Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 01-18-2017PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY, January 18, 2017 WHERE: CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Plymouth City Hall 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 CONSENT AGENDA All items listed on the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner, citizen or petitioner so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in normal sequence on the agenda. 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PUBLIC FORUM 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 5. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve the January 4, 2017 Planning Commission meeting minutes. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Creekside Plymouth LLC. Rezoning and preliminary plat for "Creekside Woods Phase II" for property located at 17125 and 17135 Old Rockford Road. (2016098) B. Civil Site Group. PUD general plan for a memory care home and retail building and preliminary plat for "Crossroads Commons Second Addition" for property located south of the Highway 55 frontage road, between West Medicine Lake Drive and County Road 73. (2016088) 7. NEW BUSINESS A. City of Plymouth. Determination of conformity of tax increment financing plan for redevelopment of the Four Seasons Mall with the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan. 8. ADJOURNMENT Proposed Minutes Planning Commission Meeting 5A January 4, 2017 MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chair Marc Anderson, Commissioners Gary Goldetsky, Donovan Saba, Jim Kovach, Julie Witt, David Witte and Bryan Oakley MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Barb Thomson, Senior Planner Shawn Drill and Planner Kip Berglund, Community Development Director Steve Juetten, Public Works Director Doran Cote OTHERS PRESENT: Council Member Ned Carroll 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. 2. OATH OF OFFICE — Planning Commissioner Bryafi Oakley 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC FORUM 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Commissioner Oakley, seconded by Commissioner Kovach, to approve the January 4, 2017 Planning Commission Agenda. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. 6. CONSENT AGENDA A. APPROVAL OF THE DECEMBER 21, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MOTION by Commissioner Witte, seconded by Commissioner Goldetsky, to approve the consent agenda. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. WRIGHT HENNEPIN COOPERATIVE ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION (2016097) Acting Chair Anderson introduced the request by Wright Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association for a site plan amendment and conditional use permit amendment for an expansion Proposed Minutes 1 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 to the existing substation and related site improvements for property located at 13700 Schmidt " Lake Road. Planner Berglund gave an overview of the staff report. Commissioner Saba asked if the only additional line would be between the two parts of the substation or whether an additional line is being added beyond the substation area. Planner Berglund stated that the only addition would be the pole and the line that would connect to the new transformer. Acting Chair Anderson stated that it seems that the property is landlocked from a public street and asked if there are easements to provide access to the parcel. Planner Berglund stated that there are easements that allow access to the site. Acting Chair Anderson introduced Dan Lesher, representing Great River Energy, who stated that there are existing access easements granted through the industrial park that provide access to the site. He stated that there are easements for the existing overhead transmission line and provided details on the connection to the expanded substation. He stated that this has been planned for some time and that they are in favor of the application, Bryant Tower, representing the applicant, identified areas of growth in Plymouth in just 2016, which includes nine residential developments and over 300 residential lots. He stated that the reason for the expanded substation is to help support the additional growth in this area. Acting Chair Anderson asked what the red areas on the map represent. Mr. Tower replied that those areas are undeveloped and have the possibility to develop and therefore will also require power. Commissioner Oakley stated that it does not seem that there is additional available space on the site and asked if the site would support full development of the city. Mr. Tower stated that the picture he displayed is a full scope development of the city. Acting Chair Anderson opened the public hearing and closed the public hearing as there was no one present to speak on the item. MOTION by Commissioner Oakley, seconded by Commissioner Witt, to approve the request by Wright Hennepin Cooperative Electric Association for a site plan amendment and conditional use permit amendment for an expansion to the existing substation and related site improvements for property located at 13700 Schmidt Lake Road. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. Proposed Minutes 2 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 B. ROCK HILL MANAGEMENT, LLC. (2016075) Acting Chair Anderson introduced the request by Rock Hill Management, LLC for a rezoning, PUD general plan and preliminary plat for a redevelopment of the Four Seasons Mall site to be called "Agora" for property located at 4200 Lancaster Lane. Senior Planner Drill gave an overview of the staff report. Acting Chair Anderson commended staff for the excellent job they did pulling together everything for this large application. He stated that PUD flexibility is being requested and asked for clarity about what that means. He stated that the site is zoned C-2 and noted that if this plan is laid in that zoning district, a number of variances would be required whereas under a PUD the variances would not be required. Senior Planner Drill stated that because the property is zoned C-2, the C-2 regulations are used as a guide and while the PUD provides more flexibility, it also requires higher levels of design and provides the City more regulatory control. Commissioner Witte asked for information on the site access. Senior Planner Drill stated that there are two existing access points along Lancaster Lane, which would remain, and one access point would be added. He noted that the new access point would be a right in/right out. Commissioner Witte asked for clarification on the parking that will be provided and whether there would be space for additional parking. Senior Planner Drill replied that the developer has stated that there would be opportunity to add some scattered parking in addition to what is shown on the plans. He said that the design of the ramp would not support an additional level of parking. He stated that quite a bit of time was spent with the developer on the parking study to ensure that staff was comfortable with the plan. He noted that the original plans included more square footage and additional buildings, and that was scaled back to provide more parking area. He stated that there is a unique mix of uses with different peak parking times, and therefore staff feels comfortable with the parking as proposed. Planning Manager Thomson added that staff was also concerned as there are no off-site parking options. She stated that staff would not have brought the application forward for approval if they were not comfortable with the parking as proposed. Senior Planner Drill noted that the senior housing will be fairly self-contained and advised that some of the residents in the building will not be driving. He reviewed the different peak times for the retail uses, the office space and the hotels. Commissioner Witte asked where the vacation of right-of-way would occur. Proposed Minutes 3 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 Senior Planner Drill identified the area south of the Aloft hotel and noted that the vacation request will go before the City Council in a separate public hearing. Commissioner Witte asked for the location of Outlot A, as he believed that is where the city pump house is. Senior Planner Drill replied that the City's pump house is located on proposed Outlot A ,where an easement currently exists, but the developer plans to dedicate that parcel to the City. Commissioner Witte referenced the statement in the staff report that the parking ramp may be owned and operated by the City and asked if that is definite or just a possibility. Senior Planner Drill replied that the ownership question is tied to the tax increment financing, which the council has not yet acted on. He noted that if the council does decide in favor of owning the ramp, the City would want the ramp on its own separate lot. Commissioner Oakley referenced the traffic study that provided the number of daily trips that would be generated and compared that to a Walmart development that was never proposed. He asked how the proposed daily trips would compare to the existing use and how many trips the Four Seasons Mall had. Community Development Director Juetten replied that a fully occupied Four Seasons Mall would generate about 5,051 daily trips. He stated that the traffic study was done with the original development plans and had a daily trip estimate of 6,800. He noted that some of those uses have since been decreased in size or eliminated, and therefore the number of daily trips could fall between 5,600 to 5,800. Commissioner Oakley stated that the majority of the setbacks do not concern him as they are setbacks from existing highways. He asked the width of the setback by the senior building. Senior Planner Drill replied that typically there is 15 to 20 feet of boulevard space to the back of the curb. Commissioner Oakley stated that it would be difficult to place trees and screening materials in that setback area. Senior Planner Drill stated that staff is also concerned with that and will continue to work with the developer to find the right type of trees that would fit well in that space and also provide an appropriate amount of screening. Commissioner Witte asked for additional information on the drive aisle widths. Senior Planner Drill replied that the primary drive aisles would be 26 feet in width while the majority of the drive aisles would be 24 feet in width. He noted that other PUDs have similar drive aisle widths, such as the Lowe's PUD. Proposed Minutes 4 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 Acting Chair Anderson noted that the report states that the impervious surface will be reduced from 78 percent to 72 percent. He received confirmation that the stormwater elements for the site would also be brought up to current standards, as there were no stormwater requirements when the original Four Seasons Mall was constructed. He asked for the history regarding the park-and-ride. Senior Planner Drill replied that there was a park-and-ride facility on this site about five to ten years ago. He stated that because there is bus service on Lancaster Lane, people do still park at this site to take the bus. He identified the location of the official park-and-ride facility as the north side of the Cub Foods on the north side of County Road 9. He stated that the Guiding Principles provide that a park-and-ride facility be brought back to the site as part of any redevelopment. Acting Chair Anderson referenced the suggested change in materials proposed by staff regarding the Aloft hotel and asked for more details. Senior Planner Drill stated that the developer will speak about this issue. He stated that staff's concern is that the building is very modern and while it may look great now, it could look dated in as little as ten years. He stated that a bigger concern is that the colors, materials, and design of the building do not match the other buildings on the site. He stated that staff does not want all the buildings to look exactly the same but would like to see the development tied together in a unified manner. Acting Chair Anderson stated that based on the comments of Community Development Director Juetten, the estimated number of daily trips would not be much more than the trips associated with the original Four Seasons Mall. Senior Planner Drill reiterated that the traffic study was completed when the development plans included additional uses that have since been removed from this plan. Commissioner Oakley asked for clarification on a design -related condition to limit the repeated use of horizontal elements in the retail buildings. Planning Manager Thomson replied that there are a lot of narrow horizontal add-on elements that seemed to be a little overdone and could become dated, and therefore staff is suggesting that those be reduced. Acting Chair Anderson introduced Lowell Langford, representing the applicant, who stated that he has been a resident of Plymouth for the past 16 years and three of his children live in Plymouth. He reviewed the timeline thus far, noting that the process began January 22, 2016 with their negotiations with Walmart and highlighted dates when the purchase agreement was signed, when an information meeting took place with the City Council and when the neighborhood meeting took place. He stated that there are really two projects, the first being the building of Agora and the second relating to the condition of the soil and stormwater aspects and all the work required to appropriately address these matters. Proposed Minutes 5 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 Steve Gebauer, Solution Blue, stated that this project is taking on a big piece in the bigger watershed. He highlighted and provided brief details on the stormwater elements proposed for the site including filtration basins, the wetland walk, plants that will help to reduce phosphorus, the stormwater management pond, and iron enhanced benches. He stated that this is a large system with many components. He stated that the watershed would like to have 100 pounds of phosphorus removed through this project and other projects in Plymouth, before runoff reaches Northwood Lake in New Hope. He stated that according to their calculations, they will be able to remove 110 pounds of phosphorus through this project and therefore are going above and beyond the requirements for the site alone. Commissioner Witt asked for details on the wetland walk. Mr. Gebauer replied that the wetland walk will be in the center of the site. He said he hopes that educational banners and signs can also be provided throughout the site in conjunction with working with the watershed. He identified the locations of the primary components of the stormwater management. Acting Chair Anderson received confirmation that the phosphorus removal calculation is on an annual basis. He stated that the drawing shows a wetland creek that flows through the site and asked for details. Mr. Gebauer stated that there will be a mix of water and plants throughout the creek. He stated that the plants will be harvested annually to aid in phosphorus removal. Gretchen Camp, ES Architects, stated that they are excited to be a part of this project, turning a vacant strip mall into a vibrant center. She stated that they do not have a problem with the condition staff recommended regarding the ribbed paneling. She stated that it will not be a problem to change the building colors either. She stated that therefore they do not have any problems with the conditions recommended by staff regarding the architecture. She stated that the owner would like a contemporary feel to the project versus a traditional, generic feel. She stated that they would prefer to have the ability to use the horizontal elements. Art Bartele, ESG Architects, stated that they are also looking for a harmonious balance for the site and noted that the original designs tended to use brighter colors. He referenced the allowable uses and identified the uses that were originally included. He stated that the owner would like flexibility for the retail elements as the leasing moves forward. He stated that they do have experience with mixed use developments and the scale of parking required. He stated that they have learned through their experience with this type of development that one thing the development needs is to stay full and that is why they are asking for flexibility. Ms. Camp stated that under the resolution there is a list of allowable uses that is very specific, and they would like to allow for a staff process that would allow for changes in use. Planning Manager Thomson noted that all the uses within the C-2 zoning district would be allowed, in addition to the specific uses listed. Ms. Camp noted that medical office was not allowed. Proposed Minutes 6 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 Planning Manager Thomson explained that medical uses typically have a higher demand for parking, and that is why they are excluded. Acting Chair Anderson stated that there is some flexibility allowed under a PUD. He noted that this is the preliminary plat stage, and there is another step with final plat, which would allow flexibility and discussion. He stated that if staff feels a request is beyond what is allowed through the PUD, it would come back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Bartele referenced the shared parking and asked if there were any questions, noting that there is good history of shared parking in their other developments. Commissioner Witt referenced Townplace Suites, which has room for conventions and asked how big the space is for meetings and gatherings. Ms. Camp stated that there would be 8,000 square feet for gatherings within the hotel, noting that often people that attend a wedding stay at the hotel as well. Commissioner Witt stated that her perception is that they are attempting to fit in a lot of things on the site and trying to squeeze in the parking. She stated that she sees the developer as trying to fit too much into too small an area. She asked if there is a developer for the senior building. Mr. Langford responded that there is a developer for the senior project, noting that the developer would be purchasing the land for their project. Mr. Bartele stated that there is a good balance of complimentary uses that will utilize parking at different times of the day when the need for parking by other uses is diminished. Ms. Camp stated that currently the resolution states that monument and wall signage is not allowed for the senior building, and they simply want to ensure that some type of signage is allowed for this building. Mr. Bartele stated that this is a nice mix of public and private uses. Terese Reiling-Holden, Welsh Colliers, referenced the medical use restriction and reminded the commission that many medical uses are now finding retail spaces as great locations. She noted that there are a number of dermatology and dental clinics that prefer retail settings, and they do not require a lot of parking. She stated that they are a great service to the neighborhood and complimentary to retail and asked that the commission consider allowing those uses. She stated that she was involved in attempting to lease the Four Seasons Mall, unsuccessfully, and is excited to be a part of this project. She said she thought it would be important for the site to have a sign at the entrance near Rockford Road. She stated that most retail developments have storefront visibility on the street, and explained that the thin strip along Rockford Road will not support retail and therefore those elements must be more internal to the site. She stated that based on her experience, she has not had success with retail internal to a site without having compensation, such as signage, for not having visibility from a major roadway, in this instance, Rockford Road. She stated that with all the investment in this project, the signage is an Proposed Minutes 7 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 important component for the retail to be successful. She stated that most of the customers for the retail will come from the neighborhood and traffic along Rockford Road. Acting Chair Anderson stated that if he was driving by the site and saw the sign being proposed while driving on Rockford Road, he would have already passed the turnoff. He asked why the signage is not proposed for the intersection of Lancaster Lane and Rockford Road. Ms. Camp stated that the signs are required to be on the subject property and set back ten feet. She stated that they are not allowed to place the sign on someone else's property. She provided details on the proposed sign and stated that they are willing to work with staff but feel it is important to have the third sign too. Ms. Reiling-Holden stated that retailers look at visibility, signage, access, and demographic requirements. She stated that the sign would allow her to address the visibility element with retailers and felt confident that the sign would be a good compromise and would allow her to gain quality tenants. Commissioner Saba asked and received confirmation that the sign would have Agora at the top and then smaller panels listing the individual tenants. Commissioner Kovach agreed that you would want people to see the development. He noted that there are multiple signs proposed for the frontage near the highway and highway ramp and stated that perhaps one of those signs could be eliminated to allow for the sign closer to the entrance to the development. He commented that it is redundant to have two signs along the highway. Ms. Reiling-Holden stated that while it may seem redundant, the two signs face in different ways and the two signs help to address the entrance ramp and the Highway 169 traffic. Commissioner Kovach stated that one of the signs is placed too late to allow traffic to see it in time and therefore felt that the one sign along the highway would be sufficient along with the sign near the entrance. Ms. Reiling-Holden stated that there are a lot of tenants in the development and therefore the two highway signs would allow for adequate space to advertise for all the tenants. She noted that some tenants may not have good visibility and therefore if she can offer them space on the sign, that will assist in leasing. Ms. Camp stated that she wanted to ensure that the language included in condition 14 about no outside storage of goods would not exclude a farmer's market. Lance Schuer, Damon Farber, referenced condition 23.c.3. regarding native plantings not being allowed in basins and ponds and asked for clarification. Before opening the public hearing, Acting Chair Anderson asked for clarification on medical uses. Proposed Minutes 8 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 Planning Manager Thomson stated that the commission can certainly alter what staff has recommended in regard to medical uses and stated that if they choose to do that, she would want to ensure that limits are placed to ensure that medical uses do not overstress the parking. Acting Chair Anderson asked if the applicant would come back with a sign package to be approved. He stated that typically not every tenant is allowed signage on a pylon. Planning Manager Thomson stated that the sign package would come forward separately. She noted that sometimes an administrative review is done but other times it would go through the whole process including the Planning Commission. Acting Chair Anderson asked if the farmer's market would be allowed. Planning Manager Thomson replied that farmer's markets can be reviewed administratively, but that matter can be further addressed prior to the City Council meeting. Public Works Director Cote stated that the intent of the language regarding plantings is that the native plantings would not be allowed in the basins themselves but could be allowed around the basins. He stated that he could review that matter further before this item goes to the City Council. Acting Chair Anderson explained that typically plantings are not allowed because they take up capacity in the basin but recognized that in this case the plants are part of the process. He stated that the City does not know enough at this time to make that decision as input is being provided by the watershed as well. Public Works Director Cote replied that the details would be determined prior to the City Council meeting. Acting Chair Anderson opened the public hearing. Acting Chair Anderson introduced Jody Shands, 10800 40th Avenue, who stated that she does like the redevelopment of the Four Seasons Mall. She stated that she does have concern that the aesthetic will not match the surrounding development as some of the buildings are much larger than the one story commercial development in this area. She stated that this was supposed to be a community gathering area but she was not clear where that space would be other than the wetland walk. She asked what would be allowed regarding signage, specifically in terms of light pollution. She asked if the tenants would be allowed to have signage on the back of the buildings, similar to what the Four Seasons Mall had. She noted that she would enjoy a coffee shop. She noted that there are already quite a few dental offices in the area, and therefore that use would not be needed. She noted that one of the hotels would be along Rockford Road and therefore perhaps would not need to have a space on the pylon sign. She asked what would be allowed under the PUD in the future in terms of large businesses. Mike Pagh, Lancaster Lane Senior Housing LLC, stated that they will be purchasing the senior housing site and wanted to spealc in support of the development and are excited to be a part of it. He stated that currently there is no signage allocated to the senior housing development. He Proposed Minutes 9 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 noted that they do not need signage on the building but they would request a 60 -square foot monument sign to identify the building. He stated that the building will be run solely by a non- profit that currently has facilities in Hopkins and Minnetonka. He stated that they will be good neighbors and are good citizens and community members. He stated that this is a well thought out and planned development. He stated that it is unlikely that they would be able to get their construction underway in May as they were a little late to the game, but noted that they would begin construction later in 2017. Acting Chair Anderson introduced Ken Weiland, 9910 41" Avenue, who stated that they are concerned with noise pollution as the neighborhood is already loud from the traffic in the area. He asked if the City has considered putting a barrier wall around the curve of Lancaster Lane. He stated that he also has concern with light pollution from the traffic, four story buildings and lit signs. He stated that in his neighborhood there is a lot of water that pools in the backyards and wanted to ensure that the runoff from the site would not travel north. He asked why two, four-story hotels would have to be included on the site. Acting Chair Anderson introduced Robert Ostvig, 4300 Trenton Lane #312, who stated that he is a member of the Trenton Place condominium association. He referenced criminal activity that could occur at a hotel and stated that the association shared that concern. He stated that an association member stated there were water problems in the foundation of the Four Seasons Mall and wanted to ensure that the problem will have been resolved if that original foundation is going to be used. He referenced the traffic at the intersection of 42nd and Nathan Lane, noting that previously it had been stated that there would not be an increase in congestion and asked if that has been verified by an independent source. He stated that there seems to be a tremendous amount of commerce in a small area and asked if there would be enough parking. He stated that perhaps the parking ramp could be designed in a way to allow an additional story to be added. He stated that there does not seem to be sufficient space for snowplowing. He asked if a walking bridge would be constructed to allow people to walk over to the businesses north of County Road 9. He stated that he is a critic of farmer's markets and is a regular customer of Cub Foods. He stated that there has been a significant drop in business for Cub Foods already with the competition from Hy -Vee and was concerned that a farmer's market would bring additional competition. He stated that in times of crisis, there needs to be a local supply of food. Acting Chair Anderson introduced David Burke, 4220 Nathan Lane, who thanked the commission for their service to the community. He stated that he is not against the proposed development but does wonder about having hotels in the neighborhood. He stated that prostitution is found in hotels. He stated that there is mention of a restaurant, and he said he would want to see something other than fast food. Acting Chair Anderson introduced Roger Connolly, 4225 Nathan Lane, who stated that he agrees with the comments from the previous speakers, noting that hotels are not a good fit for the environment of the city and the neighborhood. He stated that the City did some type of planning to determine a good use of the area, and he did not believe hotels were included. He stated that a four-story building is a four-story building, and he didn't know how you could make it look like a three-story building. He said he had a concern with the time of day that traffic would be moving through the area, as truck traffic could occur before 7:00 a.m. and past 7:00 p.m. He noted that weekends are a quiet time in their neighborhood, and now there will be a lot of Proposed Minutes 10 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 activity with this development. He stated that signage is a huge concern for the neighborhood for their visibility. He asked that lighting be well thought out to ensure that it does not cause light pollution for the neighborhood. He asked if there would be a liquor license for the restaurant and the hours of operation. He stated that the hotels and hours of operations and activity do not seem to fit well within the neighborhood. Ms. Shands stated that there is a lot of pedestrian traffic that goes down Lancaster Lane across Rockford Road to the Cub Foods area and asked if there would be a continuous sidewalk for that activity. Acting Chair Anderson closed the public hearing. Planning Manager Thomson stated that three-story buildings would be allowed in the C-2 zoning district and noted that the applicant's proposed signs are within the allowable height. Mr. Bartele stated that this is a very busy highway -oriented intersection on the north and east and the four-story buildings are closest to the highway and Rockford Road and therefore set back furthest from the neighborhood. He noted that the senior building has architectural details to break up the building bulk and is set back 130 feet from the closest residential dwellings across Lancaster Lane. Ms. Camp noted that there are apartment buildings adjacent to the senior building, which are three plus stories in height. Mr. Bartele stated that there is a fair amount of space in the middle of the development that will be used to showcase the water treatment the site is providing for the larger area, and there is a potential on slower days to setup activities such as a farmer's market that can be used for community gathering. He noted currently that space is just surface parking in a vacant development. Planning Manager Thomson asked if there would be small signs on the back of the buildings. Mr. Bartele replied that there would be one or two that would be included in the sign package. Planning Manager Thomson asked if the Aloft Hotel has one or two signs. Ms. Camp stated that the signs would be on the north and east sides of the building, facing away from the neighborhood. Planning Manager Thomson stated that Plymouth has very stringent lighting regulations and will ensure that the lights on the property meet all the requirements of the City. Mr. Bartele stated that they kept the level of the parking ramp as proposed to help mitigate the visual aesthetics from the neighborhood, notably lighting. He stated that the parking will be self- regulating as tenants will not want to come into a space that does not have enough parking. Proposed Minutes 11 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 Planning Manager Thomson noted that there will be a continuous sidewalk on Lancaster Lane. She stated that additional development in the future would require the applicant to go back through the PUD process. She asked how noise mitigation would be addressed. Mr. Bartele said that had not come up as an issue thus far, but stated that they have kept the two primary access spots in their current locations, as those are good buffers to the neighborhood and have been working in the past. Planning Manager Thomson asked and received clarification that the water runoff would be directed to the south. Mr. Gebauer explained that the water that comes onto the site would travel to the south and to their stormwater pond. He noted that he is not sure how to respond to the existing water conditions in the neighborhood mentioned during the public hearing, but confirmed that they would be handling the stormwater on their own development site and as it travels through the site. Mr. Bartele explained how they will be reusing the existing pilings because of the poor soil conditions. He stated that they are not anticipating any below grade uses. He stated that the parking ramp already has some projected growth included with the City's the park-and-ride facility. He stated that other parking structures they have on other projects of this nature are not under parked, and he would not want to see a large oversized parking ramp that sits half full. Mr. Gebauer stated that snow storage has been thought about and planned for and identified areas that he has planned for snow storage. He stated that they will not have snow storage in the water treatment features because of the chemicals that are used in snow removal. Planning Manager Thomson asked about the idea of a walking bridge across Lancaster Lane that was mentioned. Mr. Gebauer replied that they do not have control of the other side of the roadway where a bridge would need to end and stated that there is not enough walking traffic known to generate the expense of a study. Planning Manager Thomson stated that the City contracted independently with an outside source for the traffic study and was in control of the study rather than the developer. Ms. Camp stated that they support the possibility of a farmer's market as it provides a nearby location for people to gain fresh, low-cost options for purchasing food. Mr. Bartele stated that often a farmer's market can pair with an art show for a fun community event as well. Ms. Camp stated that the market for this area shows a huge demand for hotels and for the conference space. Proposed Minutes 12 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 Mr. Langford stated that they had a study done by HVS, which is the leading authority on hotel demand. He stated that there were very strong occupancy and average rate marks for both hotels. He stated that both hotels come from strong brands and will pull in reservations during slow times. Planning Manager Thomson stated that prostitution is a concern of the City and the police department as well. She stated that there are other hotels in the city and the police department handles incidents swiftly when they occur. Ms. Reiling-Holden stated that she envisions the restaurant to be a community -serving restaurant, noting that most restaurants will want a beer/wine liquor license. She noted that food would be the majority of the sales. She also noted that she cannot certify a restaurant tenant until they go out hard to the market. Mr. Bartele stated that the traffic counts and truck traffic would be similar to the Four Seasons Mall traffic, but noted that the hotels would not have the same types and level of activity as the prior grocery store that had been in the mall. Planning Manager Thomson stated that if the project goes through, there will be more traffic than there currently is with a vacant site and will have slightly higher traffic than the peal- time of the Four Seasons Mall. She noted that the traffic is nothing that cannot be handled by the current roadway network. Mr. Bartele stated that putting the housing on the site will put "eyes on the street" for the other uses as this is their neighborhood and residents will want to see it in quality condition. Planning Manager Thomson stated that when the commission deliberates they may want to consider a monument sign for the senior housing building. Ms. Camp stated that it would be a low monument sign in the front of their site to identify the building for visitors. Mr. Bartele stated that both hotel sites are ringed with parking up front, so the primary parking is adjacent to each of the buildings. Mr. Gebauer stated that the central water feature will have two small cascades which could generate a little white noise but that will be washed out by the trees. Planning Manager Thomson referenced the study the City undertook to determine possible uses once it was known that the mall would close and noted that hotels were not envisioned in any of the resulting scenarios. Acting Chair Anderson referenced the topic of architecture, noting that the developer agrees with the staff comments regarding removal of the ribbed material. He stated that the height issue seems to still be out there. He asked if there were any concerns from the commission with architectural elements. Proposed Minutes 13 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 Commissioner Oakley stated that the architect convinced him that the horizontal elements should not be eliminated from the design. He stated that the height of the buildings is the tough question, noting that the challenge with the site is that it is narrow. He stated that the portion of the site adjacent to the highway is a good fit for the taller buildings. He stated that the south end of the site is relatively close to buildings that are almost as tall and therefore he could support the heights as proposed. Commissioner Witte agreed that the horizontal elements help to diminish the height. He stated that this seems to be a well -conceived plan in terms of the placement of the taller buildings. He stated that he likes the architecture and the plan, although he has a concern that there could be too much in this space. Commissioner Saba stated that he likes to see some diversity in a development and thought that it was a good message to see separate hotels as part of the same development. Commissioner Goldetsky stated that he has witnessed the life cycle of this site and thinks that this plan is very nice on many levels. He stated that he is comfortable with the language in the conditions and would have no problem adding the language to allow farmer's markets and the monument sign for the senior building. He stated that he has always been concerned that the vacant development could create a place for youth trouble to occur but commended the police department for not letting that happen. He stated that this will be a vibrant development in the community, and he will support the request. Acting Chair Anderson noted the elements included in PUD flexibility and asked for the input of the commission in terms of the overall request as this is a lot of development for the site, and there have been concerns mentioned regarding parking. Commissioner Saba stated that this development has been well planned and there was a diverse group of people speaking tonight from the applicant's team, not only the people that created the plan and/or worked on the details, but also people that will be selling the space. He stated that this will be market-driven and that will address the concerns, as the market forces clarify the steps. He stated that they know what they need to do to make it a successful complex, as you need to know the elements that will make sales and long-term success a reality. Acting Chair Anderson stated that under the PUD there is a higher quality of development required and believed that the City is seeing that in the architectural elements. He noted that this is a very expensive site to develop because of the sponge -like quality of the soils. He stated that this is true of any development that will occur on this site and therefore perhaps that is the tradeoff for allowing additional square footage. He stated that medical uses were not included in the original staff conditions but have been mentioned as a possible want from the developer and asked for input from the commission. Commissioner Goldetsky stated that he does not have a problem with allowing a medical use. He stated that he works in the healthcare industry, and there has been a bias over the years against it. He noted that there are not a lot of police calls to healthcare locations compared to other types of uses. Proposed Minutes 14 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 Commissioner Oakley stated that he would also support a medical type use. He noted that there is typically not a problem of under parking in Plymouth, and he does not advocate for too large of a parking lot. He stated that there is a mix in the uses and as long as the demand for parking does not all occur at the same time, he would support opening up the allowable uses. Acting Chair Anderson asked if there could be language included that would allow more uses as long as the applicant can prove that there would be sufficient parking for the different types of uses. Planning Manager Thomson agreed that staff could attempt to draft potential language prior to the City Council meeting. Commissioner Witt stated that she also lives near this development and has seen it go from vibrant to the conditions today. She stated that this is a lot of development for the site. She stated that there is no guarantee that this will remain full and provided the example of the Target shopping center that opened with a gusto and has struggled to remain full. She stated that this is a lot to request, and she is unsettled. She stated that there is no doubt in her mind that this will pass and will be constructed. She stated that if there is a lot of traffic, if the center does not remain full, the residents will have to live with that. She noted that this seems full to the brim and asked if it is necessary to allow this much in that space. She asked the commission to be mindful and not be distracted by the shiny penny. She stated that she would not support a medical use in this location. She noted that the traffic at Lancaster Lane and 36th Avenue will be impacted and that has not even been addressed. Senior Planner Drill stated that a monument sign as proposed for the senior building would fit within the requirements of the C-2 zoning district, and therefore there would be no problem with that. He agreed that it would be odd not to have a monument sign at the entrance of the development and stated that it simply was not placed on the applicant's plan and will be a part of the sign plan the applicant will later submit. He noted that a farmer's market is usually permitted through an administrative permit. He noted that the specific condition could be amended to not exclude farmer's markets. Planning Manager Thomson stated that staff does have the direction to determine the further details regarding the plants within the water treatment element. MOTION by Commissioner Oakley, seconded by Commissioner Witte, to approve the request by Rock Hill Management, LLC for a rezoning, deleting the exclusion of offices/clinics for medical, dental, or chiropractic services provided that sufficient parking is demonstrated, PUD general plan and preliminary plat for a redevelopment of the Four Seasons Mall site to be called "Agora" for property located at 4200 Lancaster Lane with the following revisions and additions: Condition 14 is revised to allow farmer's markets if approved by administrative permit, Condition 21.c. is deleted, Condition 22.d. is revised to allow a 60 square foot monument sign for the senior housing building, and Condition 23.c.3. is eliminated. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. S. NEW BUSINESS Proposed Minutes 15 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 9. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Acting Chair Anderson, with no objection, to adjourn the meeting at 10:00 P.M. Proposed Minutes 16 of 16 Meeting of January 4, 2017 Agenda Number File 2016 098 �► ` PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF REPORT TO: Plymouth Planning Commission FROM: Kip Berglund, Planner (509-5453) through Barbara Thomson Planning Manager MEETING DATE: January 18, 2017 APPLICANT: Landform Professional Services, LLC PROPOSAL: Rezoning and preliminary plat for "Creekside Woods Phase II" LOCATION: 17125 and 17135 Old Rockford Road GUIDING: LA -1 (living area 1) CURRENT ZONING: FRD (future restricted development) REVIEW DEADLINE: April 1, 2017 REQUESTED ACTION: Staff is working with the applicant regarding the proposed layout and final plat request for the Creekside Woods subdivision located immediately east of the subject property. The Creekside Woods layout will affect how the applicant will layout the proposed Creekside Woods Phase II subdivision. The applicant is in the process of preparing updated plans based on staff comments relating to utilities and access. Therefore, the applicant has requested that the item be moved to the Planning Commission meeting on February 1, 2017. At this time, staff is requesting that the Planning Commission open and then continue the public hearing. Notice of the new date this item will return for Planning Commission consideration will be mailed to all property owners within 750 feet of the site. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2016098 Legend al Landform Professional Services, LLC rM ® C, , City Cent,, CC, City Center 17215 Old Rockford Road [TT CO, Commercial Office IP, Planned Industrial Request for a Rezoning and Preliminary Plat LA -1, Living Area 1 LA -2, Living Area 2 LA -3, Living Area 3 ® LA -4, Living Area 4 500 250 0 500 1,000 ® LA -R1 Feet LA -R2 ® LA -R3 r;bcity of 0 LA -RT Plymouth, Minnesota V—Z] P -I, Public/Semi-Public/Institutional Agenda Number File 2016088 bg PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF REPORT TO: Plymouth Planning Commission p�� FROM: Shawn Drill, Sr. Planner (509-5456) through Barbara Thomsori; Planning Manager MEETING DATE: January 18, 2017 APPLICANT: Civil Site Group PROPOSAL: PUD general plan for a memory care home and retail building Preliminary plat for "Crossroads Commons Second Addition" LOCATION: Crossroads Commons PUD — south of the Highway 55 frontage road, between West Medicine Lake Drive and County Road 73 GUIDING: MXD (mixed use) ZONING: PUD (planned unit development) REVIEW DEADLINE: April 7, 2017 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Civil Site Group is requesting approval of the following items: 1) PUD general plan to allow construction of a one -level, 32 -room residential memory care home in the central portion of the PUD, and a 3,604 square foot retail building with drive-through window in the east portion of the PUD; and 2) Preliminary plat to establish two lots. One lot would be for the proposed memory care home, and one lot would be for the proposed retail building. File 2016088 Page 2 Notice of the public hearing was published in the City's official newspaper. Because the proposal includes a PUD general plan, two mailed notices were sent out to all property owners within 750 feet of the site. One notice was sent upon City receipt of the application, and the other notice was sent 12 days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the notification area map is attached. Development signage has also been posted on the property. CONTEXT: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Natural Characteristics of Site The site is located in the Bassett Creek Drainage District. It does not contain any land within a shoreland overlay district. The south portion of the site contains a portion of a large medium - quality wetland basin. That area of the site also contains floodplain that aligns with the wetland. Previous Actions Affecting Site The Plymouth Shopping Center occupied a portion of the site from 1955 until 2012. In 1994, the previous landowner received the necessary approvals to allow filling and grading in the northeast portion of the site. That filling and grading was completed later in 1994. In 2003, the City Council rezoned the site to PUD. In 2011, the City Council reguided the site to MXD (mixed use) and approved a PUD for a four- story, 90 -unit senior housing building in the west portion of the PUD, and a fast food restaurant with drive through in the north portion of the PUD. The remainder of the PUD was set aside for future development requiring separate PUD general plan approval. In 2015, the City Council approved a PUD general plan and preliminary plat for a different applicant to allow construction of a 6,152 square foot multi -tenant retail building with drive- through window in the east portion of the PUD. That applicant decided not to proceed with construction. At that time, there was no proposal for development of the central portion of the PUD (where the memory care home is now being proposed). Adjacent Land Use Guiding Zoning North Car wash, restaurant, C C-2 & C-3 (across Hwy. SS) &retail (commercial) (neighborhood comm. & highway comm., respectively) West Senior Housing MXD PUD Single-family home East & commercial C C-2 South Single-family homes LA -1 RSF-1 (living area 1) (single-family 1) Natural Characteristics of Site The site is located in the Bassett Creek Drainage District. It does not contain any land within a shoreland overlay district. The south portion of the site contains a portion of a large medium - quality wetland basin. That area of the site also contains floodplain that aligns with the wetland. Previous Actions Affecting Site The Plymouth Shopping Center occupied a portion of the site from 1955 until 2012. In 1994, the previous landowner received the necessary approvals to allow filling and grading in the northeast portion of the site. That filling and grading was completed later in 1994. In 2003, the City Council rezoned the site to PUD. In 2011, the City Council reguided the site to MXD (mixed use) and approved a PUD for a four- story, 90 -unit senior housing building in the west portion of the PUD, and a fast food restaurant with drive through in the north portion of the PUD. The remainder of the PUD was set aside for future development requiring separate PUD general plan approval. In 2015, the City Council approved a PUD general plan and preliminary plat for a different applicant to allow construction of a 6,152 square foot multi -tenant retail building with drive- through window in the east portion of the PUD. That applicant decided not to proceed with construction. At that time, there was no proposal for development of the central portion of the PUD (where the memory care home is now being proposed). File 2016088 Page 3 LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving a PUD general plan. This is because PUD approval is a "quasi -legislative" action (enactment of policy). The City may impose reasonable requirements in a PUD not otherwise required if deemed necessary to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. The proposal must be consistent with the comprehensive plan. The City's discretion in approving a preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the proposed plat meets the standards established by the PUD and those outlined in the subdivision regulations. Preliminary plat review is a "quasi-judicial" action (enforcement of established policy). If the preliminary plat meets all standards and the City approves the PUD general plan, the City must approve the preliminary plat. ANALYSIS OF REQUEST: Background When the Crossroads Commons PUD was approved in 2011, the City Council reguided the PUD site to MM (mixed use) to allow for a mixture of residential and commercial uses within the PUD. This was done to provide for a transition to the abutting residential development to the south and west of the PUD. The first phase included both residential (The Waters Senior Living) and commercial development (McDonald's), with the remaining developable land set aside for future commercial development. PUD General Plan A PUD zoning designation allows the City to require higher development standards and provides the City with a higher level of regulatory control than could be achieved under conventional zoning, with respect to allowable land uses, architecture, design, materials, signage, internal pedestrian circulation, and other site features. Because PUDs are customized zoning districts, they also provide for flexibility to the conventional zoning standards for items such as building setbacks and height. The applicant is requesting approval of a PUD general plan to allow construction of the following: 1) a one -level, 32 -room residential memory care home in the central portion of the PUD (west portion of the vacant area/subject site); and 2) a 3,604 square -foot retail building in the east portion of the PUD. The retail building would include two tenant spaces and a drive-through service window along its east elevation. File 2016088 Page 4 The Crossroads Commons PUD established that, for future development of the remaining vacant land (including the subject site), the standards of the C-2 (neighborhood commercial) zoning district should be used as a guide, but may be varied from in order to accomplish the purposes of the PUD. Building Setbacks The perimeter building setbacks within a PUD are flexible and are established by the approved PUD general plan. (Building setbacks from internal lot lines are not specified or regulated within a PUD.) The standard front yard building setback specified is 35 feet for C-2 properties. The standard side and rear yard building setback specified for C-2 properties is 15 feet, except that commercial buildings are to be setback at least 75 feet from residential lot lines. The applicant is proposing the following building setbacks: Memory Care Building • Front yard to north lot line (service road): 67 feet • Side yard to west lot line (internal to PUD): 59 feet • Side yard to east lot line (internal to PUD): 10 feet • Rear yard to south lot line: 545 feet Retail Building • Front yard to north lot line (service road): 96 feet • Side yard to west lot line (internal to PUD): 54 feet • Side yard to east lot line: 170 feet • Rear yard to south lot line: 530 feet No PUD flexibility is requested for the proposed building setbacks. Parking Setbacks The perimeter parking setbacks within a PUD are flexible and are established by the approved PUD general plan. (Parking setbacks from internal lot lines are not specified or regulated within a PUD.) The standard parking setback specified from the perimeter of a site is 20 feet for C-2 properties. The standard parking/drive aisle setback specified from a building is 10 feet (excluding drive- through service lanes) for C-2 properties. File 2016088 Page 5 The applicant is proposing the following parking/drive aisle setbacks: Memory Care Site • Parking to north lot line (service road): • Parking to west lot line (internal to PUD): • Parking to east lot line (internal to PUD): • Parking lot/drive aisle to south lot line: • Parking to west building wall: • Parking to south building wall: • Drive aisle to north building wall: • Drive aisle to east wall: 5 feet* 38 feet 0 feet 505 feet 12 feet 8 feet** 10 feet at nearest point 10 feet *PUD flexibility is requested for a 5 -foot parking setback (versus 20 feet) from the north lot line. This would match the existing 5 -foot parking setback from the north lot line for the abutting Waters Senior Living building located to the west within the PUD. **PUD flexibility is requested for an 8 -foot parking setback (versus 10 feet) from the south building wall. Retail Site • Parking to north lot line (service road): • Parking to west lot line (internal to PUD): • Parking lot/drive aisle to south lot line: • Parking to north building wall: • Parking to west building wall: • Drive aisle to east building wall: • Drive aisle to south building wall: 6 feet at nearest point* 26 feet 480 feet 10 feet 10 feet 0 feet (drive-through lane) 40 feet *PUD flexibility is requested for a 6 foot parking setback (versus 20 feet) from the north lot line. This would be compatible with the existing S footparkingsetbackfrom the north lot line for the Waters Senior Living building located to the west within the PUD. Staff finds that the requested PUD flexibility for parking and drive aisle setbacks would result in an efficient use of land and would not result in adverse affects on neighboring properties or the City. Drive Aisle Widths The standard drive aisle width specified between rows of parking is 26 feet. The proposed drive aisles would comply with this standard. File 2016088 Page 6 Drive -Through Stacking The drive-through stacking regulations within a PUD are flexible and are established by the approved PUD general plan. The proposal includes a drive-through service window for the retail building. Stacking space for ten vehicles is specified under conventional zoning regulations. The applicant is requesting PUD flexibility to allow nine stacking spaces for the drive-through lane. The required by-pass lane would be provided for the drive-through lane. Staff finds that the proposed drive-through stacking would be sufficient, and would not result in adverse affects on neighboring properties or the City. Building Height The maximum building height specified in the C-2 zoning district is 30 feet. The proposed buildings would not exceed 30 feet in height. The proposed memory care building would be roughly 22 feet high, and the proposed retail building would be roughly 20 feet high. Building Design and Materials The proposed memory care building would have a residential appearance. The exterior wall materials would include lapboard sidings, shake siding, and decorative stone. The pitched roof would have asphalt shingles. The proposed design and colors would be compatible with the existing Waters Senior Living building, which is the only other residential building within the PUD. The proposed materials for the retail building would include brick, stucco, glass, and decorative stone. The building would have a flat roof. The proposed design and colors would be compatible with the existing McDonalds' building, which is the only other commercial building within the PUD. The final design of the buildings (architecture, materials, and colors) would be reviewed administratively as part of the PUD final plan required for each building, in order to ensure a unified, cohesive development. Parking The ordinance requires 21 parking spaces for the proposed memory care home. The proposed plan shows 36 parking spaces on the memory care site. The ordinance requires 30 parking spaces based on the proposed size and use of the retail building. The proposed plan shows 31 parking spaces on the retail site. Cross -parking and access easements would be recorded, as required by the attached resolution. File 2016088 Page 7 Signage No wall signage is proposed for the memory care building. Wall signage is proposed on the north and east elevations of the retail building. The proposed wall signage would comply with the PUD standards. A development monument sign to serve both buildings would be placed near the center driveway for the site. In addition, menu board signage and directional signage would be provided for the retail building in accordance with commercial signage standards. The proposed freestanding signage would comply with the PUD standards. Lighting The City's lighting regulations specify a maximum mounting height of 30 feet for light fixtures, and a maximum light intensity of 2.5 lumens per square foot. The proposed light fixtures would be mounted at a height of 27 feet (including base), and would yield 2.78 lumens per square foot. As a result, the attached resolution requires revision to the lighting plan. The proposed lighting fixtures would comply with the standards relating to backlight, uplight, and glare. Landscaping The ordinance requires 24 trees for the proposed memory care building. Under the plan, 16 overstory trees, 13 understory trees, and numerous shrubs would be planted on the site providing an equivalent of 31 trees. The ordinance requires 16 trees for the site of the proposed retail building. Under the plan, 14 overstory trees and 6 understory trees would be planted in the site providing an equivalent of 16 trees. In addition, numerous shrubs and perennials would be planted on the site. The attached resolution includes a condition requiring a revision to the landscape plan to add or relocate conifers in a manner that helps to screen the drive-through lane and menu board signage from properties to the south. Drainage/Treatment of Runoff The City requires storm drainage systems to be designed so that the post -development rate of runoff from a site does not exceed the pre -development rate. Additionally, the City requires treatment of storm water runoff before it enters the drainage system. The applicant is proposing two filtration basins on the site, as well as an area of porous pavement. The applicant would be required to demonstrate compliance with all City and watershed regulations pertaining to water quality and rate control. The attached resolution addresses this matter. File 2016088 Page 8 Preliminary Plat The subject site is presently platted as Outlot B of "Crossroads Commons". The applicant is requesting a preliminary plat to replat the subject parcel from its current outlot status. Under the plan, the outlot would be subdivided and platted into two lots; one for each of the two proposed buildings, as follows: Lot Block Use Gross Acreage (includes wetland) Net Acreage (excludes wetland and buffer) 1 1 Proposed Memory Care Building 5.39 2.09 2 1 Proposed Retail Building 5.10 1.14 Total: 10.49 3.23 Wetland Buffering The plat is subject to the City's wetland buffering regulations, which require a natural buffer strip adjacent to wetlands and a structure setback from the buffer strip. The plan indicates the required 30 -foot wide (average) natural buffer strip and 15 -foot wide building setback from the buffer strip, in compliance with the regulations. Park Dedication The comprehensive plan does not identify the need for additional parkland on the subject site. As a result, the applicant would not be required to dedicate parkland to the City in conjunction with this development. Instead, the applicant would be required to pay an equivalent cash fee in lieu of land dedication, based upon the upland acreage of the lots. The park dedication fee is collected upon issuance of the building permit. The attached resolution addresses this matter. Final Platting The development application for this site included final platting. Final plats are not reviewed by the Planning Commission. The final plat would be added to the request and resolution when this development application is presented to the City Council. File 2016088 Page 9 RECOMMENDATION: Community Development Department staff recommends approval of the PUD general plan and preliminary plat for Civil Site Group, subject to the findings and conditions listed in the attached ordinance and resolutions. If new information is brought forward at the public hearing, staff may alter or reconsider its recommendation. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Ordinance Amending Section 21655.39 (Crossroads Commons PUD) 2. Draft Resolution Approving Findings of Fact 3. Draft Resolution Approving PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat 4. Location Map 5. Aerial Photo 6. Notification Area Map 7. Applicant's Narrative 8. Site Graphics CITY OF PLYMOUTH HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE N0. 2017 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 21 (ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE CITY CODE FOR A PUD GENERAL PLAN FOR LAND LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 55, BETWEEN WEST MEDICINE LAKE DRIVE AND COUNTY ROAD 73 (201 6088) THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH ORDAINS: Section 1. Amendment of City Code. Chapter 21 of the city code of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, adopted December 18, 2006 as amended, is hereby amended by revising language to Section 21655.39, as follows: 21655.39 CROSSROADS COMMONS PUD: Subd. 1. Legal Description. This PUD is presently legally described as Lot 1 of Block 1, Lot 1 of Block 2, and Outlots A, B, and C, Crossroads Commons, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Subd. 2. Incorporated herein by reference are the Crossroads Commons PUD plans received by the City on June 21, 2011, except as may be amended by City Council Resolution 2011-294, on file in the Office of the Zoning Administrator under File 2011014, and the Crossroads Commons Second Addition PUD plans received by the City onTebfuaryzT215 December 9, 2016, except as may be amended by City Council Resolution ''0'�T 2017-***, on file in the Office of the Zoning Administrator under File 2015005 2016088. Subd. 3. Allowable Uses. The uses permitted in this PUD shall include any permitted, accessory, conditional, or interim uses allowed in the C-2 (neighborhood commercial) zoning district, as well as a 90 -unit senior housing facility (consisting of assisted living and memory care) on Lot 1, Block 1, and a free-standing drive-through restaurant on Lot 1, Block 2, as shown on the revised PUD general plan received by the City on June 21, 2011, as well as a 32 - room memory care home on land to be platted as Lot 1, Block 1, Crossroads Commons Second Addition, and a 60-'3,604 square foot retail building with drive-through on land to be platted as Lot 4-2, Block 1, Crossoroads Commons 2"4 -Second Addition, as shown on the PUD general plan received by the City onz ebfuar-y 27, 2015 December 9, 2016. Subd. 4. Development Standards. Development standards shall be as indicated on the approved PUD General Plans, except as may be amended by City Council Resolution 2011- 294, on file in the Office of the Zoning Administrator under File 2011014, and except as may be amended by City Council Resolution ''�T 2017-***, on file in the office of the Zoning Administrator under File7(l�5 2016088. Ordinance 2017- 2016088 Page 2 Section 2. Effective Date. This amendment shall take effect immediately upon its passage. ADOPTED by the Plymouth City Council this ** day of ****, 2017. Kelli Slavik, Mayor ATTEST: Sandra R. Engdahl, City Clerk CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION N0. 2017- A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINDINGS OF FACT FOR AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 21655 (2016088) WHEREAS, Civil Site Group has requested approval of a PUD general plan to allow a construction of 32 -room memory care home and a 3,604 square foot retail building with drive-through south of Highway 55, between West Medicince Lake Road and County Road 73; and WHEREAS, the affected property is presently legally described as Outlot B, Crossroads Commons, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and would be legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Crossroads Commons Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, after the related final plat is recorded; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted an ordinance amending the zoning ordinance text for the PUD general plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by Civil Site Group for a PUD general plan to revise Section 21655.39 of Chapter 21 (zoning ordinance) entitiled "Crossroad Commons PUD" based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed PUD general plan is consistent with the MXD (mixed use) land use designation of the comprehensive plan. 2. The proposed PUD general plan would meet the purpose and intent of the PUD district. ADOPTED by the Plymouth City Council this ** day of ****, 2017. STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS. The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth City Council on , 2017 with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof. WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the city this day of City Clerk CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION N0. 2017- A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PUD GENERAL PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CIVIL SITE GROUP FOR A MEMORY CARE HOME AND RETAIL BUILDING TO BE LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 55, BETWEEN WEST MEDICINE LAKE DRIVE AND COUNTY ROAD 73 (2016088) WHEREAS, Civil Site Group has requested approval of a PUD general plan and preliminary plat to allow construction of a 32 -room memory care home and a 3,604 square foot retail building with drive- through service window on property presently legally described as Outlot B, Crossroads Commons, Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the site of the memory care home would be legally described as Lot 1, Block 1 Crossroads Commons Second Addition, and the site of the retail building would be legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Commons Second Addition upon recording of the final plat; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by Civil Site Group for a PUD general plan and preliminary plat for a new memory care home and retail building, subject to the following conditions: 1. A PUD general plan and preliminary plat are approved for construction of a 32 -room memory care home and a 3,604 square foot retail building with drive-through service window, and the related lots, in accordance with the plans received by the City on December 9, 2016, except as may be amended by this resolution. 2. A separate building permit is required prior to commencement of the project. 3. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall fulfill the requirements, submit the required information, and revise the plans as indicated below, consistent with the applicable city code, zoning ordinance, and engineering guidelines: a. Record the final plat. b. Complete a site improvement performance agreement and submit a financial guarantee pursuant to section 21045.10 of the zoning ordinance. c. Obtain any required approval from the watershed district. d. Obtain City approval of the PUD final plans and the final construction plans, including those for water quality and volume control. The building materials and colors shall be compatible with existing buildings in the PUD. e. Pay the required park dedication fee based on the upland acreage. f. Revise the lighting plan so the site does not exceed 2.5 lumens per square foot, and is in full compliance with City lighting regulations. Resolution 2017 - File 2016088 Page 2 g. Provide evidence of a recorded private cross -access and cross -parking easement agreement between the two lots within the plat. h. Revise the landscaping plan to add or relocate conifers in a manner that helps to screen the drive- through lane and menu board signage from properties to the south. i. Agreements and maintenance easements are required for the basins, retaining wall, and porous pavement. 4. One free-standing monument -type sign not exceeding 100 -square feet in area is allowed to be shared by both lots. In addition, menu board signage is allowed for the drive-through pursuant to commercial signage standards. No wall signage shall be allowed for the memory care home. Wall signage on the retail building shall not exceed 10 percent of the wall area to which the signage is attached, and no wall signage shall be placed on the south elevation of the retail building. 5. Any fencing related to a secured outdoor area for the memory care residents shall not exceed six feet in height, and shall be included with submission of the PUD final plan for the memory care home. 6. Silt fence shall be installed prior to any construction on the site. 7. Fire lane signage shall be provided in locations to be field identified by the fire inspector. 8. Fire hydrants shall be relocated to locations as approved by the Fire Inspector. One hydrant must be added to the memory care site at the southeast end of the east sidewalk. 9. The post -indicate valve for the retail building must be relocated to a location as approved by the Fire Inspector. 10. Access to the fire department connection must be provided for the retail building. A parking space near that fire department connection may need to be eliminated. 11. All drives shall be constructed to the City fire lane construction requirements. 12. Fire flow calculations, as approved by the Fire Inspector, are required prior to issuance of any City permits. 13. With respect to the existing storm water vault located in the northwest portion of Lot 1, note the following: a. No trees shall be planted atop the storm water vault. b. Specify who will own and maintain the storm water vault. c. Equipment used to grade atop the storm water vault shall have tracks to minimize damage to the vault. d. Limit deliveries or storage of materials atop the storm water vault. e. Delineate and protect the storm water vault with tree fencing or snow fencing. f. Televise the storm water vault chamber before and after the project to ensure the system is not damaged or filled with sediment. Resolution 2017 - File 2016088 Page 3 14. Consider installing the porous pavement after all other construction activity is completed to prevent clogging or damage to the pavement. 15. Standard Conditions: a. The project must comply with all building code requirements. b. The applicant shall remove any diseased or hazardous trees. c. No trees may be planted in the public right-of-way. d. Any rooftop or ground -mounted mechanical equipment shall be painted or screened to match the building. e. Any signage shall comply with the PUD and section 21155 of the zoning ordinance, and shall receive sign permits if required. f. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approvals per ordinance provisions. g. The preliminary plat shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the property owner or applicant has submitted the final plat application, or unless the applicant, with the consent of the property owner, has received prior approval from the City to extend the expiration date for up to one additional year, as regulated under Section 510 of the City Code. ADOPTED by the City Council this ** day of ****, 2017. STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth City Council on 2017, with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof. WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this day of City Clerk N �NO 5s Wetland in S. portion of site would not be disturbed 5 2016088 Civil Site Group Crossroads Commons 2nd Addition PUD General Plan, Preliminary Plat, & Final Plat rp)city of Plymouth, Minnesota 750 375 0 750 1,500 NEEMENNOMmoommomi Feet 1 r 2016088 -- Aerial Photo r;bcity of Plymouth, Minnesota 250 125 0 250 500 Feet NOTIFICATION AREA MAP Buffer Size: 750 feet 0 120 240 480 ft Map Comments: I I I I I I I I I 35-118-22-14-0032 For more information contact: Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South Minneapolis, MN 55487 gis.info@hennepin.us Land Use Application - Narrative TO: Shawn Drill City of Plymouth FROM: Patrick Sarver, PLA Civil Site Group DATE: 9/30/16 RE: Moments of Plymouth and Retail Development 11305 Minnesota 55 Service Road, Plymouth, MN Senior Living Option of Moments Communities ck kl 0 8 b Ci i,Is G R O U P The proposed development use for the Crossroads Commons Outlot B will be a Moments Communities Building, a high acuity focused memory care residential building and a 3,600 square foot retail building with related drive- thru. Moments Communities is designed to be a niche, boutique model. Moments of Plymouth consists of 32 units. Moments Communities owns all of its homes. Moments of Plymouth is actively reviewing candidates for the manager and care provider. Moments Communities offers a high acuity memory care "home" for those that need a higher level of care. The de -institutionalization of health care is a key component to our model. In addition to living accommodations, our focus will be on offering a higher level of care to those affected by memory loss and higher acuity assisted living. Our highly trained staff will offer a higher level of cognitive activities to help stabilize and give our residents the best quality of life possible. Moments Communities provides a housing and care solution for those that need a level of care beyond the typical assisted living model. Many residents need 24 hour care and many families do not want their loved ones living in a "facility" or hospital -like institution. We provide a home. www.CiviISiteGroup.com 4931 West 351h Street • Suite 200 • St. Louis Park ^ Minnesota • 55416 (612) 615-0060 Our primary resident consists of seniors that are experiencing memory loss on all levels, behavioral issues and those in need of additional living assistance on a daily basis. We will target those in need of a high acuity level of care. What separates our model from the competition: We specialize in high-end memory care, higher acuity memory care including behavioral issues, early on- set memory loss (age 40+). Our residents will have state of the art landscaping, amenities, activities, staffing, competitive pricing for care, and a highly visible and convenient location for friends and family to visit their loved ones. We will be serving those individuals who are suffering from an early onset or advanced stages of Alzheimer's/dementia, those suffering from behavioral issues associated with memory care, and customers that are in need of a higher level of assisted living to complete daily tasks. The advent of this "special care" unit will allow Moments to provide intake services for those that are in need of 24/7 nursing and/or care services. Examples of this care type are aforementioned and would include all male care, all female care, those that are on ventilators and trachea tubes. This great Plymouth location provides for great access and visibility, fit and finish of real estate, home vs facility atmosphere and high acuity care will be our competitive advantage. The overall de -institutionalization of our heath care model will set us apart from the other buildings on the market. 4931 West 35h Street • Suite 200 • St. Louis Park • Minnesota •55416 • www.civilsitegroup.com Matt Pavek, PE • 763-213-3944 Patrick Sarver, PLA • 952-250-2003 Levels of Care Offered: Dementia Level One Minimal amount of Assistance and Supervision • Help with dressing • Help with personal care • Toileting and/or occasional help with incontinence • Weekly scheduled shower • Two loads(2) of laundry per week • Monthly Simple medication set-up • Simple medication administration • Weekly housekeeping • 24-hour supervision • Wander Guard/Secured environment • Nightly checks every 4 hours • Three(3)meals a day Dementia Level 2 Moderate amount of Assistance and Supervision • All of the above, plus.... • Additional personal care & bathing 2 times per wk • Additional loads of laundry, up to 4 loads per wk • Additional Housekeeping up to % hour per wk • Additional support with eating • Additional support with social cueing • Frequent redirection & intervention to reduce the risk of elopement and/or inappropriate behavior • Occasional two -person assist with transferring Dementia Level 3 Extensive amount of Assistance and Supervision • All of the above, plus.... • Assistance with toileting (every 2 hour program) • Additional shower schedule up to 5 times per week • Unlimited Laundry • Additional Housekeeping up to 1 hour per wk • Approx. every two hour checks for safety & security • Daily two -person assist with transferring Dementia Level 4 Considerable amount of Assistance and Supervision • All of the above, plus.... • Two person transfers with care • Incontinence assistance (total) • Physical assistance/support with eating • Daily one-to-one interactions • Approx. every 15 minute checks for safety & security • Management of periodic aggressive behaviors, ie: hitting, biting, pushing, chocking, or other behavior that could cause physical harm to the resident or other residents. • Mechanical lifts • Management of inappropriate toileting behavior ie: urinating or defecating in inappropriate locations • Wound care 4931 West 35" Street • Suite 200 • St. Louis Park • Minnesota •55416 • www.civilsitegroup.com Matt Pavek, PE • 763-213-3944 Patrick Sarver, PLA • 952-250-2003 Agenda Number PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF REPORT TO: Plymouth Planning Commission FROM: Danette Parr, Economic Development Manager through Steve Juetten, Community Development Director MEETING DATE: January 18, 2017 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Review the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the proposed Tax Increment Financing District 7-9 and conclude that it is in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and adopt a resolution approving the Plan's compliance. BACKGROUND: Before creating a new Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District or modifying an existing TIF District, cities are required to find, among other things, that the TIF Plan conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan. Rock Hill Management LLC has submitted an application requesting Tax Increment Financing (TIF) to assist with the development of a mixed use development on approximately 17.3 acres, to be known as "Agora". The development is proposed to include the following elements: • Two hotels totaling 195 rooms and meeting space accommodations • A 139 -unit senior housing facility • 61,426 square feet of retail space • 19,860 square feet of administrative office space • 339 space parking ramp (200 spaces will be utilized for City Park and Ride) The funds are being requested to assist with extraordinary costs of site preparation related to demolition, soil conditions, and infrastructure. The site has extensive soil correction work that is required, along with the demolition of the existing substandard structure and parking area. In addition to the TIF request, the developer is also seeking up to $830,000 in grant funding from the Bassett Creek Watershed to assist with storm water treatment features. The developer has indicated that if they are unable to obtain the TIF, they will not be able to proceed with the development as proposed. The proposed project site is located in the southwest quadrant of Rockford Road and Highway 169. Currently, the site is the location of a 117,000 square foot substandard building and parking lot that once served as the Four Seasons Mall (originally built in 1978). The structure is built on pilings, which will largely be utilized with the new development, in addition to requiring additional pilings for the new structures and utilities. The TIF Plan meets the City's Comprehensive Plan in the following ways: 1. `Establish and maintain a land use pattern that reflects the community's desire to provide for a variety of land uses, including residential neighborhoods of varying densities, retail commercial and office areas, industrial developments, civic uses and parks and open space." 2. `Encourage that all areas of Plymouth be visually appealing, vital and continually maintained." 3. Is consistent with the development approach recommended for the Four Seasons Shopping Center with a mixed use development that offers a transit component. RECOMMENDATION: Review the modifications to the Tax Increment Financing Development District number 7 and the Plan for Tax Increment Financing District 7-9 and conclude that they are in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and adopt a resolution (attached) approving the compliance. ATTACHMENTS: 7-9 Location Map Draft Development Program/Draft TIF Plan Resolution Proposed TIF District 7-9 r� City of Plymouth, Minnesota 0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2 Miles THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA FROM CIN, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS. LEGEND TIF District 7-9 Development District No. 7 City Boundary Lakes Major Roads Roads /"/ Railroads As of January 6, 2017 Draft for Planning Commission Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 7 and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 (a redevelopment district) within Development District No. 7 City of Plymouth Hennepin County State of Minnesota Public Hearing: January 24, 2017 Adopted: RPrepared by: EHLERS &ASSOCIATES, INC. Em. H L E".S3060 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 Development Program for Development District No. 7 ............................................. 1-1 Foreword............................................................. 1-1 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 .................................. 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. Development Program 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 ........................................... 2-5 Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election .................................. 2-6 Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies ....................................... 2-7 Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs ....................................... 2-8 Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions ................. 2-8 Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation ................................ 2-10 Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ....................... 2-10 Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District ................................ 2-10 Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses .................................. 2-11 Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment ................................... 2-11 Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment .................................... 2-12 Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments ...................................... 2-13 Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer .............. 2-13 Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements ................................. 2-13 Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District ............................... 2-13 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 ................. 2-14 Subsection 2-28. Summary .............................................. 2-15 Appendix A Project Description...................................................... A-1 Appendix B Map of Development District No. 7 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 Development Program for Development District No. 7 Foreword The following text represents a Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 7. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Development Program for Development District No. 7. Generally, the substantive changes include the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9. For further information, a review of the Development Program for Development District No. 7, adopted December 19, 1988 and subsequently modified on April 12, 2011, is recommended. It is available from the City Manager at the City of Plymouth. Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within Development District No. 7. City of Plymouth Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 7 1-1 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 Subsection 2-1. Foreword The City of Plymouth (the "City"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 (the "District"), a redevelopment tax increment financing district, located in Development District No. 7. 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 City has certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ("M.S.'), Sections 469.124 to 469.133, 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 Development Program for Development District No. 7. Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives The District currently consists of three parcels of land and adjacent and internal rights-of-way. The District is being created to facilitate the redevelopment of the Four Seasons Mall into a mixed-use development consisting of two (2) hotels, approximately 81,000 sq/ft of retail/office space, an 8,000 sq/ft event center, 139 senior rental apartments and a new park and ride ramp in the City. Please see Appendix A for further District information. The City intends to enter into an agreement for the redevelopment by the first quarter of 2017 and development is likely to occur in 2017. This TIF Plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Development Program for Development District No. 7. The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Development Program 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 Development District No. 7 and the District. Subsection 2-4. Development Program Overview 1. Property to be Acquired - The City currently owns one parcel of property within the District. The remaining property located within the District may be acquired by the 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 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 City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District. City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 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 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 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 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 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, finds 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 oftax incrementfinancing district consisting ofaproject, 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) tankfacilities, orproperty whose immediatelyprevious use was for tankfacilities, as defined in Section 115C, Subd. 15, if the tankfacility: (i) have or had a capacity ofmore 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 ofdeficiencies 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 just substantial renovation or clearance. (c) A building is not structurally substandard ifit 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 City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-2 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) et. (1) the parcel was occupied by a substandard building or met the requirements ofparagraph (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 ofparagraph (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. (� 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 City relies on the following facts and findings: • The District is a redevelopment district consisting of three 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). 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. City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-3 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. I b., the duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2019, 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 2044, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The 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 andM.S., Section 469.177, Subd. ],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 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 Development District No. 7, upon completion of the projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table below. The City requests 100 percent ofthe available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2019. The Project Tax Capacity (PTC) listed on the following page is an estimate of values when the projects within the District are completed. City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-4 Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $2,887,080 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) $170,06 Fiscal Disparities Contribution $633,545 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $2,083,470 Original Local Tax Rate 1.12437 Estimated Pay 2017 Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $2,342,591 Percent Retained by the City 100% Tax capacity includes a 5% inflation factor for the duration of the District. The tax capacity included in this chart is the estimated tax capacity of the District in year 25. The tax capacity of the District in year one is estimated to be $447,596. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the City 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 is reviewing the area to be included in the District to determine if any building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the City. Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF Plan. As presently proposed, the projects within the District will be financed by a pay-as-you-go note and interfund loan/transfer. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification. This provision does not obligate the City to incur debt. The 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 $33,532,065 Interest $3,353,206 TOTAL $36,885,271 The 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 $22,827,344. 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. City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-5 Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate the redevelopment ofthe Four Seasons Mall into a mixed-use development consisting of two (2) hotels, approximately 81,000 sq/ft of retail/office space, an 8,000 sq/ft event center, 139 senior rental apartments and a new park and ride ramp in the City. The City has determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District costs, as described. The City 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 $2,000,000 Site Improvements/Preparation $10,700,000 Utilities $800,000 Other Qualifying Improvements $5,974,138 Administrative Costs (up to 10%) $3,353,206 PROJECT COST TOTAL $22,827,344 Interest S 14,057,927 PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $36,885,271 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 Development District No. 7, (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 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 2764.06, subdivision 7 or M.S., Section 473F.08, subdivision 6. Where the original net tax capacity is equal to or greater than the current net tax capacity, there is no captured tax capacity and no tax increment determination. Where the original tax capacity is less than the current tax City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-6 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 ofthe authorityfrom 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 City 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; (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 City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-7 469.174, 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 City 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. la, the county board may require the 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 City within forty-five days of receipt of this TIF Plan. In the opinion of the 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 City is 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 City has determined that such development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: IMPACT ON TAX BASE Estimated Estimated Captured 2016/Pay 2017 Tax Capacity (CTC) Percent of CTC Total Net Upon Completion to Entity Total Tax Capacity Hennepin County 1,576,149,616 2,083,470 0.1322% City of Plymouth 113,961,903 2,083,470 1.8282% Robbinsdale ISD No. 281 84,183,304 2,083,470 2.4749% City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-8 The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the estimated Pay 2017 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on estimated Pay 2017 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2017 rates, which were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b): (1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be generated over the life of the District is $33,532,065; (2) Probable impact of the District on cily provided services and ability to issue debt. An impact of the District on police protection is not expected. With any addition of new residents or businesses, police calls for service will be increased. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment. The probable impact ofthe District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The development is not expected to significantly impact any traffic movements in the area. The current infrastructure for sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be able to handle the additional volume generated from the proposed development. Based on the development plans, there are no additional costs associated with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting and sidewalks. However, lighting operating costs are yet to be determined. 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 $9,422,510; (4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. It is estimated that the amount of City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-9 IMPACT ON TAX RATES Estimated Percent Potential Pay 2017 of Total CTC Taxes Extension Rates Hennepin County 0.439990 39.13% 2,083,470 916,706 City of Plymouth 0.266590 23.71% 2,083,470 555,432 Robbinsdale ISD No. 281 0.315950 28.10% 2,083,470 658,272 Other 0.101840 9.06% 2,083,470 212,181 Total 1.124370 100.00% 2,342,591 The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the estimated Pay 2017 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on estimated Pay 2017 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2017 rates, which were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b): (1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be generated over the life of the District is $33,532,065; (2) Probable impact of the District on cily provided services and ability to issue debt. An impact of the District on police protection is not expected. With any addition of new residents or businesses, police calls for service will be increased. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment. The probable impact ofthe District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The development is not expected to significantly impact any traffic movements in the area. The current infrastructure for sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be able to handle the additional volume generated from the proposed development. Based on the development plans, there are no additional costs associated with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting and sidewalks. However, lighting operating costs are yet to be determined. 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 $9,422,510; (4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. It is estimated that the amount of City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-9 tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the county's share ofthe total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $13,121,097; (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 City's findings: • A list of applicable studies will be listed here prior to the public hearing. Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing district include all of the following potential revenue sources: 1. Taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed under M.S., Section 469.177; 2. The proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, to the extent the property was purchased by the authority with tax increments; 3. Principal and interest received on loans or other advances made by the authority with tax increments; 4. Interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments; 5. Repayments or return of tax increments made to the Authority under agreements for districts for which the request for certification was made after August 1, 1993; and 6. The market value homestead credit paid to the Authority under M.S., Section 273.1384. Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District In accordance with M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any: 1. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the District, if the reduction does not meet the requirements of M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e); 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 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 City, shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-10 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 City 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 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 City, other than: 1. Amounts paid for the purchase of land; 2. Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the District; 3. Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the District; 4. Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178; or 5. Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance costs described in clauses (1) to (3). For districts for which the request for certification were made before August 1, 1979, or after June 30, 1982, and before August 1, 2001, administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3, tax increment may be used to pay any authorized and documented administrative expenses for the District up to but not to exceed 10 percent of the total estimated tax increment expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined by M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less. For districts for which certification was requested after July 31, 2001, no tax increment may be used to pay 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 City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-11 percent) of any increment distributed to the 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 incrementfinancing districtpursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, nodemolition, 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 ofthe parcel in accordance with the tax incrementfinancing 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 thatparcel including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax incrementfinancingplan, the authorityshall 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 ofthe tax incrementfinancing district. The county auditor must enforce the provisions ofthis subdivision. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required activity has taken place for each parcel in the district. The evidence for a parcel must be submitted by February 1 of the fifth year following the year in which the parcel was certified as included in the district. For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements of a street are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street, and (3) substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street. The City or a property owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately January 2020 and report such actions to the County Auditor. Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment The 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 capital and administration costs of Development District No. 7 pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.124 to 469.133; 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 City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-12 City or for the benefit of Development District No. 7 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 City for the Tax Increment Fund of said District. The 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 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 City must spend or return the excess increments under paragraph (c) within nine months after the end of the year. In addition, the City may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in Development District No. 7 or the District. Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer The City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the Development Program 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 City to demonstrate the conformance ofthe development with City plans and ordinances. The 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 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 City concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the City should the development or redevelopment not be completed. City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-13 Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the 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 City Manager. Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subds. 5, 6, and 6b the City must undertake financial reporting for all tax increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board and County Auditor on or before August 1 of each year. M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15. If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M.S., Section 469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the Office of the State Auditor will direct the County Auditor to withhold the distribution of tax increment from the District. Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations As required by the TIF Act, in establishing the District, the determination has been made that the anticipated development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value ofthe 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 ofthe 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 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 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 capital and administration costs of Development District No. 7 pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.124 to 469.133. 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 City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-14 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. 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. 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 469.176Subd. 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 City, including the cost of preparation of the development action response plan, may be included in the qualifying costs. Subsection 2-28. Summary The City of Plymouth 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. City of Plymouth Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 2-15 Appendix A Project Description The City is working with Rock Hill Development to redevelop the vacant, Four Seasons Mall into a mixed- use development consisting of two (2) hotels (190 -units), approximately 81,000 sq/ft of retail/office space, an 8,000 sq/ft event center, 139 senior rental apartments and a new park and ride ramp in the City. The City anticipates issuing the developer a pay-as-you-go TIF note to assist in offsetting some of the redevelopment cost related to the site for building demolition and pilings and other mitigation issues to address the poor soil conditions. Appendix A-1 Appendix B Map of Development District No. 7 and the District Appendix B-1 Proposed TIF District 7-9 B City of Plymouth, Minnesota 0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2 Miles THIS REPRESENTS A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION AND DATA FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE AND OTHER SOURCES THAT HAS NOT BEEN FIELD VERIFIED. INFORMATION SHOULD BE FIELD VERIFIED AND COMPARED WITH ORINGIAL SOURCE DOCUMENTS. LEGEND Q TIF District 7-9 Development District No. 7 Q City Boundary Lakes Major Roads / ! Roads 1^/ Railroads 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 13-118-22-14-0008 UNASSIGNED CITY OF PLYMOUTH 13-118-22-14-0009 UNASSIGNED WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUS TR 13-118-22-14-0013 4200 LANCASTER LA N WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUS TR Appendix C-1 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District Appendix D_1 a N 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O N N N O l N O N O O N O O N r N O N ON O O.-NtV — OC —.- — — — UI N N N a in W W W W W W rrrrrr 000000 N N N N N N Q- aaaaaQ- E C �` o o aDmrrnNv[01°,0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O N N N a d O O V? O s� C Na QLL b E tb O NN ON d CL N � C dM��� Vr'O d0 d c Q m E _ Z X « 0 W m O E > b o 7 A a O v y H c n v co o C 2 .p C d S-0 .. x C 0 O W E y g� d�-00 0 a 0yZ ur ii doa°iLL 0 m OW E= 2 i :irn °a o`Aw WS A C 15 Z d d N O N N C t0 CL' X aEyUa���,L. . nnLL5F-d 0 z0 a`W c[C o: c'� moodo{ ami ta(pn of �� N_ -C, _ ' L 'N W W d 12 X N m N U U O ,S( d« O ,_ X a= ++ W A d a� of u1 N A O A W O ULLW ELL iiHU}Q M.'sE d Qa Nd d Tx a ro o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N �- 0.,00000000000 lL � 4. d p rn a �'• m O a o 0 0 0 o a a o 0 0 U£ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O IL U d m m s a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a U d rn d R d m a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000 E N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d d .+ y ao �o 0 o e o v e o a 0 0 a�,,,roobbb"'�au a o a a N H N O V ` EN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Nu]�ON�b�NN�ON y• N xLLNNh N�()U1NNbr 0 M M N 0 X_ M� M M M M M M 00 V t0 Rj r no NO b dO �rfV OI O a Aar 0 vf ~F�,Oj W 0t00N�MMO O u >+ V K d O. 0 0 0 0 0 0 t 0 M S N �O O O N N O4 O w M N LLI M C M N N M G W � N c � R `c O 'C N N N d v d «U C N 0000 b 0000 t0 d dUUU o aUU w nx b oa! Wi Q OE • a UUUU v o. # R 000000uoi00000 o�n SO O 19 I- • R R i ^2 > 0 00 0�001�00 � N M ON N O U q X0'71 C �bbapb • 0 0 y 0 � N I� N t O N i� V � � N a 0 N Or gO ,Oj V d R C UO 0,X�b000ro Opi tNpObOpD ro O' V,=!"t V m ODbNO W ��rN N rOf OD O `0 OMg NOi PZ :, eq 1 N c d C '= 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NOO�.�-�e�-�00 N N d 9 d i LL NM W Oro top 'C V x O R d s N A l L O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a R= R M tb0 M M 7 N Obi h ? - Y O O O £ U A R O N N 0 b P- N O M _ N C•-r� N Vi �•-��rONM OD 00� 6U0 h00 ON O O N <N—b� �b N C ro W R a • 0 F- V _ m m N EFF Fo Ra -p "O'O FnFn 'O Q]n]f1.1�m0]0]p] d w O 00000 N 000 R X UM NN�nOONN�e} 13 —'O I co F- R V d Zo d U a R d N U R d Q R s W MMb ObMbO) U ELU(Y To•w — a d C d y N M d N N N b r W x G d m 01 Of 0)U OOmcn0 t O_ - - - - -.-.- -- - w 2 o U 5MMco°•mEmmm9mm � c" ` Q R R Y Gl U� a Z w O d w M E d 0 3 as �p -62 d ro Oxy ow=yw dr /7 fn Z P 2r M� `NNt\IN Nt�INNNNNNNNNNNN N NQ Qt`t� f` Q M M t\ Q t\ a\ t\ M M t` t\ t\ M V V R V V 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 W N WNW N W N m N m N m N W N W N W N m N W N W N OD N W N W N m N m N W N m N W N W N W N m (� W N W 0o000000000000000000000000000000000000000p000a00000 m m O O N N M M v V W t W W r r W m m m O O � � N N M M V V tO N W W r r W W m m O O N N M M V 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N W NNtp Mto V tt)tpM Wtp rtO W tp mtp Otp rtt)NtOMtp V u) to 0 W to r to m Wm to O 0 W N 0 M W V 0 to W O N M 7 N m r W m O N M ^ W `-' W W, mNNN NNNNNNN N N MrOVON mmW O Wr00 mW VNtpm n r r N mmmm V m O W M W W V C2 W W W mr N W rtp VO W^Vr NW WOmM rr CV W m W V rMM V O W r W NM r W MOOmM V tp O V N W� W m W WN r mi r tp � m WON O W O N W tp tp W 0 'A N N M n m r m O r m �OWtON Otp WtOm MN W O W r0 V YOrW Oto^ N N r N 00 MrN M W W V NM W V W M O .-NmV W tp Nor VM mmmmmm0 NM�rW M W m N W m N W O Wm v m W Om 00 rtp N N tp m M W m N tp W O M W m N tO m N W m V r r O V r 0 v V t-� —. N N N N M M M V V V V tp tp W W W W r r r Co W W m m m ; N N N M M M V V to tN tp W O O O O'- mm W W N N O O m O M M W {{pp W W MMOO V V V V tp uI M M Wm rr rrM M N Nm m N N NNr1�r rm W V Vmmr rW WmmMM V V m W N W W tp O O O O M M N M N N O m r N N � � 0 0 (O ao r r r r m N W N W m r r � � m m N N N N W W M M W W m W N N r r� n <o W M W �OrD OrDOONN V V W W mmOONNtOp tpp�r O O M ntOD tOD W N N tf M M f00 top l s m V m m N N N M M M M M M M M M M V V V V' V V V V tp W W W m W W N W W W W W W r r r r m m W m W m m m m m 0 Woo zNa0a T - O— — V V W m_OOha p;2 DtO tp tp l� 1� — V — to 1n 1n MM m to tA��OO tp t� W m W tp V V 0 0 0 0 0 0 � .- 2.- M M tO W 0 0 �- r 1� r r M M o tp N N N W W V V m m f� 1� W W tp tp O O O ' W W O) a) m M a0 aD N !n V a0 a0 V V m W tq W TNN t0 W N N O q,;! ai�_ �_ W 0 0 m m m Ln N N W a0 1� r N N 0 s a s s CCC Ca-- av W O O r r N m tO (p t[jt NNOVi CIVi r my MMNN�cM-�R4310 MM V V V r O O (C C� aU t+N1 (N31 W QOi tWfl N N N 0 0 0 0 vv��NNN NMM V V mN W W rr W W mm00�--�-NNM M W W W W r r m m 00 NN V V W W m m O O N -7 . z - v- .N.. .N.. v N.. .N....N.. v v s e .M_. a s v c .c v s s 'It's O O tp tp O O N N W W W m tp m V V V V W W M M M M W W r r V V r r u) W W W M M m m r r W W N N m O W W NN��OOm W W W OOtp tp W Wmm00 W MMmW mm V V O O r rM M W W ''t yr rNN O ID tOm m ' 0 m M MP'1M V V W Wa0 W NNm2m W OOnrmW op m m O O W mm W M M N N N NN NMM W W W W N N W a t) O O M t A m m O O N N Lo N O O N t p N N O O V V W W N t f> N N N N V a D a D a� V N N M M t O 'D N N ��NNMMtp W mmOONNtO tprrOOMM W W W�NNtp W m m M M r r N m0 O W tp00 N W r MMMMMMMMV V V V V V V V WNtI'� WNNWNW W m W W W rrrrOD W W W mmmm000o---- o m O M m m o m m to W N v r V V O W M N W m r m m W M W r m N r W r W a r W N V r W O O m O W N W V N W W r r m W o m m O O N M 0 0 0 0 o e oma' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r r r r r r r r r r r n r r M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M fV N N (V N N N tV N N lV N N tV N m W m W W m m m W W o W n M N W � m O r V M M N N N r V m b M W C m O 7 m m M m W W r O t0 C V r N N N W OM r N O V m V m tp r N W W W W r r W m co m m O O V N W m W m tq W M m m m V N W M W V W m tp O O Wq W m to W r T V aD M N V O OD W tp VI to to to N N b W to to to 0 to to ip o � tci o tcpi_ � CO o � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W W N O W N V U7 N N O V W m m tf1 V m N O M ^ W M W m m N r W t0 W W r O W O r m m W W CO N m m N W W r a0 V m M m M m V m W N W W M O m V m m m O O N M fh V W W W tp m O r m V N M m M N O P- N n 7 V tV0 N N O tp m W w w tp K! c6 to N M VW' Np r cl O N M v N cV tV tV 0 0 0 0 0 o e o 0 0 0 r r r r r r r r r r r M M M M M M M M M M M N lV N N tV N N N N N N m M V m m N m O N W M top t[ V tmp R Ori V WM V W W m V V mw M M O r v N O m m r r W N M M V tp W W r to m O m ttf co aro N N tmp V O M W Nlo co a tp tp W r to t+I r M O m Oi O M to to N to to to to t[I N N to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V O O r n N C lc t00 O r ao OJ O � N Pr'1 'mV c0 n W 0 0 aE 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d A cc G W O O O LL 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 8,549,000 New Market Value - Estimate 53,287,050 Difference 44,738,050 Present Value of Tax Increment 17,976,863 Difference 26,761,187 Value Likely to Occur Without TIF is Less Than: 26,761,187 Appendix G-1 PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT A MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.7 AND A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 7-9 CONFORM TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY. WHEREAS, the City of Plymouth (the "City") has proposed to adopt a Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 7 (the "Development Program Modification") and a Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 7-9 (the "TIF Plan") therefor (the Development Program Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Program and Plan") and has submitted the Program and Plan to the City Planning Commission (the "Commission") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subd. 3, and WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the Program and Plan 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 Program and Plan conform to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Dated: January 18, 2017 Chair ATTEST: Secretary