Travel today at all?>> No. Last week.>> No no Grand Rapids today. But I was saying wonder what wonder whatdecade this came from. Well, good morning everybody. It isApril 16th, 2026, 7:30 1:00 in the morning and uh this is themeeting of the data Housing and Redevelopment Authority.And uh before we start the meeting, I want tolet her everybody know as I think most people do that are regularly involvedhere at least uh that we're doing these meetings on a hybrid basis uh what wecall a hybrid basis. It means that people can either participateuh in the meeting here, uhattend in chambers or they can be watching online in some form or fashionand call in if there are things that they want to visit with usabout uh Sometimes we have two opportunities forthat. There's a public comment period where people can speak about things thatare not on the agenda or otherwise scheduled for a future public hearing.Uh or uh if we have a public hearing matter in front of us, which we do notthis morning, they can speak to that as well.Uh having provided the information, I'm going to ask uh I think our executivedirector to call the roll. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair.>> Call I'm I'm calling the meeting to order, too. So, and then we'll call theroll. >> Commissioner Risser.>> Here. >> Commissioner Jackson.>> Here. >> Commissioner Pierce.>> Here. >> Commissioner Agnew is absent. ChairHovland. >> Here.>> Next is the Pledge of Allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the to the flagof the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, onenation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thanks, everybody. And umwe've got a meeting agenda that's been published. Is there anyone on thecouncil or on the HRA that wishes to modify the meeting agenda in any form orfashion or staff? Okay. Is there a motion to adopt themeeting agenda as published? >> So moved.>> Second. >> Mr. Jackson moves, Commissioner Pierceseconds the adoption of the meeting adoption of the meeting agenda aspublished. Uh any further discussion? All those infavor of adopting the meeting agenda as published, say I.>> I. >> Opposed? Carried. Meeting agenda isapproved. We have a an agenda to work from.And next uh we are at that community comment por- portion of the agenda.And we do have a few uh of our fellow residents in the audience this morning.I don't know if anybody wants to address the HRA in a matter of concern to themthat's not on the agenda this morning or otherwise scheduled for a future publichearing, you're welcome to come forward. And I don't see anybody indicating theywant to speak. Anybody online? >> I don't have anyone online yet, butbecause there is a brief delay in the broadcast, I'd recommend we wait aminute or so before moving on. My clock shows that it's 7:34, so I will comeback to you at 7:35 or when I have a speaker, whichever is first.>> Very good. >> It is now 7:35 and I still don't have acaller, so I think it's safe to move forward with the agenda.>> All right, uh sir, executive director of any comments from the prior HRA meeting?>> No comments to respond to. >> All right.Uh then let's move move on to the uhconsent portion of the agenda. There's only one item in there, and that's theminutes of the HRA meeting on March 5th, 2026.If there are no additions or corrections, I'll entertain a motion toadopt those minutes of March 5th, 2026. >> So moved.>> Second. >> Commissioner Jackson moves, CommissionerPierce uh seconds the adoption of the minutes from the March 5th, 2026 meetingof the HRA. Uh any further discussion? All those infavor of adoption of those minutes, say I.>> I. >> Opposed? Carried. Those minutes areadopted. And uhthe substance of our meeting this morning is next on the agenda and that'suh couple of items in the reports and recommendations portion of the agenda.And we've got one update too that'll be uh that'll be good to get on the SPARKprogram when we get to that portion. And our executive director and BillNoendorf will cover that. But uh first we're going to go toStephanie Hawkinson, our affordable housingdevelopment manager, uh who's got a proposal for us regardingprofessional services for revenue analysis and and a potential developmentscenario for affordable housing. Go ahead, Ms. Hawkinson.>> Good morning. Thank you. Yes, I am seeking to get approval for thatagreement with Urban Three. Um this is in part a follow-up todirection that was given to staff at our October 16th HRA work session when wesought guidance on issuing a request for proposal for the out lot behind firestation two. After a thoughtful discussion at thatwork session, staff was directed to obtain an opinion of value, determinethe highest and best use of the site, considering both a one-time sales priceas well as long-term tax revenue. We are asked to focus on five scenarios:market rate housing, affordable housing, commercial development, industrialdevelopment, or a microgrid. As staff began identifying a consultantto um to assist with this work, we are also mindful of the upcomingcomprehensive plan update. One chapter of this plan is focused onfuture land use. Therefore, given the overlap of trying to determine the bestland use for this city-owned site as well as looking at land use generally,it became clear that an analysis of a single owned city site could becomplemented by a broader evaluation. To help inform that land use chapter.Not write the land use chapter, but provide some background information tohelp lay the stage for further discussion.As noted in item report, Urban 3 brings nationally recognized expertise in landvalue economics, property tax analysis, and community design.The proposed scope of work would provide the city with data-driven evaluation ofthe five development scenarios for the fire station two out lot,including estimated land value and projected ongoing property tax revenueas requested. In addition, they will conduct a citywide land use analysis toillustrate help illustrate relative fiscal productivity of differentdevelopment patterns. This work will equip the policy makers,you all, and the city council with and the planning commission with objective,actionable information to support thoughtful, transparent, and fiscallyresponsible land use decisions. Um we you know, we just want the landuse to align with your your fiscal and policy goals.So, we are seeking approval for 43,000 $801 on HRA administrative funds toenter into this professional service agreement and approval of the agreement.That's all I have for you. >> All right. Questions forManager Hakanson. Yes, Commissioner Jackson.>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um so, I will admit I read this looking at it from thepublic point of view. I went through the city website. I did not see thisproposal by the um Urban 3. Um so, which I can see in my boardportal. And so, a lot of the details are laid out. I haven't read this, honestly,because like I said, I looked at it from the public point of view.In the future, when we have documents that are on the board portal that aren'ton the um website, I'd love love to have a tag about thatwhen we get the notification, and I don't know who does that becauseI had a lot of questions about the details cuz in the contractum it just says consultant's proposal forfocused economic analysis for the city of Edina, which is very vague. And um II what I'd like to do is amend this agreement to say incorporating the theother document, which has the details of what they'll be doing for us. Um cuzthis is really uh I read this and I'm like, I don't know what this means.>> Uh Commissioner, I understand that, and the the proposal is an attachment to theagreement. The reason why it wasn't included on the public space is becauseit's not ADA compliant because it came from a third-party vendor, and so theirproposal had graphics in it that were not did not follow the new ADA rules,and so that's why it was uploaded to the board portal, but not to thepublic-facing portal because of the ADA requirements that we now need to follow.>> It Right, I understand that, and thank you for telling the public that. Umthat being said, the contract as written, the agreement, does notincorporate that document. >> No, it does. Per Per Scope of Services.>> Right. >> Exhibit A.>> But Exhibit A is not attached to this document.>> The Exhibit A is attached to the board portal version of the document, but notto the public-facing document because of the ADA requirements, but it is attachedto the contract. >> Okay. Okay.>> But but I think you're making a really good point. That is, when you do have adocument that's attached as an exhibit. Well, how do how do we how do we managethat issue? I mean, that's that's something thatshould be available for the public to view, too.>> I I think thatthat Stephanie's not the subject matter expert on that subject.>> But but Jennifer is. >> Not sure I want to be the expert on thateither. Um every everystaff report ends with a link for people to request information that that is notposted on the website. So, someone can make a request to receive that. Iunderstand, however, Commissioner Jackson that what you're saying ispoint out what's not posted there, so that the public knows what's missing.So, we can talk about that as as a team and perhaps the city clerk's office candelineate or come up with a standard for all packets going forward that way.>> Yeah, so I got my notification meeting notification, you know, I'm like,"Okay." And I was distracted, so I just went through the website, didn't thinkabout going to the board portal. And so I missed this entire document, um whichwould have been nice to read, be prepared before the meeting. Um I'llhave to assume that you know, we've done a good job and it's thorough and and andcovers what needs to be covered. But when I read this agreement, umthere is no appendix A. I'm like, "Okay, well, thatwould be nice to have." >> I'll point that out to the city clerk'soffice. I think it would be wise to view your packet always through board portal.>> Yeah, well, I'll have to get in the habit of doing that, butsometimes, you know, it's it's available easily online. It's a little bit moredifficult to get into the board portal, soanyways, all right. >> so it's so what and the whyis what you're pointing out. >> Yeah, no, I>> What's missing and why it's missing. Yeah, and what you're trying to answer.It's a >> I mean, I think it's safe to assume theonly difference is that which cannot be made accessible.>> Right. >> Well, it's it's an odd circumstance. TheADA, designed to create accessibility, creates less transparency.>> Yes. >> Yeah.>> Yes. >> Which is a quite an anomaly.>> It's counterintuitive, and it's >> I I just wanted to mention and maybeyou're probably aware of this, but every city in Minnesota and in the country isstruggling with this new ADA standard. I mean, it's very difficult to complywith, and everyone is making their very best efforts, but it'scaused a lot of chaos and difficulty. So, I know staff here is doing the bestthey can because it's Everyone in the country is doing the best they can, andit's very difficult to do. >> So, when we put the or put the agendaout on the website,we need to say list the document and say not available because of ADA.Um and I don't know who's responsible for that, but I think then at least, youknow, people are notified that there are because it's like I said, the way theagreement is written, it's very vague. I'm like, well, where is appendix A? I'dlike to see that. Um cuz that's kind of the meat of the matter. Umand I I didn't Like I said, I was distracted, didn't think about goingthrough the board portal. Umso, that would be very helpful in the future.>> Good catch. Uh Commissioner Russcher. >> Um I do really want to echo it'd begreat if um you know, because you can't if youhave to open every single item, you know, there could be a heads-up whichwithin an item that something was not available, but I think at the very topof the agenda, every single board portal item should be listed so that the publiccan see just how many there there are. And I don't know if you could do apackage deal if you want to um you know, put in that request foruh, that you have to submit for a datarequest. Like, I would like all of the board portal items that are no longeravailable. I do want to say, as a city council person, I am aware of people whoare concerned about that out lot. And so, I proactively do did for thismeeting screenshots, created a PDF, and then sent it out to people proactively.And I don't know if that is okay. I did it comfortably because the deadline hasnot actually passed. That's the 24th of this month.>> You're fine with email. >> I am fine with email. I can do that.Okay. >> just things that are posted on websites,web platforms, and mobile applications for now.>> Right. Well, I'm happy to do that if people, you know, anyone listening, youknow, I could provide that service if there's a topic you're really concernedabout and there's a board portal item, I will go through that process and getthat to you. Uh, but the other question I have, because this is focused on thatout lot, it is a 4.8 acre site, and I know at other meetings I have asked, canwe even actually legally create a new cartway to the site because it's under 5acres in size, and I don't know if Attorney Kendall could comment on that. >> I don't know uh, your reference tocartway it sounds like something from statute, and I'm not sure what statuteyou're referring to, but generally speaking, if if the city ownsthe land, the city could utilize some of that land to create roadways or right ofway across it, or the city could dedicate right of way as part of theplat. There's a variety of ways that you can create access.>> So, it doesn't have to be 5 acres or more.>> No, not if you're platting it. I don't know what If you're referring toa statute regarding regarding cartways, I'm I'm not sure which statute you'rereferring to. >> Okay, it is the state statute aboutputting in roads. I don't have the number, but I did bring it up at anothermeeting. Um it could have been a work session.But I I would like to know that we can actuallycreate that access road before we invest $43,000in a study to pursue what could happen on that lot. I do also have concernsabout just how this is going to impact firestation number two. And I think about how when we went through the processwith Mason Green and the staff report listedentities um around the proposed site and it didn'tinclude city hall or the police station cuz it was diagonal. It wasn't north orsouth. And I just really want to emphasize that this is a very importantpiece of our infrastructure and how it functions and also how it could whateverdevelopment goes in, how it could impact, you know, potential emergencyservices is something that's got to be a part of that. So, really, you know,that's got to be a critical factor in any process that we use to determine howwe're going to proceed with that 4.8 acre site, which 1.9 acres is in the500-year FEMA flood zone. So, there's that as well. Buthigh-level, I have a concern about this particular contract being generated umthrough the HRA because it does specifically in the staffreport say that, you know, it references the comprehensive plan update. This istalking about land use um and this really appears to me to bebeyond the purview of this body. You know, we're told repeatedly, you can'ttalk about zoning here. You can't talk about land use. This is about projects.Um and so, I I do see a disconnect and I'mwondering, has the planning commission been consulted about um um working withUrban Three? >> UhI don't know which question you want me to take first.>> The planning commission, have they beenconsulted on this? >> This This is not to design a plan. TheIt is It's getting the data and the background information that would go toplanning commission so they can proceed with their work. It is providingbase ground level information to help inform them. So when they comewhen they do their work, they can they have some data to they can work with.Um it did not since this is primarily regarding HRA expenditure,um planning commission does not dictate or inform how you all spend your money.Um so when it comes to them working on the comp plan,there are multiple variables and this will just be included in the data setsthat they get as they proceed with their work. >> I understand that has logic. I kind offeel like it's a chicken and egg thing. Um and just the impact and the influenceand um it feels like this should be something, you know, because it couldhave such a profound impact on how our comprehensive plan process plays out. Ijust for the record, I am uncomfortable, but I do want to acknowledge um I havebeen the one with sort of the highest level of being uncomfortablein terms of like what bucket of money things are coming out of. And so this issort of a thing um and I did push back a about um the general fund being used foraffordable housing, that idea, which came up um three times. And I I do feelthat that's not a good way to go. So acknowledging my concerns and I I dostill have that, but thank you. Um I appreciate your response.>> Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Jackson.>> Yes, thank you. So, had a chance to read it now. Um this is helpful. We're oftencharged to make decisions based on data. How can we make decisions based on dataif we don't get the data? So, I I appreciate your work in this. Um I amand I appreciate you following our uhquestions and curiosity about this piece of land and how it fits into the overallcity. Um we are the housing and redevelopment authority and this is dataabout what kind of housing needs, what kind of redevelopment umuh things to expect. Um so, a lot like the housing study that we did for the umhousing task force. Um I think this is very helpful and I I hope that thepublic appreciates that we're happy to spend money to get data to makedata-driven decisions. So, I thank you for your work on this and um I'm infavor of it. >> Thank you, Commissioner. CommissionerPierce. >> Thanks, Mr. Chair. Um I echo um MemberJackson. Um we have had this conversation and I appreciate that umthe city is seeking the effort uhputting in the effort to get the data uh so that we can make an informeddecision. Um I also appreciated the comments thatthis is broader than just the outlot. Um I think that was one thing that mighthave been been lost um in the translation uh with the public thatwe're not just looking at that one specific site.Um and then the other comment I have for Manager Neil,I don't know if the concerns, to what extent the concerns Member Ressa raised,um are applicable in this case, but I would want to just make sureand I assume we are good to go,but I just want to make sure that there that we are moving forward with thisfollowing guidelines state statute all of that.So you don't have to respond to that today, but that is a request that I'm Ijust want to make sure that we're good to go.Thank you. >> You know manager Hawkins, and I thoughtyou did uh quite a remarkable job of recognizing what the council wanted youto do and what the HRA wanted to do to do from a staff standpoint and uhand uh went searching with uh your teammates for the best possible resourceto do the work that we needed to do from an economic development analysisstandpoint to figure out what should we do with this property if anything.So the concerns that have been raised this morning I think will be answeredover due time, but the question the threshold question isdo we want to get this information that we thought was important to have and uhuse a professional organization to do it that's well knownin the field and that has a cost attached to it.And if we should come to the point where we end up selling this property, we'llrecapture that cost I'm sure. Uh so um I'm in favor of moving forwardwith this matter uh and getting this contract in placeand getting that analysis done on the on the possibilities relative to that uhout lot and beyond as member as Commissioner Pierce points out becausethis will have a broader sort of impact too I think.So uh um having had that conversation does anybody else have anything to addor is there a motion to approve the professional services agreement forrevenue analysis and development scenario projections with Urban ThreeLLC? >> So moved.>> Second. >> Okay, we got a motion by member Jackson,second by member Commissioner Pierce uh to approve the professional servicesagreement recommended by staff for revenue analysis and developmentscenario projections with Urban 3 LLC. Uh any further the conversation on thismatter? Any further discussion? All those in favor of adoption of the motionas stated say I. >> I.>> I. Opposed? >> Abstain.>> Uh abstention? >> Yes.>> Okay. Uh no no nays, one abstention, uh threeeyes three eyes. Uh the motion's approved.Um all right. Now, we're going to move onto uh something that uh has occupied our time ever since acouple of pieces of property decided to redevelop across the street from eachother a few years ago.And um there's been some good preliminary workdone here as well as we go through this analysis and we've hit someeffective public uh input over time, I think. Some folks wished we would havehad a broader sort of uh comment opportunity, I think, at the atthe fire station, but beyond that uh the uhsynopsis that you put together, I think, captures many of the thoughts of theresidents that uh are in uh you know, have an interest in this particularproject. And so, we've got a we've got a goodbasis from a uh backgrounding standpoint, I think, uhboth from a staff standpoint, from a council and an HRA standpoint, anduh a resident uh input standpoint to be able to have a good conversation aboutwhether we want to go to a next uh phase of this analysis. So,turn now to uh our uh economic development manager Bill Neuendorf andChad Milner, our public works directors, with us this morning as well. And I'llturn it over to you, Manager Neuendorf. >> Great, thank you. Yes, uh this morningwe wanted to have a conversation about uh the proposed extension of the EdinaPromenade and the France Avenue crossing to get uh across France Avenue.This is one of many discussions, um but we're seeing this as kind of aprelude to potential action by the City Councilnext week. Uh so the the short ver- the the short version isum uh you directed us about a year ago togo out and do more study, uh potentially hire engineering firm to actually dosome preliminary engineering. So, staff has done that. We solicitedbids and have uh have four teams that are interested.Staff recom- does recommend one one of those. We've went through that review.That decision will will be made by the City Council next week. Um but thismorning I wanted to create an opportunity to have a discussion aboutthe overall project and focusing on the funding for the project. Umso uh I do have a PowerPoint presentation. Umit's very similar to what we presented at the open house last week.Um except I redid it in hopes of better complying with these new ADA provisions.Um so the the image here shows theentranceway um to to enter uh the the underpass on theeast side of France Avenue. Uh and this morning we'll talk brieflyabout the background of the project. We'll touch on the alternative designsthat were initially considered. We'll focus on the proposed concept um that'sbeen discussed for the last year or so with a focus on cost of the project andfinancing for it. I'll also summarize the community outreach and the inputthat we collected most recently. And then have the conversation aboutnext steps. Um so in 2023the HRA began to look into this opportunity to make a significant publicpublic improvement in this area. When we saw those two privately owned propertiesheading towards change. The scope and objective of the HRA is to identifyopportunities to improve bicycling, walking, driving, and to better connectneighborhoods. That's very specific in in the state law as well as in the 1977guiding document for the HRA. So in 2024we completed a feasibility report um that looked at this idea of going over,under, or through and that report focused on going under the roadway. Thatwas the preference that was indicated back in 2023.That report did look at things thoroughly but at avery high level and the consultants were unable to identifyany red flag that would prevent the construction of this type ofimprovement. At this point in time that bothdevelopers on the west side of the road and the east side of the road are movingforward with that project with their own respective projectsand soon the HRA as well as the city council should make a decision onwhether to proceed, when to proceed, and how to proceed. So this morning a coupleoptions that that I would propose that we we consideragain just for discussion but I wanted to kind of frame the outcome. Option 1Awould be to proceed with this preliminary design, hire the engineeringteam, start to figure out some of these details because there's a lot of detailsto look into. And hire them with the intention that wewant to build this in phases in the future.Option 1B is similar, proceed with that in preliminary engineering design.Do more research into the budget, do more research into into the funding withthe intention that we might build it but we don't expect it to be right away. Wewould actually delay that decision whether or not to build itafter we have much more information. Um and then option number two is uh stopthe study. Don't study this any longer. Right? Um at this point in time this uhthe HRA has spent a little bit over a hundred thousand dollars uh with threedifferent firms to look into this concept, again at a very high level, tosee if it makes sense. So, those are a couple discussion points you might wantto think about as we move forward. Uh this slide shows two images of theformer conditions on France Avenue and then the current conditions.Um France Avenue was initially a gravel road that led to the France Avenue dump.Um uh both of these photos are taken inapproximately the same location near 72nd Street and France Avenue lookingsouthbound. When it was gravel, it was a two-lanegravel road. Um as the mall was built in the 1950s and other things were actuallybuilt there, uh over time uh France Avenue has grown to be nine lanes oftraffic, through lanes, turn lanes, um different ways to access variousproperties, but it really creates uh it's a great place to drive fast, butit's not such a good place to cross the street to get to where you want to go,whether you live in the area or work in the area or or visiting. This image is an excerpt from the 2007uh URS study that focused on this uh Centennial Lakes Promenade area.Uh it shows France Avenue going north-south and identifies the varietyof of roads and paths that existed at that time, back in 2007.Um for landmarks, we've identified the YMCA, the uh Hennepin area library, andthe Centennial Lakes uh office complex. This study identified, amongst otherthings, two key recommendations. The first was the need to improve thepedestrian underpass at York Avenue. Some place in time1970s, 1980s, the city built a a tunnel,a concrete culvert that went under the road right by the YMCA.And it was not the most friendly and not the most inviting place to be. So,the recommendation was to improve that to make it welcoming, wider, brighter,and a place that people would actually want to use and and feel safe andcomfortable using. The second key recommendation was the need tothe need for a safe pedestrian crossing across France Avenue. And the thelocation identified back in this 2007 study was near the intersection of 72ndand France. So, this image shows the two approvedprojects back from 2023.It's it's the same area, so France Avenue is the center going north andsouth. On the west side of the road, you have the 72nd property. It's a5-acre site. The footprint shows the apartmentbuilding on the on one corner, the new office building on the other corner.And the rest of the site is public space.Through the entitlement process, through the financing process, the city was ableto secure public easements to use that space for pedestrian activities, forpedestrian plazas, for bicycles and cars and all those types of things.On the west side of the street, the only only thing the city does not have aneasement on is the stormwater pond. That's a privately owned pond, andfrankly, the city does not want to maintain it. So, we decided not to takean easement on that. But, the sidewalks, the trail, theplazas, the the driveway, that we do have easements on on on those.On the other side of the street, the former Macy's site is shown here. Uh7235 is the address of that one. Uh currently, it's one one buildingsurrounded by a giant parking lot. Uhthe developer has purchased the property with the intention of building four newbuildings. The site would be subdivided uminto multiple parcels. Uh each of the building footprints is shown, and thebuildings include residential, mixed-use, potential office, uh retail,restaurants, uh interior parking, etc. Similarly, the city has securedeasements over the new roadway that will be built, the new plazas that we built,the new sidewalks, the France Avenue frontage.Um all of those contracts have been prepared, not yet executed, because thecity won't take ownership until they actually build something. Again, we wantto know what we're getting the easement on, but those documents are prepared.They were part of the approval packages that were approved back in 2023 and2024. This image also shows the potentialconnection connection across France Avenue.Um I'll jump back in time. These two imagesshow the initial study. So, on the left is an excerpt from that 2007 studythat showed at that point um a proposed bridge that went over the roadway. Uh itconnected with ramps and stairs um along 72nd Street, and then alsotowards the back end of the parcels when it was just the Byerly's flagship store.Um ultimately, the city decided not to build that bridge.When we first started this this new round of study when these two newdevelopers came forward. The image on the right shows the initialfirst glance by an engineering firm, how would you connect uh these twoproperties? So, it shows a very simple design. Umthe 72nd Street location got shifted to the south a little bit because with theredevelopment of the Lunds & Byerlys site, the area where the old bridge waswas proposed is now the driveway into the property or driveway into theunderground garage. So, uh the intention in all of these conversations is not tocondemn properties. That's not our goal. We're trying to We're trying to build aDyna, not tear it down in this area. Um so, these these initial concepts showedpretty basic thinking of of, you know, what might be possible.We did find this to be of interest back in 2023,and we hired a firm to look into it with a more creative lens that was trulypeople-focused. Rather than drawing straight lines justto to to uh to reduce the costs,how can we design something that will people will actually use? That willactually be additive to the promenade, to the greater Southdale area, and southend of Dyna as a whole. We created what we called a scrapbook ofideas, and you've seen this um multiple times as this was prepared.But, as a staff and the consultants talked to a variety of stakeholders, wetook the ideas that were offered, researched, and put them into into ascrapbook. Um so, I I will touch on the on just thehighlights of some of the ideas we looked into.These images on the left shows a very simple trafficcalming approach. Trying to do Trying to do a an improved crosswalk at grade, butalso with traffic calming features like changes to the signal timing that wouldgive pedestrians a better chance to make it across the nine-lane road in onelight rather than getting stranded in the middle.Um Uhuh when we met with Hennepin County, theywere not interested in changing the signal timing. Uh their priority is forthrough traffic from the Crosstown to 494.So, uh as we looked at some of these more simple approaches, uh the county uhtransportation department, which oversees and issues permits for thisroad, just was not interested. So, we got more creative. Uh the imageon the right shows probably the most creative and wild concept of separatingthe through traffic by going uh you know, having the through traffic at alower level and then creating travel lanes for local traffic at the at thesurface. So, once you would eliminate the ninelanes of traffic to just simple one lane northbound, one lane southbound, it'svery easy to put a crosswalk that is umuh easier to to uh to cross. However, the cost of something like thisis is out of this world, and that was a veryshort conversation. But, that was those kind of bookend our approaches from thesimple to the uh wildly ambitious, and then we started settling on things thatwere more realistic. Uh this uh photo shows a lot ofdifferent tunnels that we looked into. We looked at tunnels in the Twin Citiesarea. We did some research in tunnels around the country.Um and they uh these are some examples of what they look like in the daytimeand the nighttime. Um but, this is a more simple approach um to simply makeit functional. It's it would still be nice, but the focus here is function.As we looked into these tunnels, uh we kept having this image in front ofus, which is uh an an image of a dark, confiningtunnel that is potentially scary to enterbecause I who's lurking at the back end? You don't know.So, um as we looked into these tunnels, we decided that was not the approach. Wekept hearing comments from day one of it needs to feel safe. It can't feelconfining or trapping or a place where crime is is invited. Um so that we movedon from the tunnel. Uh we looked at a a couple of examplesof of of wider tunnels. We looked at one inShakopee. That's the image on the left. Uh it's much wider, not a whole lottaller, but wider, and it ends in a in a plaza rather than just terminating intoa continued path or to a rural area or an urban type built-up area. It's wider.Uh the images on the right are an example of a plaza at it's actually inChicago on Michigan Avenue, right at the base of the John Hancock Center,uh where it's a plaza where there's retail on it. So, it's a place wherepeople like to hang out cuz there's reasons to be there.Um so that was another example we studied.And then we looked at bridges. Uh bridges that go over the road. That wasthat initial concept back in 2007. So, here's two image two images of twoexisting bridges in the Edina area. These are both older. They both havemajor flaws, and neither of them meet the ADA requirements any longer. Um sothe curlycue ramp on the left um has a has a long spiraling ramp to go up. Thatis no longer compliant with modern uh safety codes and standards. And theimage on the right is the bridge that goes over the highway by Roslyn Park.That is accessible only with steps. Again, no longer code compliant, and Ithink we all know the fate of that bridge being hit a couple times byoversized trucks and out of commission. So, we looked at other bridges, bridgesthat are modern and can actually have a chance to to meet new standards and newdesigns. Here's six images just of a variety of bridges from around thecountry. One some from Portugal, some fromFrance, some from Minneapolis, some from Chicago, some from one from Arizona, Ibelieve. They show that bridges can be designed in a number of configurations.They can be a wide variety of colors. They can have covers over them to makethem interesting. They can have lighting. A lot of different ways to todesign a bridge with interest. One of the notable things though is inorder to meet the ADA standards, we have to have ramps. We can't just have stepsany longer. We need ramps and at this particular location on France, in orderto get to the height that we need, the ramps would be very very very long.I'll show an example in the next in an upcoming slide. In fact, this slide.This image shows an an example of what a bridge would look like if we aligned italong the existing Nine Mile Creek Trail just as an example.So there's a lot of engineering notation on this particular image. Iapologize for all the detail. But in the center it shows France Avenuegoing north and south and then it shows a blue section which is actually thebridge that spans over the roadway. It's about 115, 120 feet wide.In order to fit in a ramp and not close driveways, not close down businesses,the ramps to approach from the west and from the east would yield a total bridgethat's approximately 1,700 feet long.So we would build the ramps 10 times longer than the bridge.So this is just one example where when we actually try to do the bridge withtraditional ramps to keep cost lower. Um I don't know if we exceed withlowering exceeded I don't know if he succeeded with lowering the cost becauseit's so long. Um but that's one example of what it looked like.We looked at other at other bridges, too. Uh this image shows an example fromDenver um of a bridge that goes over a smallcreek. Uh the focus for most users is on stairs.In order to meet the ADA provisions, there's elevators on one on on bothsides at or actually on one side at This is where the elevator is.Um the elevator is in a plaza. It's kind ofset back from the stairs. If you're looking for it, you'll find it. But forthe most part, users of this bridge go up and down the stairs. And over the years, there are otherproposals that were also studied uh not by the city, but we did collect themfrom developers and architects that were doing work for other clients. So theyThis shows a a potential bridge of uh of a really iconic design that would haveconnected two buildings that were proposed on the property. Now this imageis probably 10 years old. Uh thethat is actually from the Star Tribune. The conversation did not go far. Neitherof those buildings got built. But the the idea here was that the bridgeconnects on the second level and connects those private buildings.Uh it's possible. The concern there is in order to accessit, you have to go through privately owned space.Um and will that feel welcoming? You haveto go up into the second level of a private building, like the skyways ofMinneapolis. Umand then the image on the bottom is uh another concept that was studied umby developers, but never implemented. They addressed the same challenge ofFrance Avenue being a barrier. And what they studied was to build a land bridge,not just a, you know, 10-ft wide bridge, but truly a land bridge over it. Again,that concept never went very far. So, we looked at a lot of a lot of differentways to solve this problem. Uhbut I'll conclude with where we where we finished the conversation. We lookedright in our backyard. Here's two two images of underpassesthat exist at Centennial Lakes Park and on the Edina Promenade. Uh the image onthe left shows uh an underpass that goes under four under two lanes or four lanesof park lawn. The underpass is about 60-ft wide. It's all paved and there'strees and landscaping. It's well used. Um oftentimes uh I wonder if people evenrealize they're walking underneath traffic. It's it's really integratedwell into the park. And the image on the right is the existing underpass that wasbuilt around 2010 or so at York Avenue. That one could replace the originalconcrete culvert with something that's about 25-ft wide or so. Um about 12 or13-ft tall. And it's more welcoming, broader. There's art in it. There's somebenches. So, as we brought back this scrapbook ofideas and had the conversation of you know, what should best be pursued here?What's the direction we should go if any? Uh we brought it back to this imagewhich shows in concept the the um the four or the four footprints of thebuilding on the east side of the street, the two buildings on the west side ofthe street with this potential to expand the promenade. It's not just aboutbuilding a bridge or an underpass. The idea is to actually extend the promenadeto better connect the neighborhoods on the west side of the street withCentennial Lakes Park. UmSo, that's the history and I'm sorry that I took so long, but I did have toomany slides, Jennifer. Um>> It was really interesting. >> There we There we go. UmSo, with the HRA, we started the conversation here because both of thesesites are TIF redevelopment districts. Both of those TIF districts that werecreated included in their scope the ability to build uh public improvements,including pedestrian and bicycle improvements, whether bridges,underpass, or or crosswalks. So, the the estimated project cost, uhthis comes from the 2024 study. Uh we haven't updated it, but it's a it's agood place to start. We are including zero for land acquisition because we'vealready negotiated public easement rights at street level with thedevelopers. So, there's no uh funds in here for land. Uh we don't believe anywill be needed. We do have 4.2 million for the bridging itself, the retainingwalls, the concrete, the you know, the actual underpass itself. We added 1.5million for architectural elements because it has to feel inviting. Itcan't just be a dark, scary concrete culvert. Um we also included 660,000for water and sewer uh utilities. We included half a milliondollars for private utilities, Comcast, CenturyLink, and everybody elsethat that's in that area. We included 1.2 million to rebuild thatportion of France Avenue and the sidewalks that run parallel with it.We included 3 million for landscaping and streetscaping.Again, we're not just building a concrete paradise. We want to extend thepromenade and create something in a manner that is inviting, welcoming, anda place you want to be. We added a million dollars for trafficcontrol and phasing. We've had a lot of conversation andwe've heard some concerns, many concerns about how you how do you actually buildthis? Do you have to shut down traffic for multiple years? Is that going tostifle business in the area? We're not sure exactly how we're goingto build it. That's something we we need to study if we're going to go anyfurther, but we know that there is going to beexpense to that. So, we added a million dollars in the budget to considerphasing. So, that leaves us with 12 just over 12million dollars as the construction cost that's estimated.Now, we realize that we are very early. There's a lot of things that we don'tknow. There's things we don't even know we don't know yet don't know yet. So,the consultants recommended adding a 20% contingency at this point, which isextremely high. So, we added 2.4 million.And then we also added 35%, which would cover the cost of theengineers, the architects, the landscapers, the design, the legal work,hiring a construction inspector to make sure that, you know, if we go forward,the contractor's actually doing what they're supposed to be doing, um uh aswell as financing. Uh the city doesn't have 20 million dollars sitting in thein a drawer that we can just dive into. So, we would have to finance this overtime. So, when you add that 5 million, uh thetotal estimated cost at this point is 19.6 million dollars.I round that up to 20. Uhas far as paying that amount, uh this slide summarizes the anticipatedfinancing for the project. Uh I think it's very important to notethat the city's general fund, the property taxes that residents andeveryone else pays, we're assuming that zero comes from that budget. We've heardvery loud and clearly over the last several years that uh uh building thatthat building this and raising the budget to do it is notan acceptable approach. So, staff has worked hard. That's part of the reasonwhy we're talking about this now at this point because we think there's otherfunding sources that are out there that can build this without raising the levyon taxpayers. Um, we're assuming that about $500,000could be paid uh by the uh private owners. They're out there withbackhoes and shovels and they're doing site work all the time right now and inthe future. So, they could leave the site in acondition that that saves us money. Um, we've also assumed that zero would comefrom the federal budget. That's a change. In 2023, we thought we we wouldeasily qualify for some federal funds. Uh with the change of administration, wedon't think any federal funds are going to be out there for projects like this.So, we zeroed that category out. But, we did include about 3 million fromstate transportation programs and state funding sources.And we also included about 3 million from county transportation programs andand Met Council transportation programs. There's a lot of programs out there. Westill have to apply. We haven't secured any of those. We haven't even appliedfor any of those yet. Um, uhuh but the the vast majority of the fundingwould come from the new property taxes that the tax increment funds that aregenerated from these two new buildings. You might recall when wecreated these TIF districts and considered these proposals by thedevelopers, the impact of the tax base is absolutelytremendous. Um, so we're estimating that at least 12million uh of TIF uh tax increment dollarswill be used to fund these. And that's how we protect the general taxpayer fromit. So, that's the overall cost. Um,we've reached out to the community multiple times on this over the over thecouple years. Um, uh the earliest conver- or the thebiggest burst of conversation was in 2023 and 2024. Right? We kind of went onpause in 2025. Frankly, we were waiting for the developers because if thedevelopers were not going to proceed, there was no reason to have theseconversations. Um but now that the developers areclearly proceeding, in fact, they'll be finished with their projects in 6 to 9months, um it's obvious that there will be funds generated and we wanted torenew the conversation. We started off in conversation withHennepin County. It's their road. We can't do anything to it without theirpermission. So, they were very early at the table. We spoke with the ThreeRivers Park District. They have the bike trail. One of the conversation points isdoes the bike trail stay where it is or does it incorporate does it get shiftedinto this um underpass approach or other two options? We don't have those answersyet. That's why we need a more detailed study.We also spoke with the adjacent property owners because in order to do anything,as we negotiated those site plans and those easement agreements, those ownershad to be agreeable. So, they were early in the conversation.We also spoke with uh surrounding neighbors and neighborhood groups. Wehad a big public meeting with a couple neighborhood groups, had some greatinput. We also had uh on at least three occasions, we accepted uh communityinput on our Better Together Edina website. Uh we collected hundreds ofcomments on that website, supportive and opposition.In the 2025 quality of life survey, we had a question about this this project.Very general in nature cuz we didn't really know what we were doingspecifically. Uh and then we have also presented uh earlyversions of this presentation and that scrapbook of ideasto the HRA, to the Planning Commission, the Transportation Commission. Uh we'verun the run the the loop of those types of city uh commissions. And then mostrecently, just last week, we held an open house. Uh at that open house, wehad about 200 people attend. Um uha lot of folks liked what they saw. A lot of people didn't like what they saw.So, there's a lot of opinions out there on it.I tried to summarize what we heard last last week.And when you've got 200 people with their own various comments, it's hard tosummarize. So, um this is high-level, but umI think it's important to note in that 2025 quality of life survey, uh weincluded a general general question. There was no price tag attached to it.There was no design details. It's way too early in the process to have any ofthat. But, we found that at least 70% of respondents to that either stronglysupported an improvement here or or um or somewhat supported. Those were thetwo options. You strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, orstrongly oppose. Um at the open house last week, what weheard really um um mimicked what we've heard for thelast year and a half. Um I don't think I heard a lot that was new. Some peoplethought it was one of the best things. It'll be fantastic for their family. Whydidn't we build it 20 years ago? Others thought it was the most ridiculous ideathey've ever heard. Why would we even waste a penny of of tax money on this?So, a lot of comments. Umafter the staff and our consultants debrief from that meeting, we put ourthoughts together. Okay, what did we all hear?Um the the the two architects in the room that had thethe more um uhthe pretty renderings to for just to simplify it,they tended to hear more positive comments. People like what they saw. Iwas the guy that was staffing the poster board about financing.I heard a little bit of positive, but mostly I heard about how people don'tlike paying taxes. Umbut we put our heads together and and try to to aggregate what we all heard.Um some of it was verbal, some of it was written. So, we try to put all thattogether. What we what we try toI guess my summary points would be that most people expressed support forbetter, safer pedestrian routes. High-level, people like to be safe whenthey go for a walk. There was also a lot of concern aboutcity spending and the goal of having a reasonablelevel of taxation. That came out quite clearly.As far as whether or not people like thisunderpass idea or not, what we found is younger householdstended to strongly like it or mostly like it.Older folks and that participated tended to not like it saying that theydon't walk so much any longer, they don't think they're going to feel safe,they're not certainly not going to ride a bicycle, so why would they pay for it?So, um, that was the age difference was, um, became clear at when you bring thatmany people together. Um, overall, we also heard costs aboutor concerns about cost control, overruns, delays, all those types ofthings that are possible in any big project. Uh, we also continue tocontinue to hear that concern about personal safety.Is this a place I will be safe using? Um, is this a place where if I go for awalk with a stroller, am I going to get mowed down by a bicycle racer that'sspeeding by me? Um, and is it a place that's going toattract kids and vandals and there's going to be going to be graffiti there?Um, so those types of safety concerns, again, um, those we we heard those inthe very beginning, we we are still hearing those.And then finally, there was a concern about the cost of maintenance. You know,staff believes that we've got to plan to fund it without impacting the tax levy,but we still have to maintain it. Um, and that's something that we we don'thave a a detailed plan, but we know that that's important and needs more study.So, with all that, thank you for listening, thank you for your patience.I'm going to go back to where we started. Uh, the image here is that sameeasterly approach to the underpass. Uh this is in front of the the Macy's sitelooking to the north. Um Both Chad and myself are here to answerany questions. Um and I'll we'll go back with thoseinitial options that I started with to frame the conversation. Option 1A,do we want to consider proceeding? If it works out, we would probably build it.Option 1B, do we want to proceed with that preliminary design,get more information, better understand the cost, betterunderstand the financing, and make a decision whether or not to proceed atsome point in the future? Or option number two,stop the study and don't study any don't study this anyfurther. So, with that, Mr. Chair, thank youagain for this thing and I'll turn it back to you.>> Very well done. You make this presentation a few times, you get prettygood at it. And it was a good backgrounding, Ithink, for all of us. Uh And Chad, thanks for your participation.Really uh I'm glad you're here this morning.And you stood patiently by >> Ready for questions.>> while you made that comprehensive presentation. Uhcolleagues, thoughts uh from you. Let Let Let me just get onething in my head here. We you know, at one time I think it was at the councilwe talked about uh uh potential of a I think it was a$400,000 contract for engineering purposes and I think ifI remember correctly, it was amongst the array that you talked to LHBH was arecommended >> Yep.>> engineering firm. And so, we decided, well, we didn't even know if they weregoing to close on the purchase of the Macy's property at that time, so wedeferred on that decision. So, I take it that that's under 1A or 1B, that's oneof the first costs that we would face. >> That's the question we'll ask you nextTuesday evening. So, we had four four firms submitted responses to that RFP.We had a multiple departments and the Hennepin County reviewed those proposalsand we were going to recommend LHB as the lowest cost but also met the valuesof the RFP. So that's the question you're going tothese options to answer for us on Tuesday night next week.>> That's a good thing to keep in mind as we sit with our HRE hats on that we'vegot a decision point coming next Tuesday.Um Commissioner, go ahead.>> Yes, thank you. >> Wilson.>> Um so as you were speaking, one of the questions that came upand has come up in our emails and everything is how many people do wethink are going to be using this? And so between now and next Tuesday, would itbe possible to send an intern out to count the number of people who gothrough the France or the York Avenue underpass? Just to say if it's exactlylike the York underpass and is used in exactly the same way, this is how manybikes, this is how many pedestrians we saw in a two-hour periodof time. So I don't know if you've got staffing to do that, but I think thatwould be at least a tiny estimate, but people like howmany people are going to use this? I'm not going to use this.So if we have a idea come from York Avenue.>> We don't even need to do that. We already have the data. So that's in thepacket. We measured this along the trail right at near Macy's in September for 1week in 2024. It's 300, it averaged 300 users a day.>> Okay. Great. >> So we'll have that in the informationfor you next week. >> That'd be wonderful. Thank you. Um>> Can I ask a follow-up? What area was that again? I missed that.>> It was right next to Macy's on the Three River Park Regional Trail. So it's justa you know, it's it's basically near this graphic you'relooking at. >> Yeah, I know what you're talking about.Yeah, I just didn't hear the >> And it averaged for that week, right? Ijust It was just 1 week in the fall. >> Okay.>> September 24, 300 users per day. >> Thank you.>> Okay. >> And then same issue beforeCommissioner Jackson moves on to her next question.Do we measure any uh traffic countson the east-west leg going underneath York?Because I think that would be a more appropriate sort of comparative.How many people were moving back and forth under York Avenue?>> I think it's pretty comparable between the Macy's location and York, but wedon't have data on York. >> Okay.I suspect it's less than that just having been on there quite a bit.Um All right. Okay, Council CommissionerJackson, go ahead. >> Yes, thank you. Um so, another questionand you touched on this. First of all, thank you, both of you, for the openhouse on Monday. I had not had the opportunity to be with the publictalking about this. This was extremely informative for me to hear, to seepeople uh face-to-face. It's one thing to see a survey, it's another thing tomeet with people. So, that was extremely helpful and I know it was a big deal toput that on, but so I want to thank you both. Umone of the other questions that came up actually in relation to our liquoroperations, when York Avenue was shut down all last summer, it impacted ourliquor store and people are concerned about the impact umon businesses if we shut down France Avenue. Um so, I know that's part of thepresentation. We don't know what the staging is, but I want to make sure thatif we move forward, that's one of the top criteria that theinitial study looks at because we want to make sure that we're not um that wasreally bad to have York shut down for so long. UmI felt that and I never go to that part of town, but I felt it repeatedly. So,if I felt it, I know that people who live there felt it very badly.Um and I think my fellow commissioners will have questions about um finance.One thing I do want to say on your slide looking at the different expenses, we'rea million dollars short. I think it's it would be $13 million of TIF um if if wedid that, so, um, between now and Tuesday, if we give the samepresentation, we should reflect that. Um, andI will save my questions and maybe I'll let the my my fellow commissioners addon to it. The first one is um, what is the what are the cost of ofmaintaining it? The second one is we already have TIF districts on both sidesof this project. Um, if we do this and we do the full 20dollars with TIF, how much longer would that potentially,um, extend the TIF TIF district? So, if if we anticipate the I think they'reboth 25-year TIFs. Um, I don't think we're anticipating that they will go thefull 25 years to pay off what we've already agreed to finance. Um, but howmany years, if we had the full 20 million dollars paid for through TIF,would that extend the period? Cuz I'm thinking,um, it's 2026. 25 years from now is 2051.If you're 70 years old now, you'll be 95 before you see any impact on yourproperty taxes at all, um, if it goes the full term of the TIF. And if it's 20years, you'll be 90. If you Otherwise, you'd be 95 and that's for people whoare 70 now. Um, so, just kind of put it in contextof our lifespan, that because we already have TIF, um, on there, you're not goingto see an impact on your property taxes one way or another for a number ofyears, but how many years would that push that out? So,those are my questions, um, but I want to, before you answer them, let myfellow commissioners add to it. >> Thank you, Commissioner. CommissionerRisser. >> Thank you. And, um, I am for option two,stopping expenditures on this project. Uh,at the meeting, and I do really want to thank you for all the work that you putinto it. I had conversations and it reallyreminded me of um a seminar that kids took that were itwas very popular about paradoxes and Zeno's paradoxes and you know, thetunnel versus the bridge paradox and I know that in the feasibility report onpage four it says specifically the pedestrian underpass is achieved byconstructing bridges used by northbound and southbound vehicles on France Avenuewhile pedestrians cross underneath like the underpasses on York Avenue andwithin Centennial Lakes. And I've consistentlyquestioned how to me this tunnel is two separate bridges with open spacewhich those two are. So, if you could walk me through that because I'm justnot seeing that. I see walls that are continuous along the proposed structure.Um I don't see openings. How is this what Isee is a tunnel two bridges? >> So, when we look at the structure, it'sbasically a definition of a structure. So, with the bridge we're using beams.When you use beams it's called a bridge. If you use like some of the examplesBill Bill showed where it's just a circular concrete culvertthat we would typically term as a tunnel. So, it's it's classifiedstructure with the federal bridge inspection program cuz we're using beamsto build it. >> And yet the classic definition of atunnel is an underground passage which this appears to be. Just a comment. Hence the paradox.That's the first paradox. The second is it will have zero impact on propertytaxes. And um do want to thank member Jacksonwho just noted that people won't see any relief on theirtaxes until after the TIF district has expired.And so it it will have an impact on taxes. It might not be directly fundedexcept if we start work on this project and there isn't enoughum generated TIF increment to pay for it, we are going to have to bond forthat. True? >> Yes, I I would expect that we would bondto build this. Um I mentioned we don't have the city doesn't have $20 millioncash in a drawer. So we would bond to build this. Uh those bonds would berepaid with TIF. Um uhgrants received from third parties would reduce that that overall bond amountvery very quickly on the first 2 years. But we definitely would repay it uhuh from TIF as a primary source. It is possible if everything goes haywire, thecity would still be issuing the debt. So uhif TIF if there's TIF shortfalls, that would come somewhere else from the city.We'd have to identify a source. Um We've waited for about a yearso that we would see whether or not the developers are going to proceed. At thispoint in time, I feel comfortable that they are that they will proceed.>> If we did have to bond, that would have an impact on property taxes. True?>> Um not correct. I met with our finance director yesterday and and umuh as long as there's the TIF generation,the tax increment from these new buildings,that would pay the bond, so it would not appear in the levy.>> It would not It'd have zero impact. >> That's correct.>> We won't experience the benefit of those dollars coming back to residents untilthe TIF district expires. >> Correct.>> Okay, the other issue is and I really did appreciate when youwere talking about that bridge that was considered uhto access it, you would have to go through privately owned space and wewondered whether people would feel comfortable in that space. And you weretalking about that in terms of the project that got passed over. Um theother dialogue I had with people was oh, it's space. It's an easement on privateland. And you have to go down um 70second enter onto a private space and then loop back in order to access thetunnel on the west side. So, there's that whole dynamic. Is it public? Is itprivate? And an easement overprivate land does not create the same kind of feeling that you get when you'reon the public trail. Um headed toward the York Avenueunderpass. Um which is two discrete bridges.Okay, and I I get that from a technical standpointthe tunnel is exactly the same as those two bridges. But in terms ofthe experiential umreality it will probably feel very different tomany people. And I think counting the number of users for theYork Avenue underpass doesn't necessarily provide accurate anaccurate projection of how many people will walk halfway down the block orpedal or roll in order to get to the tunnel. And thus far we have seenapproaches to the tunnel coming from the northwestand the southeast, but not other approaches. And I I keep thinking abouthow would you get to the tunnel if you were coming from the northeast, and youwould have to go up into private space to that sidewalk thatis created by Lenscrafters lease, and there's a slope, and I don't know if theslope is ADA compliant, uh but it would come down, and then you'd have to godown um to where the tunnel entrance is, and it's important to note thisexperience of going down um below grade along that section of sidewalk issomething everybody is going to have to experience regardless of whether or notthey want to use the tunnel. And I do think it could be um something thatdiscourages people from walking along that section of sidewalk. The otherthing is I think it's important to count how many people are actually using thosesidewalks today. There's not a lot of I stood um on France Avenue for about 15minutes, and that's not a huge period of time, uh across from the opening betweenthe two buildings that people are going to have to pass through, and nobodywalked by me the entire time.Um so I don't I don't know how much use thoseuh that sidewalk would get. Um I do haveconcerns about uhyou know, and some people have said it seemed more like a promotional event,you know, and I I appreciate all the work that went into it, but then if wecould go back to the slide that talked about theum quality of life survey. Okay, that question, it wasn't about thespecific location. It was about a safer crossing across France um to connectneighborhoods to the promenade. And the promenade extends north-south quite adistance. It's not just at that location. So, I think you know, and youcan say you're splitting hairs, but on the other hand, it it is important tohave it be very accurate. Um I do getconcerned when I keep seeing the video. It's a beautiful sunny dayum and you've got all thisuh you don't have rain, you don't have ice, you don't have darkness. Um youdon't have the reality of what the tunnel is going to look like uh duringdifferent, you know, types of weather, seasons, um times of day, night. Is itgoing to be open at night? That's a question I've heard repeatedly. Is itgoing to be open 24/7? >> Yes.>> It will. Okay. >> Be open just like Centennial Lakestrails are open now 24/7. >> Okay.All right, that's good to know. Umthe other questions and this hasn't the uh one thing I would like to know we didcommunicate with Hennepin County early on. Have we had recent conversationsabout could we extend the amount of time on the traffic lights? When was the lasttime we raised that question? >> They're extended as far as they'recomfortable right now. So, they've had them timed to 2.5 to 3.0 ft per secondfor a normal walking. And that's their comfort level. They'vemaxed that out. We've talked to them in the last few years.>> Could we talk to them more recently? I mean, could we talk to them today andjust find out if we could extend it if it's been a few years since we've asked?>> We can always ask. >> Okay, cuz I think it would be good tohave recent data about that at our meeting. Um before we decide whether toinvest how much was it? 400,000? Umthe Can we go back to the expe- the list of costs?Um Okay, that 20% contingency fee. Theconsultant Who was the consultant on that?>> LHB to put together and we reviewed their cost. We always look at timing ofprojects. Is it a short-term like two to four year potential or is it 10 plusyears? So that's how we look at what that contingency number should be. Welooked at past projects and the bid history of similar projects. Every yearMin Dot puts out a list of of projects that are very similar, so we compare tothat in the short-term. We look at the scope of the project.>> Okay. >> We tried to do this rough concept withmaterials that are readily available. So not make weird curved things and andbeams that aren't available. It's kind of standard sizes that would be easierto purchase. And then every one of those items hascontingency in it, too, including that 20%. So we have a risk uh there's alwaysrisk are we estimating too high, but there's a risk if we're estimating toolow. So I would compare it to our street recon program. We've been really goodabout estimating that program cuz we've done it year after year for 20 plusyears. >> Okay.>> interesting projects like this, it's a little harder. That's why we put abigger contingency on these estimates. >> And that was generated back in for thefeasibility report of 2024. >> Year and a half ago, correct.>> Okay, so before the war, before tariffs, before because we did seeum the cost for and this is apples and oranges, I willsay that up front. Um the aquatic center improvements went from 4 million to 8.And so just kind of I can't help but think about that.Where the streetscape and landscape, the 3 million, where is that going to go?>> We need this next contract to determine where we can integrate things like thatbetween the development projects and then alsoon the easements that we have would havecontrol over along France Avenue and all those spaces. Where is there enough roomto do it in? So it's a it's a placeholder. All these things areplaceholders now. >> Mhm.>> We have a concept. We need to if we really want to move forward, we need waymore details and that's this 30% potential design contract next Tuesday.>> At the end of the day, I see this as a project that is connecting two privatesites. And so, I see it as very different fromthe York Avenue underpass where you have public space going under a busy road toanother area of public space. And so, that for me really is again one of thereasons why and we have been working on this for pretty much my entire term oncouncil. So, that is where I stand. Thank you.And I appreciate all the work. >> Mayor Hovland, can I read back thatquality of life question? I just want to make sure like we'rewe're really being accurate about what that question said. So, it's question 21on the survey and it said, "France Avenue is a busy thoroughfare used byabout 27,000 vehicles per day. A study identified the need to constructa dedicated bicycle and pedestrian route to connect neighborhoods west of FranceAvenue to Centennial Lakes and the Dyna Promenade. Several examples have beenidentified for the crossing including a traditional crosswalk, tunnel, bridge,at-grade crossing, and underpass. To what extent do you support thedevelopment of the bicycling pedestrian route including the crossing?So, Council Member Risser is correct. It did not identify the exact location,just the concept or need to identify or the need to connect the westernneighborhoods with Centennial Lakes and the Promenade.>> Thank you. >> Member uh Council uh uhCommissioner Pierce. >> Uh thanks, Mr. Chair.Um >> How many things do you want here?>> So, I have um I probably a few questions and somecomments. Um and I did send an email earlier, uh butI'll echo um I was not able to attend the openhouse. That was actually my birthday and I did not prioritize the city overcelebrating with my family. Sorry about that.Uh but um I do appreciate I did appreciate the presentation, the report.Um I read through all of that um and so I I thought it was a very well-attendedevent. Um and you did a nice job of um providing the documentation after thefact. And I think member Jackson actually mentioned that as well.Um So I haven't I'm I'm not as organized asI usually am. So I I might go a few different places.Uh but the first thing umI want to mention umI Where I am right now is I'm I'm not surethat this is the thebest use of the funds. Maybe I'd put it that way. And it kind of boils down touh what is the return that we're getting. And this is alittle nuance. So I'll try to explain it. But the first question I have, andthis isn't for the two of you, but it it's more for my colleagues. Um if wedid have $20 million or the capacity to borrow or bond for it,is this the best value for the community tospend that money on? And I I don't knowthe answer to that. But as I went through the feedback and analyzed it,that was the first question that bubbled up to me. Um I interpreted the feedback.And this of course is subjective, even though we're all looking at the samedata set. It is still subjective. I felt like itwas, you know, 60/40 opposition.40% for, 60% you know, some opposition.To me, that's almost like 50/50. Right?And then there was this group that was ranged from anywhere from 10 to20%. That were neither.Right? They weren't for it or opposition. They just weren'tconvinced yet that this is something that could should go forward. So, I feltlike that group was probably leaning towards approval,but had a bunch of questions. And some of them we talked about today.Um I actually think that that's not a badposition to be in at all. It It kind of follows politics inAmerica. Right? You've got the polls, and then you've got the swing voters inthe middle that are asking moderate, very uhinformative questions. That's kind of where I feel like this is.And so those questions werearound funding. Right? How we're going to fundthis. Um Is this something that we really need?Are people going to use it? Is it going to be safe? Right? You start to hearthose types of questions. And to me, those are folks that are really tryingto tease out that next level is this the right thing to do for thecommunity. And so for us, I thinkas we move forward, I think we have to dig into making surepeople have the right information to be able todecide for themselves if it's the the right thing to do inthat context. So, I know I read that fairly neutral,but a good position as opposed to it beingyou know, everybody is adamantly against it.I appreciate the um the quality of life comment. AndI think the way you started out the presentationis accurate, right? I think most people do want safepedestrian usage throughout having a more walkablecity. I and I think that that is is 100um forI think people come into the process at different entry points. And I knowyou guys know this, but that is a huge challenge for aproject that is going to extend we've been talking about it for thislong. Um and it's a a high it's a $20 million price tag.Uh we still get comments, voicemail messages, email messages from peopleasking us to vote a certain way on things that we voted fora month prior. Um and so because of thatas we move forward, I think we we have to have a couple of and you did a goodjob of this of trying to bring people along,but there's a couple of things we have to have just bepart of every presentation we do. These are the alternatives we looked atand they were too expensive, right? You walked through it today.Um I think we have to have that at each juncture uh to bring people along.Um, this is the problem that we're trying tosolve, right? We talked about that today. Um,just reminding people that's what we're doing. These are the things we looked atand here is why we think this tunnel um is the best of those options.Um, and people will agree or disagree, but at least it shows that transparencyin thinking of how we end up where we are.Um, and so I I we have to figure out a way to do that.Um, the second thing, and this isn't necessarily related tothis project, but we have to figure out a wayto talk about TIF.Um, I had the same comment that memberRisser um questioned. Um, I I I'd like for us to considera construct and I'm just offering this, but but please go through it and andfigure out the best way to do it. We are if we're using TIF,we are borrowing money from the taxpayers.And so we're earmarking a portion of those taxes for projectsand they're not able to go to the general fund.So that has an impact to residents. And so like this idea ofwe are borrowing this money, right? From the taxpayer or some kind ofa construct so that we can at least acknowledge to people it's not zero.Right? We are borrowing from this pool, which is theTIF district, to go do these projects, which we have said from a policystandpoint, we want to do these kinds of projects. All of that is legit. Um but Iwould but we shouldn't um I'll use the word we shouldn'tcan't pretend that it's zero cuz it it actually isn't. That's not the wayum as residents uh we internalize it. So, having some way of of articulatingthat so that we're acknowledging that yeah, this is an impact to propertytaxes. Technically, I understand what we'resaying. Uh but if that district closed earlier,remember Jackson asked about this. If adding this project uh does not allowus to decertify that district and have those taxthe tax increment then be proportioned just like you've shown us, some goescity city, county, general fund,um then that meanswe have to cover the gap of our expenses somehow.And one of the ways that we do that is we raise taxes. We have a higher generallevy. Um and so it's not zero, but that is avery complicated thing to explain. However, when we say it's zero, it kindof feels disingenuous cuz because it's not actually zero when youthink about it in the way that I described it. So, I I think I'd like tosee us um figure out a way to do that.Um and then myother comment, I do feel likethere's value in this. UmI think it is true that um the majority of folks uh would like to have like Imentioned earlier safe pedestrian pathways, 100%.But here's the the challenge for me.Rep- Representative government is like extremely hard. It's extremely difficult.And so I'm going to give you guys an example. I live in Highlandsand we don't have curbs or sidewalks. And I can't remember who I was talkingto, but I said, "How come we don't have curbs or sidewalks onmy street?" I have to walk a block to get to a sidewalk or curb.And so every fall, spring through fall, I fight with people parking on my lawn.And we've been there for 13 years. Every year, I'm fighting withthat. So I'm asking, "Why Why is that the case?"Well, apparently back in the day, and I don't know how far back this was, right?The neighborhoods, you got to vote whether you wanted asidewalk or curb. And for whatever reason, my street said,"We don't want them." And so I don't have them. And I wish Idid. And so one of the things that wetypically do, and we all do this, every one of us, soI'm not calling out the 55,000 households in Edina. When things comeup, we evaluate those through our personallens. Does this impact How does this impactme? And if you'reon a cost lens, then you're going to talk about my taxes are too high, right?I don't I don't want to do this. If you area a demographic, you're going to say, "I don't ridebikes. We don't want a We don't need a bike path."If your streets are wide like the ones in Merit Circle, you're going to say,"We don't need a sidewalk. These streets are plenty wide enough. People walk allthe time." If you live in the South Dale area,you're going to say, "Man, there's too much crime. This tunnel is going to addmore crime." Most of us have that personal lens thatwe look through. Our job as elected officials is to tryto figure out how to balance our personal lens, your personal lens,and what's best for the future of the community.That's what the the challenge is. And when I look at this project, I candefinitely convince myself that there's valuein solving this challenge uh for the community.But, we got to do it in a way that balancesboth sides. Um and so, yeah, I'm irritated almostevery time I walk that I don't have a sidewalk. Every time somebody parks onmy grass, I get irritated by that. But, I get it. Um so, I am nottwo, which was move on, wrap it up, and move on. Um I can't remember what one Bwas. >> It was proceed with preliminary designand budget prep and delay the project. >> Yeah.>> Which I don't know what that means either in terms of expenditures.>> Well, I am somewhere in the ballpark of I think we probably need some moreanalysis. Um somewhere in there. I'm not at two.Um and then I And then the the last question I have, I told you I wouldn'thave this in order. I think I was supposed to close with what I justfinished. The on slide 19, I think it was, where youhad the cost layout. UhYeah, it wasn't this one. It's maybe the one before that, where you've got umthat one. Um And so there's roughlynine or six million that's estimated.Um and then you may have already answered this. So,for us to do this at all, we have to bond for it,right? Um and sowe're going to have interest tagged onto this at some point or at some level.Um And so I I've So, the the question I hadearlier was if we don't If we think we're going to getthe 12 million from the TIF district, we're short the six. How would we getthe six million if the state doesn't come through and if Met Council doesn'tcome through? I think the answer to that is we wouldbond for more. Uh but that was more my question. Whenyou're looking at the projected funding, um we're quite significantly short. Andso my question was going to be how do we close that gap? How do you foresee usclosing that gap? >> Sure. So, umI'll wrap in an answer to that question and Commissioner Jackson's earlierquestion. They go to the same heart. Um So, both the cost estimate and thefinancing strategy are both preliminary, right? Just to be crystal clear on that.Uh Uhwe feel that with these going for outside sources, you know, we'll go foras many programs as we can. UmBut ultimately, when we bring a project to you to build at some point in thefuture, we will want to have all these detailsrefined. What does it really cost and how are we really going to pay for it?We're just not anywhere close to that point yet.>> Okay. >> Um sothe TIF contribution is estimated at this point and it assumes thatuh the TIF districts run for their full 25-year length.Um uhwe did uh we did create a special or we wereceived special legislation if there's a gap,we have the rights to extend one of the TIF districts to an extra 5 years to getfrom 25 years to 30. So that would be more collection.I would only suggest we even consider that if it's necessary. If it's notnecessary, let's leave it at 25. Um but that's one of the funding sourcesif there's gaps. And I know there's a couple other programs. We've got PAX. UmChad might be able to speak to some of the other engineering resources that wehave available. >> We haveWe'll be having the same discussion on Tuesday night with the Rosen Ped Bridge.So there's other funding sources with the PAX fund, municipal state aid.But if we have to close the gap with that, we're delaying other projects. Sothat's just a conversation we would have herebefore we move forward. >> Okay.Um so I last thing you answered, I think, thefour questions I sent. Uh funding breakdown.There'll be more to come on that. Um I talked about TIF long-term financeimpact. Um There'll be more to come on that.The last one, we talked about alternatives evaluations. And soI mentioned that already. The contingency and cost overruns, um thereI I do think 20% contingency is probably low. I get it's that number'smaybe standard or something like that. In my email I was asking formore data to figure out if that is the right contingency. Just hear me sayingI think it's going to be more than 20 million.Right? I'm not an engineer. I can't see the future. But in past mostof our projects end up going we spend more than we think we're going to spend.So there was just me saying let's be sure that that contingency is the rightone. Is the right level. Um and so I'll leave that one. And then the lastthing I'll say I started with the story about the sidewalks and curbs and thisfact that in a representative government we got to balance the current needs forthe future needs. None of the people who voted in myneighborhood to not have sidewalks and curbs live there anymore.And so when you think about that we really all are trying to think aboutwhat's going to be good the best thing for the community in the future whetherthey're new families, elderly peoplewhatever. Umthat is really the crux of the issue for this onefor me especially because of the the high price tag. So thanks for um all theinformation and the continued engagement um on the project. >> Thank you. Commissioner Pierce.Um Okay.We got a little bit of time here. I guess we're past our usual closing timebut uh umI uhI don't know where I am here. Um The things that I think about arethis the main concept that you raised during theconversation of how do we create better, saferways for pedestrians and bicyclists to get across France Avenue. I think it's areally good question. What we've looked at for a long, long time. You know, when we would look back intime, I remember when we got a I think it was a million dollar or it was eithera million or three million dollars from Met Council.>> Met. >> And to build a bridge.And we got we got to thinking, well, what makes us think people are going towalk four or five blocks to go to a single point of crossingto go across and then come back again three, four blocks or go the other waythree, four blocks. And we decided, well,they probably aren't going to do that. It's just not in the human behavior. Youknow, what do they talk about a quarter mile walk shed is about what people wantto do. And so we asked if we could reallocatethat funding and put in improved crosswalks at Ithink it was 66th and 70th and 76th. >> Exactly.>> And that's what we did. >> Exactly.>> But they still they still don't feel safe. To me thethe most economical thing to do and the smartest thing to dowould be to go back to the county and not the technical staff people that areinterested in throughput, but the policy makersand try to make France Avenue a more beautiful street for passage.And if it took you a minute or two longer to go from Crosstown to 494because we had gotten rid of those two inside lanes next to the medianand you were now going two lanes in each direction and now you've got probablywhat, Chad, a 25-ft median?>> Yep. Yep.>> That's all landscaped and beautiful and and safe.And people are crossing two lanes of traffic plus a turn lane instead ofthree lanes of traffic plus a turn lane. And you could do that as you march downFrance Avenue from 66th to 76th or 77th and then south of there wherethe congestion really happens as they're going to 494 and leave it the way it is.And that street would become so beautiful, I think, in the process ofdoing that. You'd slow traffic down. Uh it would be a massive, massiveimprovement if we can get by the technical people. And I feel like two ofthe policy makers are kind of in our corner at the county.And I think, well, what would that cost to do that? It wouldn't cost I don'tthink it would cost 20 million. And I worry about the $20 million numbertwo and I hear Bill say this morning, well, the obvious is that, well, ifwe're going to do this, we got to we got to borrow the money and there's aninterest cost that we haven't factored in here anywhere.And stuff keeps going up in price all the time and soit it might well be above 20 million to build a single point of passage that'sbeautiful for people to use.So, the question I would ask you is how muchtime do we have to make a decision relative to the underpass based uponthe redevelopment activities at both sites, which could be a cushion of timein which we could go back to the policy makers at the countyand jump by the technical people who are interested in throughputand try to get them to agree with us on improving France Avenue at every singleintersection and making it a road that you you youwant to be on instead of something that feels like aa a trunk highway, you know? Um so, that's my first question.>> Sure. So, we did have um some conversations like that with the countyin 2023. Um, can we take a lane away? Because there there's more lanes um, onon this part of France than in most other county roads that serve thistraffic volume. Tremendously more lanes.>> with staff? >> That was multiple staff meetings andmultiple times we heard, "We're not going to touch it. We're not going totouch it. We're not going to touch it." >> don't They're not the decision makers.They They I mean, they can they can say that that's what they want, but they'renot the ones who are making the decision. The The people who let sit asan elected official are the ones making the decision.Now, we've got one of them on the county board that is a resident of Edina.She likes this idea. Our commissioner over in Richfield, I'vegot to You have conversations with her, the former mayor of Richfield. I thinkshe'd be an ally. We need two more. And so, the question is, do How muchtime do we have to work on that idea? >> Sure. So, the umuh in 2023, it looked like both developerswere on the same time frame, which is why we continued to study this.Um, since that time, the ones on the west are moving fast, the ones on theeast got off to a slow start. Um, so, at theboth the city has contractual rights withboth developers. The developer on the west side of thestreet, they're going to open one of theirbuildings this fall. So, they're asking us now,"What do you want us to put in this plaza? Is it an upper plaza? Is it alower plaza?" Because we're going to start building that imminently. So, wemay frankly we we we may have missed the window on that.>> Okay. Yeah. >> Um, so, we had hoped to tell them, youknow, build it either lower or build it higher, and then that's something thatwe don't have to build. It's already finished. Um, so, that window may haveclosed on us. Um, we can always make changes. Umuh but if we're going to rethink the thewhole scope, um you know, I don't anything's possible. Imean, we have contractual rights, but we don't have obligations to thedevelopers. They have obligations to us. So,um uh>> So, the west >> Yeah, with the TIF funding,one of the TIF districts starts collecting this year.The other one doesn't even begin to collect until 2028.So, one of the conversations I had with our finance director wasum if we're going to build something like this, when's the best time? Do wewant to borrow theoretically today knowing that we'll have funding in acouple years, or do we want to wait a couple years until we know that fundingstream is generating and build it then? You know, we've waited80 years already. Does it matter if we wait another two, three, four, five? UmSo, the I guess as far as any time limit, uh chair,we set the schedule. If if we think that additional study is needed or adifferent scope or a different project or or no project, all those options areon the table. >> And I would just offer on that westside, they're building the buildings. I was between them taking pictures.They're backfilling in the next week or so.That's stuff that could be removed and this idea could be placed in the future.So, they're not building anything that's going to be in the way that's a bigstructural building. >> Okay.If we just go back to the to the under passageway then idea,uh what would be the cost associated with getting to the next step under 1Band the source of funds to take us to a more definitive cost and financingestimate situation?>> be that contract we're asking you to approve next week for 387,000.We need to do some real engineering. >> to more definitive answers, you'resaying you got we got to spend almost 400,000 bucks. What's the source offunds for that? >> We would use existing funds in theCentennial Lakes TIF district. Those funds are already held in the city. Theywere collected from the commercial property ownersin that Centennial Lakes area. And they'reper the TIF statute, we can use them for studiesjust like this. So. >> Here's the thing that I'm having adifficult time with, you know, I just sort of subjectivelyinstinctively you don't have a I don't have a problem analyzing the ROI if wecould get the county to agree to do what we just talked about.Let's figure out a way to get people safely across at grade.And do this by it going on a road diet. That seems to me to be well worth themoney up and down the street. What I have trouble with is the same thingCommissioner Pierce mentioned is how do we analyze the ROI on a 20 to 30 milliondollar investment on a single tunnel that might handle 300 people a day? How do we do that? I mean, whatI know you can't put a price on a human life and we haven't fortunately had anyany uh serious injuries or deaths on FranceAvenue with pedestrians, but how do you how do you do that? I I don'tI I'm befuddled by that. You know, and with and and the and thevolume of traffic too, I don't know the volume of use. We know that withsidewalks, you know, we we build sidewalks and and they come kind of likethat Field of Dreams thing. Because people say, "Well, no one'sgoing to use it." Well, they do use sidewalks.And uh and so I suspect the same thing would happen here. It would be usedmaybe more than we expect, but how do you still go aboutanalyzing the ROI and not having to be totally speculative and and and makesure that when you think about a 20 million dollar investment or whatever itmight be, that you figure out it's going to bethat it's worth it as opposed to trying to figure out how to get people safelyacross And if we had to get people safely across at grade with six lanes oftraffic and two turn lanes. People are doing that around the world,too, because I've looked at that. I mean, you that's one of the benefits ofAI. You can look at well, where in the world are they getting people safelyacross six lanes of traffic at grade? Well, you can find examples of that allover the world. And including one inScottsdale. But right across from the KnollwoodShopping Center. Uh where they're getting them across atgrade with timing signals, big wide painted crosswalks, you know.Better landing areas. So,there's still for now when we meet next Tuesday, thethe question that's going to linger for me between now and next Tuesday isdo I want to spend Do I want to vote for spending $400,000to get to to go a little bit deeper and find out a little bit more? I I don'tknow the answer to that. But I want to talk to our those two countycommissioners in the in the gap period here and see what Ican find out. Commissioner Risner. >> Um to to your point about working withthe county policy makers, I think it's important to recognize thatin September of 2025, that was when the county came up with its toward zerodeaths action plan. And I'm just looking at it. You can seethe map and yes, we have had a fatal crash on France Avenue.There's a red dot. It's near the Bloomington border. But um I have notread through this and I will do that before our next meeting. But when Ithink about Hennepin County, to be honest, from somebody who is an advocatefor safe streets and that's really one of my things.I think of the people who I work with from the county who are part of thetoward toward zero death program. And they are totally on board with that. Andalso the Minnesota Safety Council and design is such a critical factor inreducing traffic violence. And so I think, you know, we're talking aboutconversations back in 2023. I think you know, what happened in 2023 may bevery different, you know, the dialogue could be very different than, you know,today in 2026. So I I really do support that approach.>> Yeah, thanks for that. And Executive Director Neil,uh thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to let you know that we do have uhCommissioner Edelson coming to a City Council meeting to give a specialpresentation like she does annually at your May 5th meeting. Yeah. And the other question CommissionerPierce raises what's best for the community.Um and you know, you should get to thinkabout the whole community not just a part of it, too. So, I don't know.I I'm I guess we just had we had a greatconversation here this morning and it's helped me probably prepare better forTuesday night when we meet as a council. But I can't say I would render anopinion today on 1A, 1B, or 2. So, and I usually really speak to thatissue, but Commissioner Richer was loud and clear.>> Yeah, so I'm um I think we should get more engineering on this. I want to justaddress a couple of things. So I would be one 1A or 1B, I don't know. Umcertainly the people who are in favor of this are really in favor of it. So I'mgoing to speak on their behalf and say, "Let's go and let's look." Um and so I'mgoing to do my questions or my responses a little bit in reverse order. Thereturn on investment, I think you have to look at this would transform theneighborhood. It would connect um Fred Richards Park and Centennial Lakes Park.And I think that the the impact actually goes far beyond the number of people whoare crossing there now. I think it would be a huge benefit for the Cornelianeighborhoods. Um it would be the people at the Cedarsare overjoyed about this. They're like,"Please, please, please do this." Um it would it would increase the valuequality of life for a thousand people living right there.Um Uh$20 million to use elsewhere, I think we need to remember that TIF can only beused for structure adjacent to the buildings that are going to begenerating this new tax revenue. So, it's yes or no, it's not $20 millionelsewhere. Umjust to to ground that conversation. So, it's yes, we spend the $20 million. No,we don't. The $20 million are not available for other parts of the city.Um and as far as an easement on private land, most of our streets in the cityare easements on private land. When we drive down the street, we don't think,"Oh my gosh, I'm trespassing on somebody's front yard." No, we're on acity street. Um and so, the I think the feelingof an easement is the same as we would have on a public street. So, I don'tthink that's uma feeling that would be different. It would be just like any sidewalk, any anystreet. Um I do have some ideas about how to talkabout TIF, uh Commissioner Pierce, if you want to talk about that offline. Umso, yeah, I'm I'm 1A I will be 1A on behalf of the people who begged,"Please, please, please move forward with this.">> Okay. Thanks for that. UmYeah, so you got a mix mixed bag here. I don't know.But it was it was educational and uh and this is the first timethe HR has had a chance to have this conversation, too. So.Uh and I'm disappointed that uh Commissioner Ayo couldn't be here thismorning, but uh other responsibilities take us away fromthese sometimes. So, I'm sure she'll be well prepared forTuesday, knowing her. Um okay.Uh so, do you want to give us a quick uh spark update?>> Sure. Uh, the 30-second spark update. Uh,when we extended the spark program last uh, winter or a couple months ago, Ipromised to come back with quarterly updates. You werequestioning whether or not you wanted to really extend that program.So this is the quarterly update. We're still moving forward with the projectsthat have already been funded. A few restaurants and asmall business aimed at training for school-age kids. Those are under underway. Looking to open or the two smaller projects are looking to open in the nextmonth or two. And then the restaurant is on track. In the last month or so youmay have seen they they flew in the steel and the second story is beingframed. So those are going well. I'm still in conversation with othersmall businesses to provide assistance if so needed.I'm in conversations with a small handful of businesses. I'm not sure ifthey're going to come forward though. Some of their the their funding needs Idon't think are eligible. It doesn't really grow the tax base. So that's oneof the challenges with this program is it's not just free money. It's strategicfunding that can help grow the tax base and create jobs. So I'm still on thelookout. Um, and I'll provide another update next quarter.>> How much is left in the spark fund? >> Uh,around a million dollars. >> Okay. All right. Anybody have a question forMayor Neundorf, Commissioner Risser? >> No, but I want to show you a map afterthe meeting. >> Okay.All right. Thank you, Mr. Neundorf. Thanks for all that good work you'realways doing and and the creative thinking that you have.It's really appreciated. All right. Anything else from HRAmembers or the executive director? All right. Is there a motion to adjourn?>> So moved. >> Second.>> Now we've got a motion second to adjourn the meeting of the HRE thisuh Thursday, April 16th, 2026 at 9:27 a.m.Any further uh discussion? All those in favor of adjournment say aye.>> Aye. >> Aye. Opposed? Carried.We stand adjourned. >> Oh, man.