 46 spaces per the zoning ordinance, bringing the required parking total up to 409 spaces, which is fewer than the 432 spaces provided on-site, and well short of the 590 spaces provided when the Beth-El spaces are included. Lighting: Exterior site lighting will not be added to the site. As mentioned above, the new roof over the proposed flex space will have glass skylights to bring natural light into the space. At night, interior lighting will be visible through the windows, but the interior lights will be downcast, and will not be directed out of the windows. So the windows should be similar in appearance as other windows throughout the school. Additionally, the lights will be on only when this section of the school is occupied. Otherwise, lighting will be reduced to basic security levels when the space is unoccupied. Agenda Item No. 4A Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 4 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 The elevation drawing above shows a cross affixed to the windows. The windows and cross face south east toward the BSM athletic fields and parking lot. While the cross will not be internally illuminated or illuminated by flood-light, it will be backlit to provide a faint halo effect around the perimeter of the cross. A concern was expressed by a resident about this at the first neighborhood meeting, and it was further discussed at the second neighborhood meeting. At the second meeting, BSM explored ideas of having the cross on the same timer as the parking lot lighting, so it would only be illuminated while the parking lot lights are on. This seemed to be acceptable to the residents at the second meeting. It should be noted that the resident that expressed the concern at the first meeting was not present at the second meeting. Neighborhood Meeting: BSM conducted two neighborhood meetings. The first meeting was with the neighborhood committee. This is a small group of BSM officials, BSM neighbors appointed to the committee by the neighborhood, and a city liaison. They meet several times throughout the year to discuss projects and daily operation of the school grounds. The project was presented and lighting discussed. As noted above, the illuminated cross was expressed as a concern. A concern was also expressed that the glass walls will impact the native wildlife, particularly the birds. BSM is considering a slight tint to the windows that is similar to the tinting of other windows used throughout the school. The tinting would reduce the amount of internal lighting visible through the window, and also reduce the amount of heat coming into the building during the summer months resulting from the natural sunlight. The second neighborhood meeting was conducted specifically for this application, and persons from five households and one person from Beth-El attended. The project was presented, and Agenda Item No. 4A Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 5 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 lighting was discussed. As noted above, the illuminated cross was a concern, but residents seemed amenable to it being on the same timer as the parking lot. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Major Amendment of the Benilde-St. Margaret’s Special Permit to convert the interior courtyard into student space, and to remodel existing storage space into science labs, subject to the following site specific conditions: 1. The cross facing the southeast may be illuminated by back-lighting only to produce a halo effect. Floodlights or similar lights shall not be used to illuminate it. The lighting shall be turned off at the same time the parking lot lights are turned off. 2. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. 3. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed. Attachments: Aerial Photo Construction Plans Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner Agenda Item No. 4A Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 6 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Aerial Photo Agenda Item No. 4A Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 7 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 CONSTRUCTION PLANS EXISTING CONSTRUCTION EARTH CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE PRECAST CONCRETE CONCRETE BLOCK/CMU SAND GRAVEL, BALLAST BITUMINOUS STONE BRICK STEEL, METAL STUD PLYWOOD FINISH WOOD ROUGH WOOD PARTICLE BOARD/O.S.B. BATT INSULATION RIGID INSULATION FOAM INSULATION CAST STONE PLASTER GYPSUM BOARD ACOUSTIC CEILING TILE MATERIALS ABBREVIATIONS ABV ABOVE ACP ACOUSTICAL CEILING PANEL AFF ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR ALUM ALUMINUM BLDG BUILDING BLKG BLOCKING BO BOTTOM OF BP BID PACKAGE BRKT BRACKET CIP CAST IN PLACE CLG CEILING CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CONC CONCRETE CONT CONTINUOUS COOR COORDINATE CT CERAMIC TILE CW CURTAIN WALL DETL DETAIL DIA DIAMETER DIM DIMENSIONS DN DOWN DSP DOWN SPOUT EA EACH EJ EXPANSION JOINT EL ELEVATION ELEC ELECTRICAL EQ EQUAL EQPT EQUIPMENT EXIST EXISTING EXP EXPOSED EXT EXTERIOR FAF FLUID APPLIED FLOOR FD FLOOR DRAIN FDN FOUNDATION FE FIRE EXTINGUISHER FF FINISH FLOOR FIN FINISH FLR FLOOR FO FACE OF FV FIELD VERIFY FTG FOOTING GALV GALVANIZED GC GENERAL CONTRACTOR GWB GYPSUM WALL BOARD HM HOLLOW METAL HT HEIGHT ID INSIDE DIAMETER INSUL INSULATION INT INTERIOR JT JOINT KO KNOCK OUT LOC LOCATION MAX MAXIMUM MECH MECHANICAL MFR MANUFACTURER MIN MINIMUM MNTD MOUNTED MO MASONRY OPENING MP METAL PANEL MR MOISTURE RESISTANT MTL METAL MULL MULLION NIC NOT IN CONTRACT NOM NOMINAL NTS NOT TO SCALE OC ON CENTER OD OUTSIDE DIAMETER OFD OVER FLOW DRAIN OFS OVER FLOW SCUPPER OH OVERHEAD PC PRECAST PLAM PLASTIC LAMINATE PLYWD PLYWOOD PREFIN PREFINISHED PT PAINT RAD RADIUS RD ROOF DRAIN RDL ROOF DRAIN LEADER REINF REINFORCED/REINFORCING REQ REQUIRED REV REVERSE RM ROOM RO ROUGH OPENING SHT SHEET SIM SIMILAR SLR SEALED CONCRETE SP SPACE SS SOLID SURFACE SSTL STAINLESS STEEL STL STEEL STRUCT STRUCTURE TAC TEXTURED ACRYLIC COATING TEMP TEMPORARY TO TOP OF TS TUBE STEEL TYP TYPICAL UG UNDERGROUND UNO UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE VB VINYL BASE VERT VERTICAL VFY VERIFY VR VAPOR RETARDER W/ WITH WD WOOD WM WALK-OFF MAT WS WINDOWSHADE SYMBOLS 1 A101 SIM 1 A101 SIM 1 A101 SIM BUILDING SECTION MARKER WALL SECTION MARKER DETAIL MARKER 1 A101 SIM DETAIL MARKER 1 A101 SIM BUILDING ELEVATION MARKER INTERIOR ELEVATION MARKERA600 2 0 BUILDING GRID LINE A101 1 SIM VIEW CALLOUT LEVEL 0'-0" HEIGHT MARKER X WALL TYPE DESIGNATOR KEYNOTE DESIGNATOR WINDOW TAG CW / SF TAG CENTER LINE X MOUNTING HEIGHT DESIGNATOR REVISION DESIGNATOR DOOR TAG ?100GL-X CW / SF PANEL TAG 31 4 1i LOCATION MAP COURTYARD GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH SCHOOL STANDARDS AND ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY DESIGNATED ROUTES, STAGING METHODS AND SCHEDULES FOR DELIVERY, STORAGE, AND REMOVAL OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND DEBRIS WITH OWNERS AS REQUIRED. CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR DAMAGED SURFACES. 3. PARTIAL OWNER OCCUPANCY: CONSTRUCTION TO OCCUR SUMMER/FALL 2017. OWNER WILL OCCUPY THE PREMISES DURING ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD WITH THE EXCEPTION OF AREAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. COORDINATE WITH OWNER DURING CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS TO MINIMIZE CONFLICTS AND FACILITATE OWNER USAGE. PERFORM THE WORK SO AS NOT TO INTERFERE WITH OWNER'S OPERATIONS. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SITE PROTECTION AND SUBMIT STAGING PLANS, PHASING PLANS AND SCHEDULES PRIOR TO START OF WORK. 4. MATERIALS SHALL BE PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY THE CONTRACTOR UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS. REPORT ALL DISCREPANCIES TO ARCHITECT PRIOR TO STARTING. 6. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR QUALITY OF DRAWINGS REPRODUCED FROM ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT HARD COPIES OR DIGITAL FILES. 7. REMOVE, REPAIR AND REINSTALL DAMAGED ELECTRICAL FIXTURES. VERIFY QUANTITIES AND TYPE WITH OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 8. MATERIALS TO REMAIN TO BE PROTECTED AS REQUIRED FROM DAMAGE. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REPAIR/ REPLACEMENT OF DAMAGED MATERIALS TO LIKE NEW CONDITION. 9. WHERE MATCH EXISTING IS INDICATED, PROVIDE NEW MATERIAL AS NECESSARY TO PATCH, EXTEND, OR REPLACE EXISTING MATERIAL. UNLESS AN EXCEPTION IS NOTED, NEW MATERIAL SHALL MATCH EXISTING IN ALL ASPECTS. 10. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF ALL MATERIALS AND SYSTEMS NECESSARY FOR INSTALLATION OF NEW CONSTRUCTION SYSTEMS. 11. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY GRID LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO STARTING CONSTRUCTION AND REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES TO ARCHITECT/OWNER. 12. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR CUTTING/PATCHING AS REQUIRED FOR NEW M/E/P. 13. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGE DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING ELEMENTS. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE REPAIR/ REPLACEMENT/ RESTORATION AS DETERMINED BY ARCHITECT/OWNER. PROJECT TEAM OWNER Benilde St. Margaret's School 2501 MN-100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 PH: (952) 927-4176 ARCHITECT Miller Dunwiddie Architecture 123 North Third Street, Suite104 MIinneapolis, MN 55401 PH: (612) 337-0000 FAX: (612) 337-0031 STRUCTURAL ENGINEER BKBM Engineers 5930 Brooklyn Blvd Minneapolis, MN 55429 PH: (763) 843-0420 MECH / ELEC ENGINEER Emanuelson Podas Inc. 7705 Bush Lake Road Edina, MN 55439 PH: (952) 930 - 0050 CONTRACTOR Opus Group 10350 Bren Rd W. Minnetonka, MN 55343 PH: (952) 656-4444 INDERIOR DESIGNER InUnison Design 275 Market Street, Suite 469 Minneapolis, MN 55405 PH: (612) 659-1775 C CHECKED: DRAWN: DATE: COMM. NO.:Project No.: Date: Drawn By: Checked By: 2017 Miller Dunwiddie Architecture, Inc. DRAWING TITLE: DRAWING NUMBER PROJECT: REVISED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Signature Name Date License # xxx JULY 1, 2010 xxx FULL SIZE SHEET: 24" X 36" T100 TITLE SHEET BSM1603 Issue Date EKK KPM Benilde-St. Margaret's School 2501 MN - 100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 Benilde-St. Margaret's School ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 SHEET INDEX TITLE T100 TITLE SHEET GENERAL G100 CODE PLAN OVERALL G101 BASEMENT LEVEL CODE PLAN G102 FIRST LEVEL CODE PLAN G200 PARTITION TYPES DEMOLITION D100 BASEMENT LEVEL DEMOLITION PLAN D101 FIRST LEVEL DEMOLITION PLAN ARCHITECTURAL A100 BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN A101 FIRST LEVEL PLAN A130 ENLARGED FLOOR PLANS A150 BASEMENT LEVEL REFLECTED CEILING PLAN A151 FIRST LEVEL REFLECTED CEILING PLAN A170 ROOF PLAN A200 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A300 BUILDING SECTIONS A330 WALL SECTIONS A350 PLAN DETAILS A400 STAIR PLANS, SECTIONS, DETAILS A401 STAIR RAILING ELEVATIONS A600 BASEMENT LEVEL FINISH PLAN A601 FIRST LEVEL FINISH PLAN A630 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS A631 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS A632 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS STRUCTURAL S000 TITLE SHEET S100 BASEMENT/ FOUNDATION PLAN S101 MAIN LEVEL FRAMING PLAN S102 LOW ROOF FRAMING PLAN S103 HIGH ROOF FRAMING PLAN S200 SECTION AND DETAILS S201 WALL SECTIONS S300 SECTION AND DETAILS S301 SECTION AND DETAILS S310 SECTION AND DETAILS S311 SECTION AND DETAILS S400 SCHEDULES AND DETAILS Mark Date Issue ENTRY COURTYARD AND SCIENCE CLASSROOMS C CHECKED: DRAWN: DATE: COMM. NO.:Project No.: Date: Drawn By: Checked By: 2017 Miller Dunwiddie Architecture, Inc. DRAWING TITLE: DRAWING NUMBER PROJECT: REVISED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Signature Name Date License # xxx JULY 1, 2010 xxx FULL SIZE SHEET: 24" X 36" G100 CODE PLAN OVERALL BSM1603 Issue Date EKK KPM Benilde-St. Margaret's School 2501 MN - 100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 Mark Date Issue PROJECT AREA IN BASEMENT LEVEL: REMODEL EXISTING SPACE AND INFILL EXISTING COURTYARD (NEW SQUARE FOOTAGE NOTED ABOVE) PROJECT AREA IN FIRST FLOOR: INFILL EXISTING COURTYARD (2244 GSF) ND4 D1 D1 D3 D2 D1 D1D1D1 D1 SALVAGE FOR REINSTALLATION DEMO PLAN KEY NOTES D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 D11 D12 NEW OPENING IN EXISTING FOUNDATION WALL - COORDINATE W/ STRUCTURAL REMOVE EXISTING DOORS REMOVE EXISTING UPS SYSTEM, SALVAGE FOR RELOCATION TO FIRST FLOOR EXCAVATE EXISTING COURTYARD AS NEEDED FOR NEW FOOTINGS AND FOUNDATIONS - COORDINATE WITH STRUCTURAL REMOVE PART OF BENCH REMOVE EXISTING VCT FLOOR IN LOBBY AND CORRIDOR REMOVE ARCHED LINTEL UP TO CLG TO BE REPLACED WITH FLAT LINTEL TO MATCH ADJ OPENING C CHECKED: DRAWN: DATE: COMM. NO.:Project No.: Date: Drawn By: Checked By: 2017 Miller Dunwiddie Architecture, Inc. DRAWING TITLE: DRAWING NUMBER PROJECT: REVISED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Signature Name Date License # xxx JULY 1, 2010 xxx FULL SIZE SHEET: 24" X 36" D100 BASEMENT LEVEL DEMOLITION PLAN BSM1603 Issue Date Author Checker Benilde-St. Margaret's School 2501 MN - 100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 1/8" = 1'-0"D100 4D BASEMENT LEVEL DEMOLITION PLAN PROJECT NORTH Mark Date Issue NSTR U CT U R AL F R A MIN G, F O U N D ATIO N, A N D R O O F T O R E M AIN U.N.O. R E M O VE EXISTIN G B RIC K LIN K W ALL - D1 D5 D6 D6 D6 D6 D7 ABOVE DEMO PLAN KEY NOTES D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 D11 D12 NEW OPENING IN EXISTING FOUNDATION WALL - COORDINATE W/ STRUCTURAL REMOVE EXISTING DOORS REMOVE EXISTING UPS SYSTEM, SALVAGE FOR RELOCATION TO FIRST FLOOR EXCAVATE EXISTING COURTYARD AS NEEDED FOR NEW FOOTINGS AND FOUNDATIONS - COORDINATE WITH STRUCTURAL REMOVE PART OF BENCH REMOVE EXISTING VCT FLOOR IN LOBBY AND CORRIDOR REMOVE ARCHED LINTEL UP TO CLG TO BE REPLACED WITH FLAT LINTEL TO MATCH ADJ OPENING C CHECKED: DRAWN: DATE: COMM. NO.:Project No.: Date: Drawn By: Checked By: 2017 Miller Dunwiddie Architecture, Inc. DRAWING TITLE: DRAWING NUMBER PROJECT: REVISED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Signature Name Date License # xxx JULY 1, 2010 xxx FULL SIZE SHEET: 24" X 36" D101 FIRST LEVEL DEMOLITION PLAN BSM1603 Issue Date Author Checker Benilde-St. Margaret's School 2501 MN - 100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 1/8" = 1'-0"D101 4D FIRST LEVEL DEMO PROJECT NORTH Mark Date Issue UP NA350 2B 2D A300 2B A300 A632 4B A130 1 1D A330 1 5 2 3 4 A632 2B 5 4 5 4 4 5 1 6 1 66 2 3 10987 6' - 0" +/- P2P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 H1 H1 H1 H1 H1 H1H1 H1 H1 A630A630 6E6D6C A631 6E 7' - 4"2' - 0"8' - 0"6' - 0"8' - 0"2' - 0"7' - 4"8' - 8"7' - 4"2' - 0"8' - 0"8' - 0" A350 3D A350 1D A401 4A 2D A330 3D A330 CLR. 3' - 2" M.O.M.O.M.O.M.O.M.O.M.O. 145°90°1 7 0° 1 7 0 °145°90°17 1 1 8 19 95-1 95-2 95-3 95-4 95-5 95-A 95-B 95-C 95-D FLOOR PLAN KEY NOTES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 EMERGENCY EYEWASH & SHOWER DUAL-SIDED FUME HOOD FUME HOOD LOCKERS COAT RACK WHITE BOARD ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT - COORDINATE W/ ELECTRICAL DI SINK DISHWASHER EQUIPMENT, N.I.C. GLASS GUARDRAIL IN 48" MAX SEGMENTS FURR OUT EXISTING WALL SURFACES RELOCATE UPS SYSTEM - COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL COORDINATE DUCT WORK LOCATION WITH MECH 42" HIGH CMU WALL COVERED WITH GYP BD EXTENDING 15" BEYOND RAMP AT BOTH ENDS. GYP BD CAP AT A.F.F. HOT WATER HEATER - COORDINATE W/ MECHANICAL STAINLESS STEEL HANDRAIL AT STAIRS, MOUNTED TO POURED CONCRETE WALL METAL STAIR RAILING AND HANDRAIL19 GENERAL NOTES 1. NOTE 1 2. NOTE 2 C CHECKED: DRAWN: DATE: COMM. NO.:Project No.: Date: Drawn By: Checked By: 2017 Miller Dunwiddie Architecture, Inc. DRAWING TITLE: DRAWING NUMBER PROJECT: REVISED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Signature Name Date License # xxx JULY 1, 2010 xxx FULL SIZE SHEET: 24" X 36" A100 BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN BSM1603 Issue Date EKK KPM Benilde-St. Margaret's School 2501 MN - 100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 1/8" = 1'-0"A100 4D BASEMENT LEVEL PROJECT NORTH Mark Date Issue DN GENERAL NOTES 1. NOTE 1 2. NOTE 2 A 2 0 0 3 A 2D A300 2B A300 A632 4B 1D A330 1 5 2 3 4 A632 2B N11 11 11 12 TYP. 12 12 14 13 148' - 0" CLR.A 6 3 2 4 D 15 C2 P2 P2 11 16 P3 A401 1B5' - 0"2D A330 3D A330 DN A401 4C A 401 3 C A 4 0 12C A401 1C A401 4A A401 2A A401 1A P2 1 8 19 95-1 95-1 95-2 95-3 95-4 95-5 95-A 95-B 95-C 95-D 145°90°1 7 0° 1 7 0 °145°90°FLOOR PLAN KEY NOTES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 EMERGENCY EYEWASH & SHOWER DUAL-SIDED FUME HOOD FUME HOOD LOCKERS COAT RACK WHITE BOARD ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT - COORDINATE W/ ELECTRICAL DI SINK DISHWASHER EQUIPMENT, N.I.C. GLASS GUARDRAIL IN 48" MAX SEGMENTS FURR OUT EXISTING WALL SURFACES RELOCATE UPS SYSTEM - COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL COORDINATE DUCT WORK LOCATION WITH MECH 42" HIGH CMU WALL COVERED WITH GYP BD EXTENDING 15" BEYOND RAMP AT BOTH ENDS. GYP BD CAP AT A.F.F. HOT WATER HEATER - COORDINATE W/ MECHANICAL STAINLESS STEEL HANDRAIL AT STAIRS, MOUNTED TO POURED CONCRETE WALL METAL STAIR RAILING AND HANDRAIL19 C CHECKED: DRAWN: DATE: COMM. NO.:Project No.: Date: Drawn By: Checked By: 2017 Miller Dunwiddie Architecture, Inc. DRAWING TITLE: DRAWING NUMBER PROJECT: REVISED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Signature Name Date License # xxx JULY 1, 2010 xxx FULL SIZE SHEET: 24" X 36" A101 FIRST LEVEL PLAN BSM1603 Issue Date EKK KPM Benilde-St. Margaret's School 2501 MN - 100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 1/8" = 1'-0"A101 4D FIRST LEVEL PROJECT NORTH Mark Date Issue A 2 0 0 3 A 1,040 SF FLAT EPDM ROOF 340 SF FLAT EPDM ROOF 590+ SF SLOPED EPDM ROOF 550 SF FLAT EPDM ROOF 1 5 2 3 4 NA200 3B A200 4C FLAT EPDM ROOF NOTE: NEW ROOF TOP UNITS FOR REFERENCE ONLY. SEE MECHANICAL. A200 4B A 2 0 0 4 A 3D A330 95-1 95-2 95-3 95-4 95-5 95-A 95-B 95-C 95-D C CHECKED: DRAWN: DATE: COMM. NO.:Project No.: Date: Drawn By: Checked By: 2017 Miller Dunwiddie Architecture, Inc. DRAWING TITLE: DRAWING NUMBER PROJECT: REVISED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Signature Name Date License # xxx JULY 1, 2010 xxx FULL SIZE SHEET: 24" X 36" A170 ROOF PLAN BSM1603 Issue Date EKK KPM Benilde-St. Margaret's School 2501 MN - 100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 1/8" = 1'-0"A170 4D ROOF PLAN PROJECT NORTH Mark Date Issue EXST ROOF OVER CLASSRMS 110' - 6" FIRST LEVEL 100' - 0" MID LEVEL 102' - 6" TOP OF MASONRY 116' - 0" NEW ROOF 2 126' - 6" NEW ROOF 1 121' - 1 1/2" T.O. NEW ROOF 3 131' - 6"4' - 5 1/2"4' - 5 1/2"5' - 1 1/2"9' - 3"5' - 4 1/2"5 TOP OF MASONRY 116' - 0" NEW ROOF 2 126' - 6" NEW ROOF 1 121' - 1 1/2" T.O. NEW ROOF 3 131' - 6" EXST ROOF OVER CLASSRMS 110' - 6" 1 TOP OF MASONRY 116' - 0" NEW ROOF 2 126' - 6" NEW ROOF 1 121' - 1 1/2" T.O. NEW ROOF 3 131' - 6" 95-1 66' - 8 1/2" +/- 11' - 6" +/-3' - 7"5' - 8 3/4"3' - 10"TOP OF MASONRY 116' - 0" NEW ROOF 2 126' - 6" NEW ROOF 1 121' - 1 1/2" T.O. NEW ROOF 3 131' - 6"2' - 7 3/4"3' - 1"7' - 8 1/2"26' - 0" +/- TOP OF MASONRY 116' - 0" NEW ROOF 2 126' - 6" NEW ROOF 1 121' - 1 1/2" T.O. NEW ROOF 3 131' - 6"3' - 10"36' - 9 1/32" +/- C CHECKED: DRAWN: DATE: COMM. NO.:Project No.: Date: Drawn By: Checked By: 2017 Miller Dunwiddie Architecture, Inc. DRAWING TITLE: DRAWING NUMBER PROJECT: REVISED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Signature Name Date License # xxx JULY 1, 2010 xxx FULL SIZE SHEET: 24" X 36" A200 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BSM1603 Issue Date Author Checker Benilde-St. Margaret's School 2501 MN - 100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 1/8" = 1'-0"A200 3A EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"A200 4C PARAPET ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"A200 3B WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"A200 4A CLERESTORY ELEVATION 2 1/8" = 1'-0"A200 4B CLERESTORY ELEVATION 1 Mark Date Issue EXST ROOF OVER CLASSRMS 110' - 6" FIRST LEVEL 100' - 0" MID LEVEL 102' - 6" TOP OF MASONRY 116' - 0" NEW ROOF 2 126' - 6" NEW ROOF 1 121' - 1 1/2" T.O. NEW ROOF 3 131' - 6"4' - 5 1/2"4' - 5 1/2"5' - 1 1/2"9' - 3"5' - 4 1/2"30' - 0" MAX TO AVG. GRADEGRADE 101' - 6" AVERAGE GRADE EXST ROOF OVER CLASSRMS 110' - 6" 1 TOP OF MASONRY 116' - 0" NEW ROOF 2 126' - 6" NEW ROOF 1 121' - 1 1/2" T.O. NEW ROOF 3 131' - 6" 95-1 66' - 8 1/2" +/- 11' - 6" +/-3' - 7"5' - 8 3/4"3' - 10" 1/8" = 1'-0"A200 3A EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"A200 3B WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION EXST ROOF OVER CLASSRMS 110' - 6" FIRST LEVEL 100' - 0" MID LEVEL 102' - 6" TOP OF MASONRY 116' - 0" NEW ROOF 2 126' - 6" NEW ROOF 1 121' - 1 1/2" T.O. NEW ROOF 3 131' - 6"4' - 5 1/2"4' - 5 1/2"5' - 1 1/2"9' - 3"5' - 4 1/2"30' - 0" MAX TO AVG. GRADEGRADE 101' - 6" AVERAGE GRADE EXST ROOF OVER CLASSRMS 110' - 6" 1 TOP OF MASONRY 116' - 0" NEW ROOF 2 126' - 6" NEW ROOF 1 121' - 1 1/2" T.O. NEW ROOF 3 131' - 6" 95-1 66' - 8 1/2" +/- 11' - 6" +/-3' - 7"5' - 8 3/4"3' - 10" 1/8" = 1'-0"A200 3A EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"A200 3B WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION Planning Commission Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Agenda Item #4B 4B. Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness 7210 Minnetonka Boulevard Case No.: 17-11-CUP Applicant: Steven E. Cherney Recommended Action: Chair to close public hearing. Motion to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the Snap Fitness located at 7210 Minnetonka Blvd to operate 24 hours, 7 days a week with conditions recommended by staff. Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Zoning: C-1 Neighborhood Commercial REQUEST: The applicant, Mr. Cherney, is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to operate a Snap Fitness 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The Snap Fitness is located in a small commercial multi-tenant building located at 7210 Minnetonka Blvd. LOCATION: Agenda Item No. 4B Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness Page 2 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 ZONING ANALYSIS – CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Proposed Use: Snap Fitness is currently operating at 7210 Minnetonka Blvd. It is one of four tenants in the building, and it occupies the most westerly tenant space, which is directly adjacent to the mall parking lot. The Applicant opened the Snap Fitness at this location in August of 2016. The hours, however, are limited to 6am to midnight, seven days per week, which is the maximum allowed without a CUP in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. If the CUP is approved, the Applicant will operate 24 hours per day, seven days a week. The applicant relocated the Snap Fitness from its previous location at 5101 Minnetonka Blvd, which is the mixed-use building located to the west of city hall. When Snap Fitness first opened at this location, they were operating 24 hours. During this time, they had a few customers that came in as early as 4am, and customers that stayed as late as 11pm. Very rarely did they have customers between 11pm and 4am. The applicant had to relocate to the current location because the noise and vibration from the use traveled through the structure to the residents above and was a nuisance to the residents not just during the early and late hours, but also during the daytime hours. The applicant moved to the new location as a remedy to that problem. While the applicant is requesting to be open 24 hours, he is expecting the same traffic patterns as experienced at the previous location. Customers will stay as late as 11pm and show up as early as 4am. The 4am customers are typically working out before going to work. The request for the full 24 hours is mostly to satisfy the expectation that a Snap Fitness franchise is open 24 hours as advertised. The applicant is expecting very little use between the hours of 11pm and 4am as shown by the previous location. With regards to the noise and vibration potentially being a nuisance to the tenants in the building, the owner of the property also owns Rose Fashion Optical, which is the only tenant that shares a common wall with Snap Fitness. Snap Fitness has been operating several months at this location, and the city has not received a complaint regarding the noise and vibration. Additionally, the owner signed the CUP application authorizing the applicant’s request to extend the operating hours to 24 hours, seven days a week. Site Plan: A survey is attached that shows the location of Snap Fitness in relation to the property lines. No changes are proposed to the building or site as a result of this application. Agenda Item No. 4B Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness Page 3 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Zoning Regulations: Snap Fitness falls under the “Private Entertainment (Indoor)” land use category, which includes fitness centers (see below). Private entertainment (indoor) means entertainment services provided entirely within an enclosed building. It includes theaters, health or fitness centers, bowling alleys, arcades, roller rinks, and pool halls. Characteristics may include late operating hours, outdoor lighting, noise, and traffic. Snap Fitness was permitted to open in 2016 because the use is permitted with conditions in the C- 1 district, meaning, it can be administratively approved as long as it meets some conditions specific to the use. The conditions state that the use is required to be at least 60 feet from a parcel zoned Residential, and if beer/wine is served, then a separate bar is prohibited. In this case, the portion of the building Snap Fitness is located in is 68 feet from the adjacent parcel which is zoned R-2 Single-Family Residence. Also, beer/wine is not served, so that condition is not applicable. Conditional Use Permit – Hours of Operation. Snap Fitness, however, was not allowed to operate between midnight and 6am because a CUP is required to be open during these hours in the C-1 district. When considering a CUP, the following conditions are required to be met: 1. The business shall have access to a roadway identified as a collector or arterial. 2. Buildings shall be located at least 25 feet from a parcel that is zoned Residential. 3. The use is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Snap Fitness complies with the conditions as explained below: 1. The business shall have access to a roadway identified as a collector or arterial. Snap Fitness has access to both Louisiana Avenue and Minnetonka Boulevard, both of which are designated as arterials, and meet this requirement. 2. Buildings shall be located at least 25 feet from a parcel that is zoned Residential. As noted above, the portion of the building that Snap Fitness is located in is 68 feet from the adjacent parcel zoned R-2 Single-Family Residence. The remaining section of the building is located 45 feet from the same residential parcels. 3. The use is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The property is designated as commercial in the Comprehensive Plan, and a fitness center is consistent with that designation. Conditional Use Permit – General Standards and Conditions. City code includes the following general standards and conditions for the city to consider while reviewing a CUP application: 1. Consistency with plans. It is consistent with and supportive of principles, goals, objectives, land use designations, redevelopment plans, neighborhood objectives, and implementation strategies of the comprehensive plan. The Minnetonka Blvd / Louisiana Ave intersection is identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a neighborhood commercial node. As such, it is an area that provides commercial conveniences to the immediate neighborhood. It is conveniently located so that residents can walk, bike or drive to the businesses. Agenda Item No. 4B Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness Page 4 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 The Comprehensive Plan also goals to be pursued in the commercial areas, including the neighborhood commercial nodes. The goal for neighborhood commercial nodes is: Preserve and revitalize neighborhood commercial nodes that provide essential neighborhood commercial services, unique neighborhood identity, and neighborhood gathering opportunities. Part of preserving and revitalizing neighborhood commercial nodes includes granting the opportunity for businesses to thrive in an environment that is sensitive to the impacts to the adjacent residential neighborhoods. Snap Fitness is conveniently located for the neighborhood, giving them the opportunity to walk and bike to a fitness center instead of having to drive to a commercial center such as Life Time Fitness located at West End. The request to operate 24 hours per day is the standard model for a Snap Fitness. Staff believes it can operate all night at this location without impacting the neighborhood because the noise generated by the business is contained within the building. Additionally the convenient parking for the use which is located closest to the entrance is also located approximately 100 feet away from the closest residents. There is also a privacy fence located between the parking lot and the residents to address noise and vehicle headlights. 2. Nuisance. It is not detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community as a whole. It will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of properties, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, parking facilities on adjacent streets, and values of properties in close proximity to the conditional use. Snap Fitness provides an opportunity for residents to improve their health through exercise. It is a small fitness facility oriented to a smaller neighborhood, as opposed to a large fitness center such as Life Time Fitness that draws from a regional customer base. Therefore, the use generates very little traffic compared to the larger fitness centers. It may be possible that customers may occasionally choose to talk outside the building before or after working out. This noise could become a nuisance if the conversation is prolonged and in a loud voice. As noted above, the residents are approximately 100 feet away from the parking spaces that are most conveniently located to the entrance of the fitness center, and there is a privacy fence between the parking lot and the adjacent residents. So the distance and fence should mitigate most conversations that occur. As noted above, history has shown at the previous location that there is very little activity from 11pm to 4am and typically no activity. 3. Compliance with code. It is consistent with the regulations, intent and purpose of City Code and the zoning district in which the conditional use is located. As noted above, staff believes the Snap Fitness can operate within the conditions required for a CUP to operate 24 hours. C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District - General Conditions. The stated purpose and effect of the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial district is to provide for low-intensity, service-oriented commercial uses for surrounding residential neighborhoods. Limits are placed on the type, size, Agenda Item No. 4B Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness Page 5 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 and intensity of commercial uses in this district to ensure and protect compatibility with adjacent residential areas. As noted above, operating 24 hours in the C-1 district is permitted by CUP as long as it meets conditions specific to this request with the intent of addressing the stated purpose and effect of the C-1 district. The conditions and staffs responses are restated below. 1. The business shall have access to a roadway identified as a collector or arterial. Snap Fitness has access to both Louisiana Avenue and Minnetonka Boulevard, both of which are designated as arterials, and meet this requirement. 2. Buildings shall be located at least 25 feet from a parcel that is zoned Residential. As noted above, the portion of the building that Snap Fitness is located in is 68 feet from the adjacent parcel zoned R-2 Single-Family Residence. The remaining section of the building is located 45 feet from the same residential parcels. 3. The use is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The property is designated as commercial in the Comprehensive Plan, and a fitness center is consistent with that designation. In addition to the conditions specific to the CUP request to operate 24 hours, the C-1 district also has general considerations that need to be addressed during the review of the application. They are as follows: 1. Consistency with service capacity. It will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities, services or improvements which are either existing or proposed. The applicant relocated to this site to address numerous complaints regarding noise and vibration traveling to the residential condominiums located in the floors above the fitness facility. The new location has dramatically reduced the impact on government resources by addressing the nuisances generated at the previous location. Utility services are adequate to handle the request. 2. Site design. It is consistent with the design and other requirements of site and landscape plans prepared by or under the direction of a professional landscape architect or civil engineer registered in the state and adopted as part of the conditions imposed on the use by the city council. No changes are proposed to the site. 3. Consistency with utilities. It is consistent with the City’s stormwater, sanitary sewer, and water plans. The request does not impact the City’s stormwater, sanitary sewer, and water plans. 4. Conditions specific to site. It complies with all conditions imposed by the City Council and listed within the conditional use permit. Agenda Item No. 4B Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness Page 6 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Staff is recommending approval of the requested CUP with conditions. The conditions are listed below, and it is expected that the applicant will abide by them if they are approved by the council. A summary of the conditions recommended by staff follows: a. Only the fitness center may operate up to 24 hours per day, seven days per week. The CUP needs to be clear that the 24 hour approval is for the fitness center only. If another tenant in the building wishes to extend its hours, then it will have to apply for a separate CUP. b. The fitness center is limited to 2,500 square feet in size, and to the tenant space located at the western end of the building. This condition is intended to address concerns that a large fitness center may generate more traffic in the overnight hours, and therefore, become a nuisance to the neighborhood. c. Customers shall not be allowed to loiter outside the building between the hours of 10pm and 7am. Complaints regarding noise emanating from vehicles or talking between these hours shall be a violation of this conditional use permit. The intent of this condition is to clarify that the city expects the business owner to address complaints resulting from late night/early morning activities occurring outside the building by its customers. It also establishes that the noise is a violation to the CUP, and is therefore, subject to the $750 fine and grounds for revoking the CUP. Noise generated from the Snap Fitness is not discernable from outside the building. The use has been operating at this location since 2016. Complaints have not been registered with the city regarding noise or any other aspect of the business. Nonetheless, staff is recommending a condition of approval that prohibits loitering outside the building between the hours of 10pm and 7am. If the city receives complaints regarding noise within these hours, and the business owner and property owner seem unable or unwilling to address it, then the city may issue administrative citations. The fine for the citation will begin at $750 and double with each violation to a maximum of $2,000 per violation. If a problem persists, then the city can follow the CUP revocation process outlined in city code. Revoking the CUP would reduce the hours of operation back to 6am to midnight. d. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. This condition is standard of all CUPs, and when coupled with condition “c”, it enables the city to pursue violations to noise and other violations. e. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed. This is another standard condition of all CUPs. It states a city code provision that calls for the CUP to be revoked and cancelled if the building is removed. Agenda Item No. 4B Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness Page 7 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a fitness center to operate up to 24 hours per day, seven days per week, subject to the following site specific conditions: 1. Only the fitness center may operate up to 24 hours per day, seven days per week. 2. The fitness center is limited to 2,500 square feet in size, and to the tenant space located at the western end of the building. 3. Customers shall not be allowed to loiter outside the building between the hours of 10pm and 7am. Complaints regarding noise emanating from vehicles or talking between these hours shall be a violation of this conditional use permit. 4. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. 5. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed. Attachments: Aerial Photo Survey Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Agenda Item No. 4B Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness Page 8 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Aerial Photo Agenda Item No. 4B Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness Page 9 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 SURVEY Agenda Item No. 4B Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness Page 10 Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Planning Commission Meeting Date: April 19, 2017 Agenda Item 4C 4C Parkway 25 – Major Amendment to Section 26-268-PUD 7 Case No.: 17-13-PUD Location: 4001 & 4025 Hwy 7 Applicant: Owner: Parkway 25, LLC Parkway 25, LLC Recommended Action: Chair to close public hearing. Motion to recommend approval of Major Amendment to Section 26-268 PUD 7 subject to the conditions recommended by Staff. Review Deadline: 60 Days: 5/21/2017 120 Days: 7/20/2017 REQUEST: Parkway 25, LLC has submitted an application for a Major Amendment to Section 26-268 PUD 7 that established the zoning for the Parkway 25 redevelopment located at 4005, 4015, and 4027 County Road 25 (the former Vescio’s restaurant and Valu Stay Inn). City Council approved the Parkway 25 PUD in September 2016 which allowed for the construction of a five story, mixed-use building with 112 residential units, 8,850 square feet of ground floor commercial space, and parking located in two surface lots and in an underground parking ramp. The original commercial uses included a restaurant and a fitness center. The applicant requests an amendment to the PUD to allow for medical uses and to increase the size of the commercial area from 8,850 square feet to 12,040 square feet. The plan would decrease the west surface parking lot from 25 spaces to 14 spaces to accommodate the additional commercial space, and reduce the east surface parking lot from 30 parking spaces to 29 spaces to install a turn around space. The additional commercial space would be added to the west side of the buildings ground floor. The additional commercial space requires the parking lot to be shifted 5 feet to the west side of the property to allow for increased circulation, resulting in the removal of landscaping on the west property line. Additional landscaping is being installed elsewhere on the site to make up for the removals. The development will still include 112 residential dwelling units and will remain 5 stories in height. The only proposed changes occur on the ground floor of the building. Meeting of April 19, 2017 Page 2 Subject: Parkway 25 SITE LOCATION MAP: SITE INFORMATION: Site Area: 1.574 acres Zoning: PUD – Planned Unit Development Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Neighborhood: Triangle BACKGROUND: City Council approved the Parkway 25 PUD in September 2016 which allowed for the construction of a five story, mixed-use building with 112 residential units, approximately 8,850 square feet of ground floor commercial space, and parking located in two surface lots and in an underground parking ramp. PUD ANALYSIS: Description: The developer requests a major amendment to Section 26-268 PUD 7 of the city’s zoning ordinance which established the zoning for the Parkway 25 development. Meeting of April 19, 2017 Page 3 Subject: Parkway 25 Existing Approved Plans Proposed Plans Commercial Commercial Commercial /Restaurant 5 Units 7 Units 2 Units Commercial Glenhurst Ave Glenhurst Ave Meeting of April 19, 2017 Page 4 Subject: Parkway 25 Zoning Compliance Table: Factor Required Adopted Proposed Use Commercial Mixed Use-Commercial and Residential No Change Lot Area 2.0 acres, or less with City Council approval 1.574 acres No Change Height No maximum with PUD 67 feet No change Building Materials Minimum of 60% Class I materials A: 69.4% Class I B: 62.8% Class I C: 73.4% Class I D: 70.7% Class I E: 71.0% Class I F: 70.5% Class I G: 85.8% Class I H: 68.4% Class I A: 72.6% Class I B: 62.8% Class I C: 73.4% Class I D: 70.7% Class I E: 71.0% Class I F: 70.5% Class I G: 85.8% Class I H: 68.4% Class I Density 50 units/acre, or more with PUD 66.7 units/acre No Change Floor Area Ratio None with PUD 2.09 2.12 Ground Floor Area Ratio N/A 0.2 0.34 Off-Street Parking Residential: 154 spaces • 1 space/bedroom Commercial: 54 spaces • 1 space/200 square feet for commercial (58 spaces) • -10% transit reduction (-6 spaces) Total: 206 spaces required • 159 underground spaces • 55 off-street surface spaces • 16 on-street spaces Total Provided: 230 spaces Total Required: 230 spaces • 159 underground spaces • 43 off-street surface spaces • 16 on-street spaces Total Provided: 218 spaces Total Required: 206 spaces Bicycle Parking Residential: 127 • 1 space/unit (112 spaces) • 1 space/10 automobile spaces (15.4 spaces) Commercial: 6 • 10% of required vehicle parking Total: 133 spaces • 132 interior bike spaces in underground ramp • 14 exterior bike spaces Total: 146 bike spaces • 130 interior bike spaces in underground ramp • 14 exterior bike spaces Total: 144 bike spaces DORA 12% total lot area 12,187 square feet, 17.7% 12, 626 square feet, 18.4% Landscaping See Landscaping section Setbacks None with PUD Front (North): 0’ Side (East): 14’ Rear (South): varies, 17’- 70’ Side (West): varies 47’- 73’ Front (North): 0’ Side (East): 14’ Rear (South): varies, 17’- 70’ Side (West): varies 47’- 53’ Uses: The proposal includes a mix of commercial and residential amenity space and dwelling units on the ground floor and residential units on floors two through five. The ground level was originally approved with 7 ground floor dwelling units split between the buildings east and west sides and 8,850 square feet of commercial space. The developer proposes moving all ground floor residential units to the building’s east side while modestly reducing the size of those units. The Meeting of April 19, 2017 Page 5 Subject: Parkway 25 applicant proposes commercial space on both the east and west sides of the building: 2,237 gross square feet of commercial space on the building’s east side and 9,785 gross square feet of commercial space on the west side, for a total of 12,040 square feet of commercial space. Height: No changes to height are proposed. Parkway 25 will remain 67 feet and 5 stories tall. Parking: A restaurant use requires more parking than a medical use which reduces the overall parking requirements from 230 parking spaces to 209 parking spaces. The plans include 218 parking spaces and meet the parking requirements for the amended uses. Landscaping: The revised plans decrease the number of trees and plantings on the site due to the shifting of the west parking lot. The plan proposes 87 deciduous trees, 317 shrubs, and 1083 perennials, while the original plan called for 91 deciduous trees, 306 shrubs, and 1,146 perennials. Due to the loss of landscape materials, the applicant worked with the city’s Natural Resource Coordinator to increase the quality and diversity of the tree and plant species. The plans continue to meet the intent of the landscape ordinance. Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA): The proposed development plans illustrate DORA through the inclusion of the 12,626 square feet outdoor space in the rear of the building, including 11,654 square feet for an outdoor recreation plaza and a 972 square foot dog park. The plan exceeds the City’s minimum 12% DORA requirements, and provides approximately 18.4% of DORA. The previous approved plans included 12,187 square feet (17.7%) of DORA space. Public Input: A neighborhood meeting was held on April 6, 2017 to discuss the proposed changes to the uses and ground floor of the building. There was disappointment that a restaurant is no longer part of the proposed development, and there were questions to clarify the location of parking. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends amending Section 26-268 PUD 7 and the Official Exhibits for Parkway 25: 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this ordinance, approved Official Exhibits, and City Code. ATTACHMENTS: • PUD Ordinance Amendment Draft • G000P – Cover Sheet • C0.1 – Site Survey • C0.2 – Final Plat • C1.0 – Removals Plan • C2.0 – Site Plan • C2.1 – Alley Plan and Profile • C3.0 – Grading Plan • C3.1 – Grading Plan - Interim • C4.0 – Utility Plan • C5.0 – Civil Details • C5.1 – Civil Details • C5.2 – Civil Details • SW1.0 – SWPPP – Existing Conditions • SW1.1 – SWPPP – Proposed Conditions • SW1.2 – SWPPP – Narrative and Details • SW1.3 – SWPPP – Attachments • SW1.4 – SWPPP – Attachments • LS100 – Tree Preservation and Replacement Plan • LS300 – Site Landscape Plan • L400 – Reference Plan • L401 – Layout Plan • L500 – Details - Amenity Deck Meeting of April 19, 2017 Page 6 Subject: Parkway 25 • L501 – Details - Amenity Deck • L502 – Details - Amenity Deck • L503 – Details - Amenity Deck • A110P – Floor Plan – Level 1 • A120P – Floor Plan – Level 2-4 • A150P – Floor Plan – Level 5 • A160P – Roof Plan • A200P – Exterior Elevations • A201P – Exterior Elevations • A300P – Building Sections • AS100P – Architectural Site Plan Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, Planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Meeting of April 19, 2017 Page 7 Subject: Parkway 25 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTION 36-268-PUD 7 THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4005, 4015, & 4027 COUNTY ROAD 25 THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 17-13 PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance Section 36-268-PUD 7. Sec. 2. The Comprehensive Plan designates the following described lands as Commercial: Lot 1, Block 1, Parkway 25 Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota Sec. 3. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 36-268-PUD 7 is hereby amended to add the following changes: Section 36-268-PUD 7. (a) Development Plan The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD signed Official Exhibits: 1. C0.0 G000P – Cover Sheet 2. C0.1 – Site Survey 3. C1.0 – Removals Plan 4. C2.0 – Site Plan 5. C2.1 – Alley Plan and Profile 6. C3.0 – Grading Plan 7. C3.1 – Grading Plan Interim 8. C4.0 – Utility Plan 9. C5.0 – Civil Details 10. C5.1 – Civil Details 11. C5.2 – Civil Details 12. SW1.0 – SWPPP – Existing Conditions 13. SW1.1 – SWPPP – Proposed Conditions 14. SW1.2 – SWPPP – Narrative and Details Meeting of April 19, 2017 Page 8 Subject: Parkway 25 15. SW1.3 – SWPPP – Attachments 16. SW1.4 – SWPPP- Attachments 17. L100 – Tree Preservation Plan LS100 – Tree Preservation and Replacement Plan 18. L200 – Preliminary Landscape Plan– LS300 - Site Landscape Plan 19. L400 – Reference Plan 20. L401 – Layout Plan 21. L500 – Planting Details 22. G000 – Cover Sheet 23. A100P – Floor Plan – Level -1 24. A110P – Floor Plan – Level 1 25. A120P – Floor Plan – Level 2-4 26. A150P – Floor Plan – Level 5 27. A160P – Roof Plan 28. A200 – Exterior Elevations A200P – Exterior Elevations 29. A201 – Exterior Elevations A201P – Exterior Elevations 30. AS100 – Architectural Site Plan AS100P – Architectural Site Plan 31. A300P – Building Sections 32. Site Lighting Photometric Plan 33. Zoning Map Amendment Exhibit 34. Preliminary Plat 35. Final Plat 36. Traffic Study 37. Parking Management Plan 38. Parking Agreement The site shall also conform to the following requirements: 1) The property shall be developed with 1112 residential units and 8,850 12,040 square feet of ground floor commercial space. 2) At least 214 202 off-street parking spaces shall be provided. At least 16 on-street parallel parking and loading spaces shall be installed adjacent to the site. An off- street parking management plan shall be approved by the city and managed by the property owner, with the goal of avoiding spill over parking into surrounding Meeting of April 19, 2017 Page 9 Subject: Parkway 25 streets in the neighborhood and maximizing the benefits of mixed use development and shared parking. At least 10% of the parking shall be permitted for use as guest parking. 3) The maximum building height shall not exceed 67 feet and five stories. 4) The development site shall include a minimum of 17.7% percent designed outdoor recreation area based on private developable land area. (b) Permitted Uses (1) Multiple-family dwellings. Uses associated with the multiple-family dwellings, including, but not limited to, the residential office, fitness facility, mail room, assembly rooms or general amenity space are limited to a maximum of 40% of the building first floor. (2) Commercial uses. Commercial uses are only permitted on the first floor, and are limited to the following: medical office, restaurant, office, private entertainment (indoor), retail shops, service, showrooms and studios. a. a. All parking requirements must shall be met for each use. b. b. Hours of operation for commercial uses shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 12 a.m. including commercial deliveries c. No more than 3,950 square feet of gross building floor area shall be used for restaurant. d. c. Each commercial tenant space on the first floor shall have a direct and primary access to the outside of the building on the north building elevation that is open during business hours. e. d. In vehicle sales is prohibited. f. e. Restaurants are prohibited. (3) Civic and institutional uses. Civic and institutional uses are limited to the following: education/academic, library, museums/art galleries, indoor public parks/open space, police service substations, post office customer service facilities, public studios and performance theaters. (c) Accessory Uses Accessory uses are as follows: (1) Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a permitted use and not to exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the associated permitted use. Meeting of April 19, 2017 Page 10 Subject: Parkway 25 (2) Home occupations complying with all of the conditions for home occupations located in the R-C district. (3) Catering, if accessory to food service, delicatessen or retail bakery. (4) Gardens. (5) Parking lots. (6) Public transit stops/shelters. (7) Outdoor seating, public address (PA) systems are prohibited. (8) Outdoor uses and outdoor storage are prohibited. (d) Special Performance Standards (1) All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance shall be met, including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, architectural design, landscaping, parking and screening requirements. (2) All trash, garbage, waste materials, trash containers, and recycling containers shall be kept in the manner required by this Code. All trash handling and loading areas shall be screened from view within a waste enclosure. (3) Signage shall be allowed in conformance with the MX- Mixed Use District requirements found in the sign code. (4) Façade. The following façade design guidelines shall be applicable to all ground floor non-residential facades: a. For street-facing facades, no more than 10% of total window and door area shall be glass block, mirrored, spandrel, frosted or other opaque glass, finishes or material including window painting and signage. The remaining 90% of window and door area shall be clear or slightly tinted glass, allowing views into and out of the interior. b. Visibility into the space shall be maintained for a minimum depth of three feet. This requirement shall not prohibit the display of merchandise. (5) Awnings. a. Awnings must be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass. Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited. Meeting of April 19, 2017 Page 11 Subject: Parkway 25 b. Backlit awnings are prohibited. Sec. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 17-13 PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec. 5. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearing April 19, 2017 First Reading April 24, 2017 Second Reading May 1, 2017 Date of Publication Date Ordinance takes effect Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council ____________ Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney TREE REPLACEMENT CALCULATIONS: x A = Total diameter inches of significant trees lost as a result of land alteration or removal. x B = Total diameter inches of significant trees situated on the land. x C = Tree replacement constant (1.5). x D = Replacement trees (number of caliper inches). x ((A/B)-0.20) x C x A = D ((250/250)-0.20) x 1.5 x 250 = 300 A = 250 B = 250 C = Tree replacement constant (1.5). D = 300 SURVEY AND TREE REMOVAL NOTES: 1. BOUNDARY AND EXISTING TREE INFORMATION TAKEN FROM SURVEY ARE PREPARED BY HARRY S. JOHNSON CO. INC., BLOOMINGTON, MN AND CIVIL SITE GROUP FOR SPECIES IDENTIFICATION. 2. ST. LOUIS PARK NATURAL RESOURCE COORDINATOR PERFORMED A SITE VISIT AND VERIFICATION WITH CIVIL DESIGN GROUP FOR ALL SURVEYED TREES. TREE SPECIES AND CONDITION NOTES ON THIS PLAN. 3. ALL ONSITE TREES ANTICIPATED TO BE REMOVED. 4. SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS OF REPLACEMENT TREES. 5. CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DEFINES *SIGNIFICANT TREE: ANY TREE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SALIX (WILLOW), BOXELDER, SIBERIAN ELM AND BLACK LOCUST IS CONSIDERED TO BE SIGNIFICANT UNDER THE LANDSCAPING SECTION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE IF IT IS AT LEAST FIVE CALIPER INCHES FOR DECIDUOUS TREES AND SIX CALIPER INCHES FOR CONIFERS. ASPEN, COTTONWOOD OR SILVER MAPLE IS CONSIDERED SIGNIFICANT IF IT IS AT LEAST 12 INCHES IN DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT-DBH. EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE REMOVAL - ON SITE TREE REMOVAL LEGEND: x REPLACEMENT REQUIRED = 300 DIA. INCHES x REPLACEMENT PROVIDED IN THE SITE LANDSCAPE PLAN (SEE LS300) = 259.5 DIA. INCHES x x CAL. INCHES BELOW REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENT = 46.5 DJRARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2015 DJR Architecture, IncB 8 333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATEIssue: Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.ACDEFGH 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 4015 CSAH 25 Saint Louis Park, MNTerry Minarik15-066PARKWAY APARTMENTS4224215-066JCTMCLIENTPARKWAY 25, LLC4915 W 35th St, #102Saint Louis Park, MN 55416952.925.3878Project#:Date:Drawnby:Checkedby:CONTRACTORDORAN COMPANIES7803 Glenroy Rd #200,Minneapolis, MN 55439952.288.2000STRUCTURALERICKSEN ROED AND ASSOCIATES2550 University Avenue WSt Paul, MN 55114651-251-7570CIVILCIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35th St. Suite 200Saint Louis Park, MN 55416612-615-0060PUD AMENDMENTLANDSCAPE530 N 3rd St #120Minneapolis, MN 55401612 333-3702MECHANICAL/ ELECTRICALEMMANUELSON- PODAS, INC.7705 Bush Lake Rd,Edina, MN 55439952 930-0050HUD Submittal 07/28/2016Permit 09/23/2016A Permit and HUD Comments 11/16/20164/07/20174/10/2017PUD AMENDMENT3/22/2017ADDENDUM F4/10/2017LS100TREE PRESERVATION AND REPLACEMENT PLANTREE PRESERVATION AND REPLACEMENT PLAN01 LS100 SCALE: 20'40'10'0' 1"=20' F F Xref P:\djr-arch\2015\15-066.00 - Sela Roofing - Vescio's Site Apartments - St. Louis Park, MN\Arch\Consult\Landscape\To\17-0321-Cad\15-066_Parkway25_apederson - Floor Plan - LEVEL 1 - Planning-15-066 Parkway25 Phase II-rvt-1-LEVEL 1 - Planning.dwg FD FD REF. Xref N:\2016\16011MN - Parkway 25 Mixed Use St. Louis Park - DJR\16011MN - AutoCAD\ARCH\16-0912 CAD Background.dwg ALLEY EDGEALLEY EDGE SEE SH E E T S L 4 0 0 - L 4 0 1 F O R A M E NI T Y D E C K A B A SEE 01/LS300 C C C C C C C 17'-4"13'-0"O.C.2'-0"4'-9"O.C.5'-5"16'-0" O.C. 16'-0" O.C. COLUMN 4" FROM FACE OF WALL B C LS300SITE LANDSCAPE PLANPLANTING NOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT THE SITE AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS RELATING TO THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF WORK. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY PLAN LAYOUT AND BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT DISCREPANCIES WHICH MAY COMPROMISE THE DESIGN OR INTENT OF THE LAYOUT. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE WORK AND MATERIALS SUPPLIED. 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT EXISTING ROADS, CURBS/GUTTERS, TRAILS, TREES, LAWNS AND SITE ELEMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS. DAMAGE TO SAME SHALL BE REPAIRED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE THE PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION AND PLANTING INSTALLATION WITH OTHER CONTRACTORS WORKING ON SITE. 6. CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW THE SITE FOR DEFICIENCIES IN SITE CONDITIONS WHICH MIGHT NEGATIVELY AFFECT PLANT ESTABLISHMENT, SURVIVAL OR WARRANTY. UNDESIRABLE SITE CONDITIONS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO BEGINNING OF WORK. 7. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ONGOING MAINTENANCE OF NEWLY INSTALLED MATERIALS UNTIL TIME OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION. REPAIR OF ACTS OF VANDALISM OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY OCCUR PRIOR TO SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. 8. SYMBOLS ON PLAN DRAWING TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCHEDULES IF DISCREPANCIES IN QUANTITIES EXIST. SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER NOTES. 9. SOD ALL AREAS WITHIN CONTRACT LIMITS, NOT COVERED BY PAVING, BUILDINGS, OR PLANTING BEDS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 10. CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE SHREDDED HARDWOOD BARK MULCH AROUND ALL TREES AND IN ALL PLANTING BEDS TO A DEPTH OF 3". 11. KIND, SIZE AND QUALITY OF PLANT MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO AMERICAN STANDARDS FOR NURSERY STOCK, ANSI 260-1992, OR MOST RECENT EDITION. 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPORT SUBSURFACE SOIL OR DRAINAGE PROBLEMS TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SHOW PROOF OF PROCUREMENT, SOURCES, QUANTITIES AND VARIETIES FOR ALL SHRUBS, PERENNIALS, ORNAMENTAL GRASSES, AND ANNUALS WITHIN 21 DAYS FOLLOWING THE AWARD OF CONTRACT. TIMELY PROCUREMENT OF ALL PLANT MATERIAL IS ESSENTIAL TO THE SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION AND INITIAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROJECT. 14. SUBSTITUTIONS SHALL ONLY BE ALLOWED WHEN THE CONTRACTOR HAS EXHAUSTED ALL SOURCES FOR THE SPECIFIED MATERIAL, AND HAS PROVEN THAT THE SPECIFIED MATERIAL IS NOT AVAILABLE. THE CONTRACTOR MUST PROVIDE NAME AND VARIETY OF SUBSTITUTION TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO TAGGING OR PLANTING. SUBSTITUTIONS SHALL BE NEAREST EQUIVALENT SIZE OF VARIETY OF PLANT HAVING SAME ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS. 15. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE NURSERY GROWN, SOUND, HEALTHY, VIGOROUS AND FREE FROM INSECTS, DISEASE AND INJURIES, WITH HABIT OF GROWTH THAT IS NORMAL FOR THE SPECIES. SIZES SHALL BE EQUAL TO OR EXCEEDING SIZES INDICATED ON THE PLANT LIST. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPPLY PLANTS IN QUANTITY AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. 16. STAKE OR PLACE ALL PLANTS IN FIELD AS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS OR AS DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL BY THE OWNER PRIOR TO PLANTING. 10. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AFTER STAKING IS COMPLETED AND BEFORE PLANT PITS ARE EXCAVATED. 12. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, THE APPROPRIATE DATES FOR SPRING PLANT MATERIAL INSTALLATION IS FROM THE TIME GROUND HAS THAWED TO JUNE 15. 13. CONIFEROUS PLANTING IS ACCEPTABLE FROM AUGUST 15 TO OCTOBER 1. FALL DECIDUOUS PLANTING IS ACCEPTABLE FROM THE FIRST FROST UNTIL NOVEMBER. 14. ADJUSTMENTS TO PLANTING DATES MUST BE APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 15. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IF TREE PLANTINGS ARE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF WINDOW LOCATIONS. SOD NOTES: 1. SOD ALL NON-PLANTING AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON PLANS. 2. WHERE SOD ABUTS PAVED SURFACES, FINISHED GRADE OF SOD SHALL BE HELD 1" 3. SOD SHALL BE LAID PARALLEL TO THE CONTOURS AND SHALL HAVE STAGGERED JOINTS. ON SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR IN DRAINAGE SWALES, SOD SHALL BE STAKED SECURELY. 4. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, THE APPROPRIATE DATES FOR SPRING SOD PLACEMENT IS FROM THE TIME GROUND HAS THAWED TO JUNE 15. 5. FALL SODDING IS ACCEPTABLE FROM AUGUST 15 TO NOVEMBER 1. FALL SEEDING IS ACCEPTABLE FROM AUGUST 15 TO SEPTEMBER 15. ADJUSTMENTS TO SOD/SEED PLANTING DATES MUST BE APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. LANDSCAPE LEGEND: PROPOSED DECIDUOUS TREES DECIDUOUS SHRUBS ROCK MULCH PERENNIAL PLANTING BED/ GRASSES SOD BIKE RACKS, AS SPECIFIED. PERGOLA D, SEE DETAIL 01/L502. EDGING, SEE L500. KEY NOTES: A B CONIFEROUS SHRUBS SITE PLANTERS - ANNUAL PLANTINGS PROVIDED BY OWNER PLANTING SCHEDULES: LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE - ALTERNATIVE LANDSCAPE: THE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FALLS JUST SHORT OF MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK CITY ORDINANCE MINIMUMS FOR TREE PLANTING. THE FOLLOWING LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED AS AN ALTERNATIVE PATH TO MEETING CITY ORDINANCE: x GREEN ROOFS - EXTENSIVE GREEN ROOF AREAS IN THE AMENITY DECK AREA = 1,600 S.F.. PLANTED AREAS WILL INCLUDE SMALL TREE, SHRUB AND PERENNIAL PLANTINGS. THERE IS ANOTHER 193 S.F. OF PLANTING AREA OUTSIDE OF THE AMENITY DECK THAT IS ALSO OVER STRUCTURE AND WILL BEAUTIFY THE PARKING LOT. x PLANTERS - SEASONAL PLANTINGS WILL ACCENT ENTRIES AND PROVIDE FOCAL POINTS IN THE LANDSCAPE. CURRENTLY THERE ARE 12 LARGE PLANTERS PROPOSED FOR THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING, AND 17 PLANTERS PROPOSED INSIDE THE AMENITY DECK. x LANDSCAPE WALL - THERE IS APPROX. 108 L.F. OF LANDSCAPE WALL PROPOSED ALONG THE SIDEWALK ON GLENHURST AVE. PROPOSED CONIFEROUS TREES SITE LANDSCAPE PLAN02 LS300 SCALE: 20'40'10'0' 1"=20' ARTIFICIAL TURF, AS SPECIFIED. ARTIFICIAL TURF @ DOG RUN, AS SPECIFIED.DJRARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2015 DJR Architecture, IncB 8 333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATEIssue: Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.ACDEFGH 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 4015 CSAH 25 Saint Louis Park, MNTerry Minarik15-066PARKWAY APARTMENTS4224215-066JCTMCLIENTPARKWAY 25, LLC4915 W 35th St, #102Saint Louis Park, MN 55416952.925.3878Project#:Date:Drawnby:Checkedby:CONTRACTORDORAN COMPANIES7803 Glenroy Rd #200,Minneapolis, MN 55439952.288.2000STRUCTURALERICKSEN ROED AND ASSOCIATES2550 University Avenue WSt Paul, MN 55114651-251-7570CIVILCIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35th St. Suite 200Saint Louis Park, MN 55416612-615-0060PUD AMENDMENTLANDSCAPE530 N 3rd St #120Minneapolis, MN 55401612 333-3702MECHANICAL/ ELECTRICALEMMANUELSON- PODAS, INC.7705 Bush Lake Rd,Edina, MN 55439952 930-0050HUD Submittal 07/28/2016Permit 09/23/2016A Permit and HUD Comments 11/16/20164/07/20174/10/2017PUD AMENDMENT3/22/2017ADDENDUM F4/10/2017PERGOLA D LOCATION01 LS300 SCALE: 10'20'5'0' 1"=10' C F F F F F F F F Xref P:\djr-arch\2015\15-066.00 - Sela Roofing - Vescio's Site Apartments - St. Louis Park, MN\Arch\Con FD FD REF. Xref N:\2016\16011MN - Parkway 25 Mixed Use St. Louis Park - DJR\16011MN - AutoCAD\ARCH\16-09 F2 A B C C F1 D D D F1 D1 D D E E H H H H H H H H F2 F2 F2 M G I I I I J J I I I I I J J K K L N O P P I Q D D D D T S R R R R ALLEY EDGE T T D1 L400REFERENCE PLANREFERENCE PLAN01 L400 1"=10'-0" SCALE: 10'20'5'0' 1"=10' POOL, SEE ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS HOT TUB, SEE ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS POOL PLATFORMS, SEE ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS CONCRETE WALK CONCRETE CURB, SEE 15/L500 INTEGRAL COLORED CONCRETE WALK COLOR: DAVIS COLOR - MESA BUFF 5447. 2X4 PORCELAIN PAVERS, SEE DETAIL 03/L500. MANUFACTURER: BELGARD HARDSCAPES PRODUCT: MIRAGE QUARZITL_2.0 COLOR: WATERFALL QR 03 2X2 PORCELAIN PAVERS, SEE DETAIL 03/L500. MANUFACTURER: BELGARD HARDSCAPES PRODUCT: MIRAGE QUARZITL_2.0 COLOR: GLACIER QR 01, MOUNTAINS QR 02, WATERFALL 03 NOTE: RANDOMLY PLACE THREE COLORS @ DESIGNATED LOCATIONS. TURF PLANTBED PLANTER WALL 'TYPE A', SEE 01/L500 PLANTER WALL 'TYPE B', SEE 02/L500. PERGOLA A & B, SEE 02/L501. PERGOLA C, SEE 01/L502. CUSTOM FEATURE FIREPLACE, SEE 01/L501. CUSTOM BAR TABLE, SEE 07/L503. CUSTOM FIREPIT, SEE DETAIL 03/L503. CUSTOM GRILL STATION, SEE 08/L503. SCULPTURE LOCATION, BY OWNER. FENCE, SEE 01/L502. DECORATIVE SCREENING FENCE, SEE 01/L502. FENCE @ DOGPARK & PARKING GARAGE ENTRY, SEE 06/L503. KEY NOTES: A B C D E F1 G H I J K L M N O P Q R S DOG RUN REFERENCE PLAN03 L400 SCALE: 10'20'5'0' 1"=10' T DJRARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2015 DJR Architecture, IncB 8 333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATEIssue: Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.ACDEFGH 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 4015 CSAH 25 Saint Louis Park, MNTerry Minarik15-066PARKWAY APARTMENTS4224215-066JCTMCLIENTPARKWAY 25, LLC4915 W 35th St, #102Saint Louis Park, MN 55416952.925.3878Project#:Date:Drawnby:Checkedby:CONTRACTORDORAN COMPANIES7803 Glenroy Rd #200,Minneapolis, MN 55439952.288.2000STRUCTURALERICKSEN ROED AND ASSOCIATES2550 University Avenue WSt Paul, MN 55114651-251-7570CIVILCIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35th St. Suite 200Saint Louis Park, MN 55416612-615-0060PUD AMENDMENTLANDSCAPE530 N 3rd St #120Minneapolis, MN 55401612 333-3702MECHANICAL/ ELECTRICALEMMANUELSON- PODAS, INC.7705 Bush Lake Rd,Edina, MN 55439952 930-0050HUD Submittal 07/28/2016Permit 09/23/2016A Permit and HUD Comments 11/16/20164/07/20174/10/2017PUD AMENDMENT3/22/2017ADDENDUM F4/10/2017F2 D1 F Xref P:\djr-arch\2015\15-066.00 - Sela Roofing - Vescio's Site Apartments - St. Louis Park, MN\Arch\Con FD FD REF. Xref N:\2016\16011MN - Parkway 25 Mixed Use St. Louis Park - DJR\16011MN - AutoCAD\ARCH\16-09 POOL C E N T E R LI N E 15' -6"O.C .21' -1" 2'-8" 13'-0" O.C. 11'-1" 54'-1"9' -10"9' -6"O.C .6"FROMFACEOF WALL 2'-9" 49'-0" 12'-0" O.C. 14'-0" O.C. 14'-0" O.C. 14'-0" O.C.21'-1"15' -6"O.C . 16'-0" O.C. 16'-0" O.C. 17'-0" O.C.1' -0 " R6'-0"3' -0 "3'-0" 4'-0" TYP. 4'-0" TYP. ALLEY EDGE2'-2"5'-7"60'-6"17'-6"1'-0" WIDE 7'-6"13'-11"FD FD REF. 13'-3"11'-1"5'-1"10'-3"2'-10"14'-1"12'-0"3'-3" 8'-0" 47'-5" 7'-8" 16'-5"5' -3"6'-0"10'-6" POOL C E N T E R LI N E 1'-1"8' -0"10' -0 "8'-9 "5'-4"6'-7"3'-1"17'-5"3'-8"1'-11"5'-4" 9'-10"20'-3"22'-3"17'-9"6'-10"5'-7"R7'-0"R9' - 0 " R 6 ' - 2 " R6'-0" R10'-0" 17'-4" 20'-11" 13'-2" 6'-1" 4'-3" 4'-0" 5'-11" 14'-0" 10 9 °71°1 1 9 °126° R 8 ' - 6 " 1 3 6 °79°R10'-0"19'-4"133.1°155°11' -7"3'-8"39'-5"10 0 ° R8'-0"3'-11"3'-5"13'-8"3'-4"5'-10"1'-6"5'-11"6'-11"3'-5"2'-8"109°71°5'-4"23'-2"4' -2"18' -11" 18'-1"15'-2"5'-11" 5'-0" 10 9 °R2'-0"1'-0 "111°2'-2"1'-0" TYP 11'-4"4' -2 " 5'-6 "10'-3"3'-5"15'-9"16' -0 " 21'-0"16' -9 "9' -5"4'-0"20'-7" 12'-1" 4'-4" 2'-5"7'-11"16'-5"37'-9"2'-2" 17'-9"12' -3" 8" 8'-9" 1'-8" 2'-4"5'-6"2'-9 "2'-4"8" 1'- 0 "6' -0 "4' -11 "110.1°90. 8 ° 11 0 . 1 ° 6'-3" 10'-5" 36'-3"5' -8 " L401LAYOUT PLANSTRUCTURES & SCORING LAYOUT PLAN01 L401 SCALE: 10'20'5'0' 1"=10' WALL LAYOUT PLAN03 L401 SCALE: 10'20'5'0' 1"=10' SPECIAL NOTE: ALL PLANTER WALLS ASSUMED TO BE 90° ANGLES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. DOG RUN LAYOUT PLAN03 L401 SCALE: 10'20'5'0' 1"=10'DJRARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2015 DJR Architecture, IncB 8 333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATEIssue: Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.ACDEFGH 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 4015 CSAH 25 Saint Louis Park, MNTerry Minarik15-066PARKWAY APARTMENTS4224215-066JCTMCLIENTPARKWAY 25, LLC4915 W 35th St, #102Saint Louis Park, MN 55416952.925.3878Project#:Date:Drawnby:Checkedby:CONTRACTORDORAN COMPANIES7803 Glenroy Rd #200,Minneapolis, MN 55439952.288.2000STRUCTURALERICKSEN ROED AND ASSOCIATES2550 University Avenue WSt Paul, MN 55114651-251-7570CIVILCIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35th St. Suite 200Saint Louis Park, MN 55416612-615-0060PUD AMENDMENTLANDSCAPE530 N 3rd St #120Minneapolis, MN 55401612 333-3702MECHANICAL/ ELECTRICALEMMANUELSON- PODAS, INC.7705 Bush Lake Rd,Edina, MN 55439952 930-0050HUD Submittal 07/28/2016Permit 09/23/2016A Permit and HUD Comments 11/16/20164/07/20174/10/2017PUD AMENDMENT3/22/2017ADDENDUM F4/10/2017F F 3/4"3 5/8" MIN.NOTE: INSTALL ARTIFICIAL TURF GRASS AND INFILL MATERIAL PER MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS. NAIL OR STAPLE ARTIFICIAL TURF TO BOARD FASTEN BOARD WITH SS SCREWS CONCRETE WALK OR PLANTER WALL WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE/INSULATION AND CONCRETE BELOW, BY OTHERS. ARTIFICIAL TURF GRASS, ASSPECIFIED. INFILL MATERIAL. 3/8" COMPACTED GRAVEL BASE PRESSURE TREATED 2X4, TRIM TO FIT AS NECESSARY3/4"4" MIN.NOTE: INSTALL ARTIFICIAL TURF GRASS AND INFILL MATERIAL PER MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS. NAIL OR STAPLE ARTIFICIAL TURF TO BOARD FASTEN BOARD WITH SS SCREWS CONCRETE WALK OR FENCE POST FOOTING UNDISTURBED GRADE ARTIFICIAL TURF GRASS, ASSPECIFIED. INFILL MATERIAL. 3/8" COMPACTED GRAVEL BASE PRESSURE TREATED 2X4, TRIM TO FIT AS NECESSARY GEOTEXTILE FABRIC4"2"SOD SOIL FROM SOD CUTTING TOPSOIL DISCED SUBGRADE SUBGRADE SCALE FACTOR: 3"=1' WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE/INSULATION AND CONCRETE BELOW, BY OTHERS. INTEGRAL COLORED CONCRETE FINISHED GRADE 4"MIN.WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE/INSULATION AND CONCRETE BELOW, BY OTHERS. PORCELAIN PAVERPRODUCT: MIRAGE QUARZITL_2.0 PAVERCOLOR: MOUNTAINS QR 02SIZE: 24"X48" MANUFACTURER: BELGARD HARDSCAPES WWW.BELGARD.COM1.877.235.4273 FINISHED GRADE 3 1/4"MIN.TYPICAL PAVER SECTION TYPICAL CONCRETE SECTION CLEAN WASHED SAND COMPACTED SUBGRADE CURB AND GUTTER, SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS 1'-6" 3" SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH (SEE SPECIFICATIONS) 316" METAL EDGER W/ STAKE, PER SPEC.3-6" LIMESTONE ROCK MULCH EDGER 3" SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH (SEE SPECIFICATIONS) FINISHED GRADE AND EDGE CONDITION VARIES - SEE PLAN FOR CONDITION. 316" METAL EDGER W/ STAKE, PER SPEC.1' MINPLANTING SOIL4"12"12" ARTIFICIAL TURF CONCRETE CURB W/(2) #3 CONT.TURF OR PLANTBED MAY OCCUR 3/4"COMPACTED CLASS V SOIL TROWEL TOP SMOOTH PLANTBED OCCURS, SEE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS ISOLATION JOINT WHERE CONCRETE OCCURS. (3) #5 CONT. TOP AND BOTTOM #4 STIRRUP @ 10" O.C.1'-3"#4 HORIZ. REINFORCING BARS CONT. @ 8" O.C. EACH FACE 3000 PSI REINFORCED CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE WALL WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE/INSULATION AND CONCRETE BELOW, BY OTHERS.3"4"1'-0" FINISHED GRADE #4 REINFORCING BAR @ 12" O.C. TIE INTO WALK. IJ TROWEL TOP AND SIDES OF WALL SMOOTH PLANTBED OCCURS, SEE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS ISOLATION JOINT WHERE CONCRETE OCCURS.9"#4 HORIZ. REINFORCING BARS CONT. @ 9" O.C. 3000 PSI REINFORCED CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE WALL WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE/INSULATION AND CONCRETE BELOW, BY OTHERS.3"4"#4 REINFORCING BAR @ 12" O.C. TIE INTO WALK. FINISHED GRADE 8" IJ1'-1"MIN. SOIL DEPTHBOARD FORM SIDES2 1/2"3/4" LED STRIP LIGHTING - SEE LIGHTING PLAN 0.625 CHAMFER USINGCHASER BLADE T = THICKNESSOF PAVEMENT TOP OF CONCRETE PAVEMENT EXPANSION JOINT FILLER WITH 1/4" RECESS SAWCUT 0.125 PILOT JOINTT 1/8" TOP OF CONCRETEPAVEMENT T = THICKNESSOF PAVEMENT 5/8" LINE OF FRACTURE T/4T1/4" TOOLED JOINTS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AT A MINIMUM DEPTH OF ONE INCH BYSCORING WITH A TOOL WHICH WILL LEAVE THE CORNERS ROUNDED AND INSUREA FREE MOVEMENT OF CONCRETE AT THE JOINT. TOP OF CONCRETE PAVEMENT LINE OF FRACTURETOOLED CONTROL JOINT - WALKS SAWED CONTROL JOINTS NOTE: SPACE EXPANSION JOINTS NOT TO EXCEED 35' IN CONCRETE WALKS AND WHERE INDICATED ON PLAN. 1/2"1/4"EJ TYPICAL EXPANSION JOINT (EJ) JOINT SEALANT AS SPECIFIED NOTE: PLACE ISOLATION JOINTS BETWEEN CONCRETE AND BUILDING FOUNDATION AND ALL FIXED OBJECTS TOP OF CONCRETE PAVEMENT JOINT SEALANT AS SPECIFIED FACE OF BUILDING OR FIXED OBJECT 1/2" EXPANSION FILLER CONSTRUCTION JOINTS SHALL BE PLACED BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL POURS OF CONCRETE WHERE EXPANSION JOINTS ARE NOT INDICATED. KEY JOINT CENTERED WITHIN DEPTH OF PAVEMENT TOP OF CONCRETE PAVEMENT 5/8"1/2"T/41 1 3 x AMIN. 30" RADIUS MIN.4"A EACH TREE SHALL BE PLANTED SUCH THAT THE ROOT FLARE IS VISIBLE AT THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL. IF THE ROOT FLARE IS NOT VISIBLE, THE SOIL SHALL BE REMOVED IN A LEVEL MANNER FROM THE ROOT BALL TO WHERE THE FIRST MAIN ORDER ROOT (12" DIA. OR LARGER) EMERGES FROM THE TRUNK. SET MAIN ORDER ROOT 1" HIGHER THAN ADJACENT GRADE. DO NOT COVER TOP OF ROOT BALL WITH SOIL. SCARIFY SIDES OF TREE PIT WITH SPADE BY HAND TO BIND WITH PREPARED SOIL. PLANTING PIT TO BE TWO TO FIVE TIMES THE DIAMETER OF ROOT BALL, SLOPED TAMP SOIL AROUND ROOT BALL BASE FIRMLY WITH FOOT PRESSURE SO THAT ROOT BALL DOES NOT SHIFT. DRAINAGE TRENCH AS REQUIRED PER PERCOLATION TEST IN SPEC. AUGER A 4" DIA. HOLE & FILL W/ 34" GRAVEL. PLACE ROOT BALL ON UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SOIL. DIG PLANTING PIT 4-6" DEEPER THAN ROOTBALL. UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE. REMOVE BURLAP, WINE, ROPE AND WIRE FROM TOP HALF OF ROOT BALL. COMPACT PLANTING SOIL TO 85% OF MAXIMUM DRY UNIT WEIGHT PER ASTM D 698. EDGE CONDITION VARIES, SEE PLAN. 4" BUILT-UP EARTH SAUCER BEYOND EDGE OF ROOT BALL. 3" SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. DO NOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT WITH ROOT FLARE. RODENT TRUNK PROTECTION: 12" HARDWIRE-CLOTH MESH CYLINDER. DIMENSIONS: 8" DIAMETER (OR GREATER) X 36" HEIGHT. STAKE IN PLACE, AVOIDING ROOTS. SEE SPEC. NOTE: CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING TREES IN A PLUMB POSITION THROUGHOUT THE WARRANTY PERIOD. STAKING AND GUYING IS MANDATORY FOR TREES 4" CAL OR GREATER, AND ALL BARE ROOT TREES. WRAP TREE TRUNKS ONLY UPON APPROVAL BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. SEE SPECIFICATION SECTION 32 93 00. 5' DIAMETER MULCH RING, TYP. SEE PLAN12"MIN. PREPARE SOIL FOR THE ENTIRE BED 4"3" SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. DO NOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT WITH SHRUB STEM. NOTE: SEE SPECIFICATION SECTION RELATED TO EXTERIOR PLANTING. CONTAINER GROWN MATERIAL SHALL HAVE ROOTS HAND LOOSENED. MIN.4" DEEPER THAN ROOT BALL. SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF ENTIRE BED WITH SPADE BY HAND TO BIND WITH PLANTING SOIL. UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE. PLANTER WALL 'TYPE A' DETAIL01 L500 1" = 1'-0"TYPICAL CONCRETE & PAVING DETAILS03 L500 1 1/2" = 1'-0" CONSTRUCTION JOINT05 L500 3/4" = 1'-0" ISOLATION JOINT06 L500 3/4" = 1'-0" CONTROL JOINT07 L500 3/4" = 1'-0"EXPANSION JOINT08 L500 3/4" = 1'-0" PLANTER WALL 'TYPE B' DETAIL02 L500 3/4" = 1'-0"ARTIFICIAL TURF DETAIL @ AMENITY DECK04 L500 3" = 1'-0" ARTIFICIAL TURF DETAILS @ DOG RUN10 L500 3" = 1'-0"DJRARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2015 DJR Architecture, IncB 8 333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATEIssue: Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.ACDEFGH 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 4015 CSAH 25 Saint Louis Park, MNTerry Minarik15-066PARKWAY APARTMENTS4224215-066JCTMCLIENTPARKWAY 25, LLC4915 W 35th St, #102Saint Louis Park, MN 55416952.925.3878Project#:Date:Drawnby:Checkedby:CONTRACTORDORAN COMPANIES7803 Glenroy Rd #200,Minneapolis, MN 55439952.288.2000STRUCTURALERICKSEN ROED AND ASSOCIATES2550 University Avenue WSt Paul, MN 55114651-251-7570CIVILCIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35th St. Suite 200Saint Louis Park, MN 55416612-615-0060PUD AMENDMENTLANDSCAPE530 N 3rd St #120Minneapolis, MN 55401612 333-3702MECHANICAL/ ELECTRICALEMMANUELSON- PODAS, INC.7705 Bush Lake Rd,Edina, MN 55439952 930-0050HUD Submittal 07/28/2016Permit 09/23/2016A Permit and HUD Comments 11/16/20164/07/20174/10/2017PUD AMENDMENT3/22/2017L500DETAILS - AMENITY DECKTYPICAL PLANTING DETAIL12 L500 3/4" = 1'-0"TYPICAL TREE PLANTING DETAIL11 L500 3/4" = 1'-0" TYPICAL SOD DETAIL09 L500 3" = 1'-0" TYPICAL MULCH EDGE13 L500 1 1/2" = 1'-0" METAL EDGING DETAIL14 L500 1 1/2" - 1'-0"CURB DETAIL15 L500 1 1/2" = 1'-0" WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE/INSULATION AND CONCRETE BELOW, BY OTHERS. HSS6 X 6 X1/4 STEEL COLUMN CONCRETE WALK MAY OCCUR, SEE PLAN. BASE PLATE W/WELDED ANCHOR BOLTS INSTALLED DURING CONCRETE POUR, COORDINATE WITH CONCRETE AND WATERPROOFING CONTRACTOR. ISOLATION JOINT WELD COLUMN TO BASE PLATE, COORDINATE INSTALLATION W/WATERPROOFING CONTRACTOR. DRAINAGE LAYER, BY OTHERS. PLANTING SOIL MAY OCCUR, SEE PLAN. SPECIAL NOTE: COLUMN FOOTINGS FOR PERGOLA D, BY OTHERS. SEE ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS. HSS6 X 6 X 1/4 STEEL COLUMN WELD CONT. AROUND PERIMETER AND GRIND SMOOTH HSS4 X 4 X 1/4 STEEL SUPPORT BEAM, CONT. WELD TO UNDERSIDE OF COLUMN AND GRIND SMOOTH 2 X 4 SHADE SLAT ELEVATION A PLAN GALVANIZED BRACKET, WELD BRACKET TO SUPPORT BEAM, COLOR: TBD. FASTEN W/CARRIAGE BOLTS TO SHADE SLATS. ELEVATION B HSS4 X 4 X 1/4 STEEL SUPPORT BEAM, CONT. WELD TO UNDERSIDE OF COLUMN AND GRIND SMOOTH. TOUCH UP WELD AREA WITH COLUMN COLOR. 2 X 4 SHADE SLAT TO BE FLUSH W/END OF COLUMN FASTEN GALVANIZEDBRACKET W/CARRIAGEBOLTS, 2 PERCONNECTION, COLOR TOMATCH SUPPORT BEAM HSS6 X 6 X 1/4 STEEL COLUMN, CONT. WELD AT CONNECTIONS AND GRIND SMOOTH. FIREPLACE MANTLE STONE VENEER, MATCH ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATION 4'-0" PLANTBED AND PLANTINGS TO OCCUR, SEE LS301. PLANTBED CURB, SEE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS DECORATIVE FIREPLACE ELEMENT, TBD. 1'-6"1'-6" 04 L501 O.C. SPACING VARIES, SEE PLAN.16'-0"6'-0"3'-0"PERGOLA STRUCTURE 02 L501 02 L5012'-9"6"TYP.9'-10"1'-2"3'-6"13'-0"4'-4" STONE VENEER 13'-0"CMU BLOCK W/VERT. REINFORCING BARS. 3000PSI CIP CONCRETE FIREPLACE SUPPORT FRAME W/ #4 HORIZ. REINFORCING BARS CONT. @ 12" O.C. EACH FACE OPENING IN CONCRETE FOR VENTILATION STONE CAP, MORTAR AND SEAL CAP FLUSH TO STONE EDGE SS FLAT LID CHIMNEY CAP W/ 3/4" MESH. CONTACT: WOODLAND DIRECT P: 1.800.919.1904 NOTE: PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION. DRAWINGSSHALL BE SIGNED BY LICENSEDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEER. 2'-0" 2'-0"2"6"3'-0"1'-6"4'-0" PLANTBED TO OCCUR, SEE SHEET LS301. 2'-3" CONDUIT FOR GAS LINE 03 L501 STONE VENEER CMU BLOCK W/VERT. REINFORCING BARS. 3000PSI CIP CONCRETE FIREPLACE SUPPORT FRAME W/ #4 HORIZ. REINFORCING BARS CONT. @ 12" O.C. EACH FACE OPENING IN CONCRETE FOR VENTILATION STONE CAP, MORTAR AND SEAL CAP FLUSH TO STONE EDGE 1'-4" 3'-4" 1'-6"2" 01 L501 HOTTUB, SEE ARCHITECT DRAWINGS. 1'-6"6'-0"2'-7" FIRE RESISTANT/ANIMAL PREVENTATIVE WIRE MESH PERGOLA STRUCTURE FEATURE FIREPLACE HOTTUB AND SURROUND, SEE ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS 06 L501 1'-0" O.C. TYP. 03 L501 04 L501 05 L501 ELEVATION SECTION A PLAN SECTION B3"PLAN1'-4"05 L501 SECTION B ELEVATION HSS 6 X 6 X 1/4 GALVANIZED STEEL COLUMN, COLOR TBD. HSS 4 X 4 X 1/4 GALVANIZED STEEL SUPPORT BEAM, COLOR TBD. 2 X 4 CEDAR SHADE SLATS. 7" TYP. 7" TYP.2'-0"TYP.PLAN ELEVATION A 3"10"RIGID INSULATION CONDUIT FOR GAS LINE RIGID INSULATION1'-6"WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE/INSULATION AND CONCRETE BELOW, BY OTHERS. WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE/INSULATION AND CONCRETE BELOW, BY OTHERS. L501 05 ELEVATION B 4'-10"TYP.NOTE: PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION. DRAWINGSSHALL BE SIGNED BY LICENSEDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEER. VARIES, SEE PLAN. HOT TUB COPING - SEE ARCH. PROVIDE JOINT @ FIREPLACE MANTLE FIREPLACE MANTLE FEATURE FIREPLACE01 L501 3/8" = 1'-0"PERGOLA A & B02 L501 3/8" = 1'-0" FEATURE FIREPLACE: SECTION A03 L501 3/8" = 1'-0" FEATURE FIREPLACE: SECTION B04 L501 3/8" = 1'-0" PERGOLA CONNECTION DETAIL, TYP.05 L501 3/4" = 1'-0"COLUMN BASE CONNECTION DETAIL06 L501 1" = 1'-0"DJRARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2015 DJR Architecture, IncB 8 333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATEIssue: Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.ACDEFGH 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 4015 CSAH 25 Saint Louis Park, MNTerry Minarik15-066PARKWAY APARTMENTS4224215-066JCTMCLIENTPARKWAY 25, LLC4915 W 35th St, #102Saint Louis Park, MN 55416952.925.3878Project#:Date:Drawnby:Checkedby:CONTRACTORDORAN COMPANIES7803 Glenroy Rd #200,Minneapolis, MN 55439952.288.2000STRUCTURALERICKSEN ROED AND ASSOCIATES2550 University Avenue WSt Paul, MN 55114651-251-7570CIVILCIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35th St. Suite 200Saint Louis Park, MN 55416612-615-0060PUD AMENDMENTLANDSCAPE530 N 3rd St #120Minneapolis, MN 55401612 333-3702MECHANICAL/ ELECTRICALEMMANUELSON- PODAS, INC.7705 Bush Lake Rd,Edina, MN 55439952 930-0050HUD Submittal 07/28/2016Permit 09/23/2016A Permit and HUD Comments 11/16/20164/07/20174/10/2017PUD AMENDMENT3/22/2017L501DETAILS - AMENITY DECK 05 L501VARIES,SEE PLANVARIES,SEE PLAN05 L5012'-0"2'-0"9'-10"1'-2"VARIES, SEE PLAN. VARIES, SEE PLAN. L501 06 PLAN ELEVATION A PERGOLA STRUCTURE 1'-0" O.C. TYP. HSS 6 X 6 X 1/4 GALVANIZED STEEL COLUMN, COLOR TBD. HSS 4 X 4 X 1/4 GALVANIZED STEEL SUPPORT BEAM, COLOR TBD. 2 X 4 SMOOTH CEDAR SHADE SLATS. 7" TYP. NOTE: PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION. DRAWINGSSHALL BE SIGNED BY LICENSEDSTRUCTURAL ENGINEER. PERGOLA C & D01 L502 3/4" = 1'-0"DJRARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2015 DJR Architecture, IncB 8 333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATEIssue: Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.ACDEFGH 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 4015 CSAH 25 Saint Louis Park, MNTerry Minarik15-066PARKWAY APARTMENTS4224215-066JCTMCLIENTPARKWAY 25, LLC4915 W 35th St, #102Saint Louis Park, MN 55416952.925.3878Project#:Date:Drawnby:Checkedby:CONTRACTORDORAN COMPANIES7803 Glenroy Rd #200,Minneapolis, MN 55439952.288.2000STRUCTURALERICKSEN ROED AND ASSOCIATES2550 University Avenue WSt Paul, MN 55114651-251-7570CIVILCIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35th St. Suite 200Saint Louis Park, MN 55416612-615-0060PUD AMENDMENTLANDSCAPE530 N 3rd St #120Minneapolis, MN 55401612 333-3702MECHANICAL/ ELECTRICALEMMANUELSON- PODAS, INC.7705 Bush Lake Rd,Edina, MN 55439952 930-0050HUD Submittal 07/28/2016Permit 09/23/2016A Permit and HUD Comments 11/16/20164/07/20174/10/2017PUD AMENDMENT3/22/2017L502DETAILS - AMENITY DECK 1" GAP 3"2"FENCE BRACKET, WELD TO BASE PLATE AND GRIND SMOOTH. PROVIDE 2 BOLT CONNECTION TO FENCE BOARDS EACH SIDE. BASE PLATE, WELD AND GRIND SMOOTH TO FENCE BRACKET. PROVIDE ANCHOR BOLT CONNECTIONS TO SURFACE BELOW. BASE PLATE, WELD AND GRIND SMOOTH TO FENCE BRACKET. PROVIDE ANCHOR BOLT CONNECTIONS TO SURFACE BELOW. 4 1/2" FENCE BRACKET, WELD TO BASE PLATE AND GRIND SMOOTH. PROVIDE 2 BOLT CONNECTION TO FENCE BOARDS EACH SIDE. HSS2 X 4 X 1/4 FENCE POST FENCE POST TO BE FLUSH WITH PLANTER WALL WHERE OCCURS CONCRETE SURFACE OR PLANTER WALL TO OCCUR BELOW CONCRETE SURFACE OR PLANTER WALL TO OCCUR BELOW 1X6 SMOOTH CEDAR1X6 SMOOTH CEDAR2"7"4"METAL PERFORATEDSCREEN PANELS WITHCUSTOM PATTERN,COORDINATE WITHMETAL PANELS BYARCHITECT. SECTION B2"BOLT PANEL TO WELDBRACKET, (5 CONNECTIONSEACH SIDE) WELD BRACKET TOSUPPORT BEAM ANDDECORATIVE FENCE PANELAND GRIND SMOOTH.COLOR TO FENCE POSTCOLOR.1'-6"O.C.HSS2 X 4 X 1/4 STEELFENCE POST. COLOR TOMATCH PERGOLA COLUMNCOLOR.2"TROWEL SMOOTH TOP AND SIDESOF CONCRETE SECTION DECORATIVE FILL, TBD. BURNER BURNER PAN W/WEEP HOLES PAVERS OCCUR, SEE PLAN.20"BOARD FORM CONCRETE WALLWITH #4 CONT. REBAR @ 6" O.C. GALV STEEL PAN SUPPORT, GRINDOUT TO SET SUPPORT. CROSS FLOW VENTILATION GAS LINE6"8" FIREPIT DECORATIVE FILL: CRUSHED LAVA ROCK 10 L503 8"R2'-0" 5'-0" O.C. TYP.2"4"3'-0"4" TYP. LENGTH VARIES, SEE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS SELF CLOSING HINGES,MATCH ARCHITECTUREPATIOS. SECURITY LATCH, MATCHARCHITECTURE PATIOS. FENCE GATE,SEE PLAN FORLOCATIONS. FENCE END POST, MATCHARCHITECTURE PATIORAILING. 5" O.C. TYP. FENCE INNER POST,MATCH ARCHITECTUREPATIO RAILING. 1"X4" PICKET EQUALLYSPACED BETWEENDOUBLE PICKETS,. SPECIAL NOTE: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR FENCE TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.6'-0", TYP.8'-0"1x6 SMOOTH CEDARFENCE PANELS. STAINFINISH TBD. PLANTER WALL 02 L502 3'-7" O.C. TYP. ELEVATION 3'-5" TYP. SUPPORT COLUMN 2 1/2" FROM FACE 2"METAL PERFORATEDSCREEN PANELS WITHCUSTOM PATTERN,COORDINATE WITHMETAL PANELS BYARCHITECT. HSS2 X 4 X 1/4 STEELSUPPORT COLUMNS,COLOR TBD. END FENCE POST W/ LBRACKETS WELDED TOPOST (2 PER POST).COLOR TBD. SPECIAL NOTE: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR FENCE AND DECORATIVE FENCE TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. SELF CLOSING HINGES,COLOR TO MATCH FENCEPOSTS. SECURITY GATE.SEE ARCH. PLANTER WALL 21'-10"1" TYPSPACING3'-4" TYP. GATE WIDTH TYPICAL METAL FENCEPOST, COLOR TO MATCHPERGOLA. 04 L503 05 L503 36" GRILL W/INSULATED JACKET, INTEGRATED INTO COUNTERTOP. CONTACT: WOODLAND DIRECT P: 1.800.919.1904 FINISHED GRADE CEDAR 1X3 VENEER, RECESSED 2" SEATWALL BEHIND CIP REINFORCED CONCRETE COUNTERTOP FRONT ELEVATION 6'-0" RESYSTA WOOD VENEERPLANTBED TO OCCUR FINISHED GRADE GRILL W/INSULATED JACKET 2X4 TIMBER FRAME CONSTRUCTION 12 #### SECTION 11 #### PRECAST CONCRETE BAR TOP, FASTEN TO TIMBER FRAME FROM UNDERSIDE. SEE PLAN FOR DIMENSIONS. SPECIAL NOTE: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 2X4 TIMBER FRAMECONSTRUCTION 6"2'-6" CEDAR 1X3 VENEER 2" FROM FACE OF WALL3"TYP.3'-2"GAS LINE CONDUIT HOOKUP SPECIAL NOTE: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 1X3 SMOOTH CEDARBOARD VENEER BENEATHCOUNTERTOP CUSTOM BAR & GRILL STATION VISUAL INTENTR6'-0"R4' - 0 " 6" TYP. REINFORCEDCONCRETE 11 #### SECURE TABLE ENDS TOCONCRETE BELOW PRECAST CONCRETE BAR TOP, SEE PLAN FOR DIMENSIONS. SECTION A SECTION A SECTION B SECTION B CIP REINFORCED CONCRETE COUNTERTOP ANCHOR GRILL STATION TOCONCRETE BELOWW/CONCRETE ANCHOR BOLTSFROM INSIDE OF FRAME TOCONCEAL CONNECTION R 4 ' - 6 "R5' -6 " 1X3 SMOOTH CEDARBOARD VENEER 1X3 SMOOTH CEDAR BOARD VENEER SECURE TIMBER FRAMECONCRETE BELOW SECTION A 3'-0"4'-6"14'-3"3"3" TYP. FENCE & DECORATIVE FENCE01 L503 3/4" = 1'-0"FENCE & DECORATIVE FENCE02 L503 3/4" = 1'-0" TYPICAL END FENCE POST DETAIL04 L503 3" = 1'-0"TYPICAL FENCE POST DETAIL05 L503 3" = 1'-0"DJRARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2015 DJR Architecture, IncB 8 333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATEIssue: Date:I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.ACDEFGH 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 4015 CSAH 25 Saint Louis Park, MNTerry Minarik15-066PARKWAY APARTMENTS4224215-066JCTMCLIENTPARKWAY 25, LLC4915 W 35th St, #102Saint Louis Park, MN 55416952.925.3878Project#:Date:Drawnby:Checkedby:CONTRACTORDORAN COMPANIES7803 Glenroy Rd #200,Minneapolis, MN 55439952.288.2000STRUCTURALERICKSEN ROED AND ASSOCIATES2550 University Avenue WSt Paul, MN 55114651-251-7570CIVILCIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35th St. Suite 200Saint Louis Park, MN 55416612-615-0060PUD AMENDMENTLANDSCAPE530 N 3rd St #120Minneapolis, MN 55401612 333-3702MECHANICAL/ ELECTRICALEMMANUELSON- PODAS, INC.7705 Bush Lake Rd,Edina, MN 55439952 930-0050HUD Submittal 07/28/2016Permit 09/23/2016A Permit and HUD Comments 11/16/20164/07/20174/10/2017PUD AMENDMENT3/22/2017L503DETAILS - AMENITY DECKFENCE @ DOG PARK & PARKING GARAGE ENTRY06 L503 3/4" = 1'-0" CUSTOM BAR TABLE07 L503 1/2" = 1'-0"CUSTOM GRILL STATION08 L503 1/2" = 1'-0" CUSTOM FIREPIT03 L503 1" = 1'-0" VISUAL INTENT09 L503 N.T.S.