Apologize for the wait. Um, it is Thursday, February 5th at about uh 6:15 p.m. in the evening and I call the city of Maple Plane Planning Commission meeting to order. Please stand and join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thanks everybody. All right. So, first order of business is that I need to um either items need to be added to the agenda or I need to hear a motion to adopt the agenda as is. Have to make a motion to add the items or Okay. >> to amend the agenda. Yeah, I'll make a motion to amend the agenda to add the resolution for the TIFF financing and the public hearing. >> Okay, I got a motion from um Dang, forgot your name, Adam. >> Uh second. >> Okay. And then a second from Nick. Other Nick. Um all in favor say I. I. >> All oppose say the same. >> Hearing none. eyes have it four to zero. Okay. So then we can proceed with um looking at the minutes from um September 4th, 2025 and December 4th, 2025. Um, given David and Nick, you all I think you were here for December. >> Y, >> but you were not here for September. So, can look through them and comment and make suggestions as needed. From my perspective, I thought they were very thorough and detailed. So, that's good. >> I'll make a motion to accept. >> Okay. David makes a motion to accept the meeting minutes. Can I get a second? >> We'll second that motion. >> Adam seconds the motion. All in favor say I. >> I. >> All oppose say the same. >> Eyes have it four to zero as well. Okay. So now related to new business. Um, is this the moment where we talk about the resolution or >> No, Mark will >> Mark will present um news business related to uh Northshore Development and the reasonzoning the request for resoning and approval of the preliminary and final plant. >> Yes. Thank you, honorable chair, commissioners. Good to see everybody. Happy New Year. Um so tonight we have a a couple things on your agenda relating to a downtown redevelopment project in the city. Um we've got a request for resoning site plan review plan unit development and preliminary final plat to allow the construction of a new multifamily residential building to be located on the properties generally uh at the intersection of Main Street and Maple Avenue identified by the P numbers in the report. We also have a resolution considering uh planning commission um approval of the tax increment financing that's being requested as a part of the downtown redevelopment. I'll note on the tax increment financing piece. Um we're just making a finding from a planning perspective, not a fiduciary or um tax perspective per se on this that the uh proposed plan um is um in accordance with our adopted comprehensive plan. And so we would we would need both of those things. It's kind of rare and unique that planning that you're being brought in a resolution. As you know, there's no other areas where you actually consider um resolutions as a planning commission. This is um one of those areas, and it we haven't done I think the city's actually only done one other tax increment deal in the history of uh Maple Plane. So, um not a very common occurrence. With that said, I'll introduce the project, kind of walk through the project, talk about a couple things related to the project. Um, and then uh we can talk through as much or as little detail. As you noted, this this was noticed uh for both public hearings, the um public hearings that we talked about from the planning side and also from the tax increment side. So, with that said, um Matt Alexander and Northshore Development, who are the applicants, have been working uh with the city for um I believe over a year actually now on the potential redevelopment of the five properties that the city has ownership of in the downtown area. Those five properties um have been acquired over time by the city and consolidated um uh to a point where um we've packaged some pieces with Mandot uh some pieces the city owned and we've also um through the use of grants uh acquired and and done even cleanup on um what used to be a filling station or um convenience store and filling station located on one of those properties. In total, those properties have an aggregate um of about 1.5 acres overall. Um and you can see that on the proposed preliminary plan. And so this particular development uh redevelopment of this property is something that the city's been working on for over 20 years. Um the city has um through a number of different processes, a number of different grants um uh been looking actively to redevelop this particular block um into a higher and better use um for for a long time. Um, as some of you know, the city has looked at a wide array of uses on this property that span um from u retail uh retail office uh mixed use retail residential um uh all residential uh residential mixeduse retail and civic. Um I'd show you a couple of these examples once Jacob gets me up um back online. But with that, the city has has spent a lot of time trying to find a developer that would uh redevelop this property in a way that was consistent with the city's um the majority of the city's uh priorities, the majority of the city's vision. What we found in that 20 plus years of trying to attract uh and and look at redevelopment is there has never been and there's unlikely to be a perfect fit um as it relates to the let's see here I think it might be on so as it relates to the redevelopment thank you of this property um every development proposal that we've seen over the last 20 years has been a variation of one of those things that we've tried to um have done, but never have we been able to realize a a full-on proposal um where it it kind of checked every box. It was always we could meet some, not all. And so with that, I'll just kind of just real high level, I'll walk through just so you can see these are not in your packet. These were just part of my presentation. Um this is 2015. Uh we had a pretty broad marketing piece to try to obtain uh retail development on this uh property. We had engaged uh a team um that would look at the redevelopment of this property um that we're talking about tonight. Um in 201617 we had a couple of developers come forward looking at uh possibly doing three, four, fivetory uh this was a Bavarian themed uh potential project where we looked at a mixeduse building with city hall. Uh we looked at a library um city hall combination. We looked at kind of a retail mix. Uh you can see a bunch of different themes that we kind of walked through um with all of these um you know different proposals that came through kind of variations of different things. In 20189 we then had another developer come forward. Uh they had kind of another plan with uh city hall library combination, retail office, residential, um underground parking, some sort of a flex public plaza, closing of Bud Street. 2021 we had another building come through. Um this one had a mixeduse building with a kind of retail corner um kind of out in this location. uh that would have been, you know, maybe even drive-thru retail, Caribou Cabin was one of the things we talked about. Um then we had in 2022, uh and I think this went into 2023, uh we had another study come through. It looked at a similar uh redevelopment plan for this site with a uh residential building. um no retail in this particular proposal kind of concept of what that started to look like. Um and in 2024 and 20 in the into 2025, we had another proposal here for another multifamily building um that came forward to the city um with a couple of ideas, a couple of concepts. And so through all that, I just wanted to kind of show the history. We've looked at this site in multiple ways. Um, many different times throughout its 20-y year history, we've looked at anything from just full on retail to a mixeduse. We've looked at buildings that range in size from, I think, 64 65 units all the way to 145 units um on this same site. Uh, and so with all of that, the city has had, I think, six different um, purchase agreements on this property during that time period. Uh, we had, uh, some of those purchase agreements extended, uh, during that time period, um, for quite a length of time. And so, uh, all of that to say that we've worked for a very long time to try to, uh, realize some sort of redevelopment. Now, with that said, um I'm going to touch a little bit on kind of the comp plan piece that addresses um the redevelopment and the vision, but also talk to what we've talked about as a city over those years kind of even outside of the the comprehensive plan in terms of what we wanted. Um and then I'll come back to kind of what's being proposed. So, with this particular site, it's zoned mixeduse downtown, which is our mixeduse zoning district, and it's uh one of our subzones than the downtown zoning district. And it's guided by our comprehensive plan as mixed use. And so, with that, um the city has always envisioned this particular part of downtown to be some sort of a mixeduse. What that is I think has varied and differs has differed um between councils um as they've come in and out and different council members and planning commissioner planning commissioners have been involved in uh some of the discussions. Um we've had a difference of what this particular project could or might look like. So, um, you've seen all those kind of variations that I started to show with that the the city had identified in its comprehensive plan. I'll just highlight our mixeduse downtown land description. Um, it's a land designation established for the entire downtown area. And it talks about a combination of retail service, commercial, public, semi-public uses, um, office, residential, vertical, um, uh, types of uses, civic type of uses, and it talks about a density range of between 20 and 40 units per developable acre. It also speaks to the height might vary between uh, de different zoning designations. And we've had a variation of heights uh, considered and proposed. And it also talks about um in our comprehensive plan that the mixes the uses can be mixed vertically in a single structure um with different types of uses or they can be single uses within any of those buildings within our overall um downtown. Our density we show um at a overall range across the downtown between 20 and 40 units. And we projected that between 2020 and 2040 we'd have a minimum of 167 residential units, a maximum of 334 um within that downtown mixed use. And then we talk about percentages uh saying that um approximately 50% of the downtown um I'm sorry 35% of the downtown 50% of our general would be um occupied by residential in its entirety. Meaning that we would only you would only see 35%. Uh there goes our there goes our link. I don't know how stable. Let me see one more time if I can get back on it really quick. I don't know if it's gonna go. Do you have this up, Kevin? Can you Are you going to be more stable than me? At least just pull the packet up and we can scroll. So um so as it relates then to the um comp plan I'll note for you there is um we did uh get a comment on our comp plan and whether or not this um particular project um met the um guidance by the compre comprehensive plan noted noting that uh this particular development is currently at about 59 units per acre. um which as you would know is outside or it's it's beyond the 20 to 40 units. Um we did have a um uh somebody had asked the question if that um was consistent with the comp plan. We did go back to the city attorneys and they provided a reassurance that they think that um the uh proposed building um does comply with the city's comp plan in that we had a rational basis for making a determination and interpreting how our comp plan and that density range uh was clearly stated to be across the entirety of the downtown and not uh not focused on any singular property. And the the city attorney also provided the city with a memo related to that that also um kind of just confirmed our assumption and then kind of reinforced that it um just be um in using that kind of rational basis that it would have been impossible for the city's comprehensive plan to to realize that in the form of mixed use and other types of uses. So, um, when you get one of the comments tonight, just know that the the city attorney's, uh, recommendation to us was to continue and proceed, um, with their opinion. So, um, with that said, I'm going to walk through the project and I will note that um, uh, kind of all aspects of what's being proposed tonight and then we can kind of talk through some of the questions. Uh the the proposed development that we see tonight is for a 95 unit multifamily residential apartment building. It's a singular use in that it would be 100% uh residential. It's intended to be a market rate uh 95 unit building uh that would consist of five stories. The there is a lower level uh story which would be uh parking. There is a first floor story which would also be parking and then there are four residential floors that go above uh those units. And so with the proposed development, the city has has kind of had a a variety of different conversations with this particular development uh relating to the overall um number of floors, the overall number of units. when we re when we originally had looked at this proposal, it was a 70 unit uh 71 unit apartment building that had been proposed and uh once we got further into some of the design details of that building um looking at soil uh looking at at some of the um remediation that might have to be done to remove some soil on that site. the developer came back and um said that they wanted to look at a uh um 95 unit building but add a an an additional uh floor of parking which was supported by the city that came back before the EDA and then city council. We talked about that a little bit and there was definitely a high level of support for that additional uh off- streetet private parking and um in turn the building needed to go up one additional story in order to make that all go together. So, um, we've worked quite extensively on building architecture on this site layout and site design. Um ultimately trying to get to a proposal that um made sense for the developer and ultimately we think can make sense for the city in terms of um its architecture, its building materials, its site layout and how it how it fits into this particular block as well as how it probably sets the stage for additional development that could occur or will occur. um hopefully as um additional redevelopment would happen. The building itself, 95 units, uh is broken down uh into studios, one and two bedroom units. That table is um shown in the staff report. And the intent of um those units is to try to capture um that kind of market rate rental market that doesn't currently exist in Maple Plane. Uh we don't have new product. We don't have new product of this type um that currently serves um the city. So with this proposed development, they're trying to balance uh those three unit types um within the building. The primary building entrance is located on the east side of this site. Um, and when the site when we've worked on this site, we've looked at a number of different scenarios where the building entrances would be um facing Highway 12. We've looked at scenarios where the building entrances face Main Street. We've looked at where they're on the corner of Maine and Maple. But ultimately with the site layout that we've uh landed on, it really provides I think a a strong presence to the front door both from Main Street and from Highway 12 in that uh we create um that kind of eastwardfacing uh entrance to the building. And so with that entrance um you know you'd be able to visibly see it from both both sides of uh the building Main Street and the Highway 12 side. um with the uh first floor parking level. We've spent a lot of time talking with the developer and trying to work on how do you make that first floor parking garage feel more like a pedestrian scale uh first level that can be adjacent to Main Street. Um and still has characteristics that are indicative of a uh kind of main street level but um obviously has parking behind it. And so with that, the developers put together uh a series of elevations uh that are in the report that we can um take a look at that attempt to try to bring um different um elements into play. And so I don't know, Kevin, if it's possible to scroll down without um jumping off of this. Yeah, there you go. So um that first elevation there that's the um that elevation is facing is that east? >> Yeah. So, you can see what we've tried to do at the entrance way is create a high level of of openings, windows, um, that would be facing that eastern elevation and then wrapping those around the corner on both the south and the north sides of that to try to really emphasize that entry point, but also to provide um, you know, um, more of a identifiable streetscape to that corner of the building. And then as you if you scroll down a little bit further, we get to the U main street side. The uh the top elevation there on the screen shows the what would be our main street side. And we've worked with the developer to try to introduce um essentially faux windows to that parking garage side that would start to uh provide some sort of connectivity between the pedestrian walkway on Main Street and um just more pedestrian scale u um architectural features that feel like um you know you have some more of a uh frontage that that relates to the street. the developer has provided. They're not going to show up because my thing's not um connecting. Um but they have provided and um we can maybe talk through those. Yeah, there's some handouts maybe. Um they're even looking at trying to integrate some historical imagery into those glazing those openings essentially. um and then into the glass area on the east side of the building. That would um they've worked with the historical society here to try to take some uh kind of historical timelines and some historical uh facts about the the area and integrate those into kind of the backdrop that could be lit or lighted um um along the main street, those flow windows that we're looking at there. Um and then on the east um eastern end of the the block. Um as it relates to the rest of the architecture, we're I mean we've still been working on that architecture. Um really trying to to get this to a different uh level of kind of connectivity to the downtown with pedestrian uh kind of a pedestrian level scale. knowing that this building as large as it is to try to accommodate the units to make the the math work um really you know becomes a bigger mess than anything we've been accustomed to in our downtown. Um, but utilizing color, utilizing materials, and then utilizing openings and some of these other elements, trying to trying to break the building down from a visual perspective so that the massing of that building doesn't uh kind of take over, but um more or less um sets the framework for for beginning to uh set the future architectural stage for other redevelopment um in the downtown. We also note with the architecture and the size and the scale of this project that the ability for the city to um um assemble a similar size parcel in our mixeduse downtown area is highly unlikely. This is a very unique piece of property that um because of the city's ownership of the majority of these pieces to start uh we were able to assemble a 1 and a half acre parcel. But trying to do that or trying to replicate that again in the limited area that we have for downtown is going to be extremely difficult. Um so when we're look at this and we're talking about precedent or we're talking about what if this started to multiply, it's it's unlikely that we'd be able to get this much uh land under assembly um in in the small area that we have designated for our downtown redevelopment. So I think that's something to at least think about as it relates to this project and then the the project architecture. So in order to make this all work um we would need to uh uh consider a planned unit development so that we could look at some flexibility in the standards that we have um put together. So with our downtown mixeduse development standards, it was anticipated that uh we would have mixed use. Um, but with that, we've always um anticipated that we would need some flexibility one way or another as it relates to some of our uh design standards um and some of our um other standards that we have in the downtown to try to make a project uh go together on this. And so as we've looked at this uh the planned unit development uh seems to be the right tool that we have uh to try to put together a project um that could get to a density that we're talking about on this property um bring that that level of um new residents into the city um and still stay at a um place that um is affordable or obtainable um in this particular market. And so we look at um all of the things that that are being proposed. Um when we reviewed this, we looked at um also our downtown design standards um which was a set of standards that we established uh almost 20 years ago now for the purpose of um trying to set the framework for redevelopment in uh the Gateway, the downtown, and the Bud Avenue districts. Um well we know of those standards as we've gone to apply those standards. I mean they were originally adopted with you know the perfect intent that we'd be able to achieve um everything in those what we what we know now is we are trying to take the majority of those uh standards and apply them to the extent that we can knowing that um things like economics and market um also drive development and redevelopment and we have to be able to respond to those um those things as well um if we're wanting to uh get some of this uh some of these projects to actually move forward. And so um in looking at the the um planned unit development and and kind of what is being requested of us, I'll just I'll just walk through uh those pieces. And so as it relates to the building height for this particular project, uh the requested height here is 54 uh and a 1/2 ft. Our zoning ordinance has a downtown uh standard of 40 feet. Um and so in order to make the parking work on this property um also in order to deal with the soil conditions and then water table levels on this property and a higher uh height standard is needed um in in in order to make this project work. As it relates to the setbacks, uh we noted that the building meets all applicable setbacks outside of the 50 foot setback from Highway 12. The Highway 12 The Highway 12 setback, thanks Kevin for working through that. Um the highway 12 setback is 50 feet for all buildings, but we write right into our ordinance that there are times where the 50- foot setback is not going to be applicable because it would render properties not usable and it notes that the city council has the ability to wave that provision. In this particular case, the 50-foot setback would render the the majority of this property um not usable and would put a a pretty big strain on potential redevelopment of that property. Um I noted uh the density um overall already um is at about 56 units uh per acre. Um and I noted how we looked at that um in in our interpretation of the city's comp plan. The parking then for this uh project is noted that in mixed use we require a minimum of one parking stall, garage or dedicated space for each residential unit. Uh for the residential uses, parking space must be on site and cannot be shared. We also have a provision for multifamily which is not pertaining to this in our ordinance. So if you looked at that, it would say that multifamily uh for all other uses not directly specified within the mixed use have a two unit two parking space per unit count. Um with this particular building, they're proposing 122 indoor parking spaces on two floors and then 30 exterior parking spaces. It would equate to a total of 152 parking spaces or a ratio of 1.6 parking spaces per unit. Uh we find that the 1.6 six uh ratio is a is a sufficient uh parking ratio for the proposed development. I noted a couple other sources um just for context, not necessarily to be um directly um um the same as but if you look at IT um recommendations uh for urban core market, suburban market um or just look at the overall national average as it related to uh recommended parking space ratios, you can see a 1.46 average. Um we're suburban, right? So we're we need to be closer to um something between 1.5 and 2.0 is kind of the standard of practice that we're working off of right now. Anybody following parking um in the Twin Cities would note that Minneapolis has dropped all parking requirements uh recently for uh projects and there is a trend on reducing andor eliminating parking uh minimums and parking standards. But with this particular uh project, the 1.6 um is a adequate parking ratio. I think we feel comfortable with um what's being proposed. I will note that that does not include the on street parking spaces. Um that would um also be developed as a part of the overall improvements on this project. Um and so those spaces um while they likely would be utilized by guests or by residents on a temporary basis or you know as people visit, they would be uh public parking spaces that would be open to and remain open to the public. Um and then I I talk about the architecture. U we've hit on that already. I noted in our design standards um that our design guidelines um which speak to uh development in the downtown uh mixeduse area um they show that the city has a requirement for firstf flooror buildings of 60% fenestration or openings. Um, I would note in the in looking at and how we've historically looked at and applied those standards, um, those standards were really written for retail commercial buildings. Um, and we have held those standards um, applicable to retail commercial. We've never tried to apply them to a residential uh, project within our downtown, but they they would be difficult to um, meet. With that said, the first floor window fenestration on this project is approximately 45%. Um, and then on the second and all other upper floors, the city has a design standard of 40%. In this particular case, we we found a ratio of 41%. Um, which would be right in line with the recommended fenistration and openings uh for a building. Again, I think in looking at how our standards were developed and what they really speak to, the idea of a residential multifamily building um isn't thought about or addressed. It would be difficult again to get to that uh 60% standard. And then as it relates to building materials, the applicant noted they're using a mix of Hardy planks. So cement fiber pinels uh uh cement fiber or concrete based um siding um in a couple of different forms. And then they're using a variation on colors to try to get to uh the architecture that's being proposed. Then as it relates to landscape or streetscape in this particular case, we have had a lot of discussion with the applicant on streetscape. the city's downtown streetscape. Um there is guidelines that talk about uh different layers of pedestrian um uh pedestrian spaces, uh vehicle spaces, and then kind of front of building spaces within the downtown. And really our only um the only thing we have to go back on or really look at is the streetscape that was developed in front of McGary's the post office and the the 5910 building on uh Main Street. The city kind of began a streetscape pattern where we began integrated uh integrating um uh different pavement as well as tree grades into that streetscape. the city's the city um we spent a lot of time with our engineer and the developers engineer and the developer to try to identify a uh streetscape that we think could be carried out in this particular development that would uh that would um essentially play off of or complement the streetscape that's already been started in front of McGarry's and be one that we could replicate with additional development as we move forward. forward. And so in this particular um kind of main street maple streetscape, we looked at in integrating diagonal parking one so we could get additional parking on street and then uh utilizing uh street uh tree grates and and street trees. So adding in that deciduous tree layer and then um utilizing a uh differentiation in pavement likely through color uh to provide another contextual layer to that streetscape. We were trying to maintain approximately 12 to 13 feet of width. Um one of the things that kind of came out of this and you can see it on the screen there. This is the main street streetscape section that's being proposed by the developer is they'd like to maintain something up against the building um to help with uh kind of maintenance and wear and tear up against that building front. They noted that in a lot of cases where you've got an urban condition and sidewalk right up to the face of the building, um you get a lot of salt uh uh related um issues. you can get other things like just at that lower level from bumping and kicking and things, you know, hitting into that. And so their proposal would be to maintain about a 4 to 5 foot buffer along the base of the building um and then about an 8 foot sidewalk with street tree grates um as shown uh kind of strategically placed um along that facade. And then when you get to the intersections or the corners, obviously widening out widening widening out uh that um that pedestrian space uh on those corners. So this is something we've talked about. Obviously, um the city um the developers certainly would like, you know, feedback and um if there's thoughts from the city, um throughout this process as it relates to the architecture and the streetscape um and and kind of how we lay this out, they've really been um more of a partner to us. Obviously, we're trying to jointly get this site off the ground and get it going. And so with that, um you know, definitely opportunity to talk more about what that looks like. Um so in in all of the uh various designs that we've gone through um with the developer um one of the things that has been consistent is that the city has uh noted that the city will be redeveloping Maine Street and Maple um in its entirety. And so we've been um we've been talking about the redevelopment of those streets uh for a long time and we've been waiting to do those streets until we had a project in front of us that actually um can be realized. And so with that, the city this past uh late fall after entering into a second phase of the purchase agreement with the developer uh kicked off a feasibility study to redevelop uh the downtown Main Street and Maple, but then determined that it was um that they wanted to extend the city wanted to extend that redevelopment all the way down Main Street uh and then include the finger streets of um Delano, Pioneer, Marsh Marsh uh I miss you one uh the the streets between Maine and uh and Highway 12. And so with that, the city has kicked off a feasibility study to redevelop that. That's going to include utilities um as well as the full street. And then um it will also um then include uh bearing the overhead uh power that is on the main and maple block to go underground. and then uh working with the developer on kind of a start stop point between the public space or the public improvement and the developer uh improvements for this particular property. Um with those improvements, one of the things that the city's determined is necessary to really realize the maximum potential for this redevelopment property is that we are going to be creating essentially a regional storm water uh to be able to accommodate storm water from this site in a essentially what I'll call plugandplay fashion. So, uh we will provide a stub to this site that the developer will be able to plug into. And with our redevelopment project, we're going to be looking at taking and accommodating uh storm water for treatment and rate uh control for the for this particular project so that we don't have uh storm water on on this site. And um given the the limited amount of land that the city really has to redevelop, it's important that we try to maximize to the extent possible. storm water that whole reconstruction >> Yeah. So, it's it's a good it's a good question. The city the city has storm water um the city has storm water requirements for its project regardless of this project. We have talked for some time because it's a city-owned piece of property that um we would we would consider taking the water the storm water and putting it into an overall system or a broader system that's going to support the redevelopment um of the city streets. there is a cost that's being associated um with that. I I don't know if I have that exact number. Um but it was I think it was presented as to what the overall storm water cost. I want to say it's in the3 to $500,000 range, but that that's not exclusive to this site if that makes sense. But there's additional cost to support the site because of the type of construction happening or is it I mean it's the same amount of acreage regardless, right? So you're going to collect so much >> correct >> rain. I understand that. I just kind of curious about what that implication is. I mean because it's the cost of the storm water system that'll be borne by all the city residents. >> So yeah, I mean the city So yes and no. So um the and I can talk about the tax increment financing piece on this. So this site the developers asked for tax increment financing which an economic development tool the city has uh to try to um uh achieve development where it otherwise couldn't because of the economics. So with this particular project this uh the city is offering um the developer a percentage of the tax increment that's going to be generated because of this development. and the city is going to um take a percentage for itself to and it's probably not going to pay 100% of those costs, but to offset the costs for uh the city share of the the redevelopment. So, so it's not a straight it's going to be borne 100% by the taxpayers. there is um that final math is still being worked out as to what the total cost to the city itself will be for all of that redevelopment including uh Main Street and all those finger streets going all the way down to the fire station. And so that that hasn't been finalized, but this project is going to generate um several million dollars that are going to go back into the city's uh side of the ledger to help offset and pay for those public improvement costs, including storm water. >> Okay. We can review that later when you get to that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Just want to make sure I understand. >> Sure. It's a great question. Uh so so storm water um as it relates to storm water gradient drainage and then as it relates to utility connections um all the parking uh sidewalks uh a lot of that infrastructure is being developed um handinhand with the developer but but through the city's redevelopment process we've had a a big say in kind of what that uh streetscape um starts to look like what those parking uh spaces look like and then how that kind of integrates um into what the developer is proposing as a part of their project. Um so with that um the kind of last thing on the development side piece that I would note plary and final plat um normally we for many developments we have plary and final plat come through as two pieces. Um this is a fairly um uh simple in that we're really talking about one development piece, one development lot that's going to be coming out of this. And so the combination of five lots into one uh through a plat um we're recommending we've done this historically on kind of simple plats or where where we're taking um and actually combining land rather than subdividing land. Um we've looked at preliminary and final plat as a singular item um through the planning commission uh uh process anyway. And so the applicant has provided us with the preliminary plat. Um the final plat uh is um going to look identical to the to the preliminary plat. The city did note a couple of drainage and utility easements uh that would need to be added to the plary and final plat that would be noted in um our uh review and approval of the plenary final plat um that would go to the city council. So um that's a high level overview and we can get into questions on the planning side of the development. I'll speak to the tax increment financing side um a little bit also um and then maybe go through that and then we can uh open it up uh for questions. So the um city has a uh tool available to it tax increment financing as I noted I think we've only used this one other time in the city's industrial park uh in the history of Maple Plane. And so with that, the city uh would be establishing a development district number two and a tiff district number two-1 um for the city of Maple Plane. And so the city has a tax increment consultant who had put together the development program for development district number two and then the tax increment financing uh in this case redevelopment plan for tax increment financing district number two-1. And so we would um the planning commission is being asked to review these documents for consistency with the city's comprehensive plan and adopted policies. Uh tiff district 2-1 is proposed uh to support the redevelopment of this particular site. Um specifically for this 95 unit multifamily housing project development uh diff district number two is a a kind of broader district and we placed it across the entire city. Um and it really just encourages the city in the future being able to redevelop uh underutilized and blighted properties across the entirety of the city. Uh facilitate private investment, support needed public improvements and increase tax base and employment opportunities to the extent possible. So um the the uh adoption of tiff district number two across the entirety of the city just kind of opens that up for us. And then we have this specific TIFF district which is 2-1 which is comprised of the five properties that we're talking about uh for the purpose of this redevelopment. So in order to uh utilize tax increment financing and in this particular case we're call um we're utilizing what's called redevelopment tax increment financing. Uh that is a type of tax increment financing that's defined by state state statute and in that we have to make some findings. Um the city utilized a a third party that um does this very often for many municipalities to confirm that the site ma uh meets all statutory requirements or criteria uh for establishing a redevelopment district. And so in this particular case, what we needed to find is that 100% of the buildings located on this property are structurally substandard. Um, and so in this particular case, there was one building that was still remaining on this property. And I will note over the course of the last 20 years, the city certified all of the buildings on this property. But the certification windows for those um previous or those the certification windows for those buildings that were previously certified and now uh taken down on those properties, um those windows only last for three years. And so at the end of that um the city can no longer uh rely on the certification. So in this particular case we're down to one building uh the museum historical uh building. Um and it was uh found to be substandard um which is I think not surprising to anybody. Um and so then on top of that we have a coverage test or an occupied coverage test. Um and we have to have 75 70% of uh the site has to be covered in this parta uh particular case. Um we have exceeded that uh threshold and then um the substandard conditions are reasonably distributed throughout the the district. So this 2-1 um some of those coverage things and some of those substandard conditions include uh things on the ground, not just the building. And so that was distributed across the entirety of the site. Um and those findings were done in a report uh that you can see I think it's in the it's in the tax increment financing report. So then we have to establish a need for assistance and so the developer has worked with the city in providing their pro-forma and financial analysis for the property and then the city's uh financial and tiff consultant has done an analysis of that and we presented that to the city's EDA um on a couple of different occasions um and it will go in front of the city council. Ultimately, the total development cost is approximately $21.7 million in this particular case. And if the developer were to develop this property without TIFF, the debt service coverage um for the financing would would um be at a level that would not allow the property the project to proceed. Um and so with the tax increment financing that's being offered um it's estimated that the project um does meet the the financial levels um that would allow the project to proceed. And of course then the developer um agrees with that that uh without the use of tax increment financing the project did not work. With the use of it it does uh work. And so in this partic particular case, the uh city found uh that the project is not financially feasible through private investment alone. And so what we have offered to the developer is what's called a pay as you go uh tiff note that would essentially be issued to the developer. What that means is that the city has identified a maximum uh reimbursement amount that would be reimburse reimbursed to the developer over the 26-year life of the tax increment financing district. That amount is $2,889,000. Um and the city would uh give essentially um up to that amount or 70% of the proceeds from the available increment that's generated on uh as a part of this development. The city would rem um would retain the remainder of that for eligible expenses uh to be reimbured. So, those would be things like um utilities, street reconstruction, uh anything to do with land acquisition. Um there's a a whole list of things that would be eligible and those have been named in the in the um tip plan. And then um what it means to say pay as you go is that the developer would pay their taxes every year and then every year the city would uh send back to the developer or reimburse the developer a certain amount money that's established in our plan up to that total maximum amount of tax increment financing that we would that has been agreed to. than in the TIFF note. Just in case anybody doesn't know on tax increment financing, super high level. Um so there's an established current uh estimated market value for that property and then there um there's taxes that are um determined based on that. So that we essentially would take what's there today and that base value and then the base amount of taxes uh paid on that property. we'd freeze it and then we'd say at the end of construction it's going to it's going to have a new uh value and then taxes based on that new value and what the city's able to capture is the difference between those two and so that's the increment that we're essentially capturing. Um and so anything that was currently paid on those properties if there were taxes paid uh would still be paid. Um, and then we would be capturing for the period or the life of that district or until we've satisfied the notes that we've issued on that district and satisfied ourselves, uh, we could close that district earlier um, and take that off the books and then let the taxes go back um, onto the tax roles. The um the one thing I would note with tax increment financing as a tool um one of the things that it leverages or gives the city the ability to leverage is the city can capture um the taxes not only its its city taxes, but it's also allowed to capture the taxes that are generated for schools and for the county. And so, um, as a tool, it's it's probably one of the more robust economic development tools that the city has available to it because it's able to capture, um, the entirety of the tax, not just the the city tax. So, um, with that, the district that we are talking about creating, uh, would uh would generate approximately five and a half 5.2 million over the life of the district. So, if that kind of gives you a sense, then we have a a couple of million dollars that the city would capture and the developer would capture uh that that three million uh dollars. >> Yeah. >> Would you just walk us through the table one example of one of those years? >> Sure. >> On page 54, the whole thing. >> I just want to make sure I understand. >> Sure. Yeah. >> See, the first year it's valued at 15 million, but then the second year it's 215. Is that just because it's under construction at that time? >> Yeah, that's assuming it doesn't realize its full market value in year one of that partially because they they um that payable year is based on what was finished in the previous year. So assuming that it's not 100% complete. Um so then with that in year 29 it has a a taxable market value of 21 million tax capacity of 269,000. The original base tax capacity so what's there today is 13,879. So that captures that incremental difference of 255,000 um that would be available in um see So, does it break down? >> Maybe we just take year two and just kind of walk across. I want to make sure I understand all the columns. >> Sure. I I thought there was another table in here. Um it doesn't look like um just trying to see estimated um so so if you take just table two you go across you'd have um the taxable market value to have 21 million 588 tax capacity 269 original base tax capacity 138 to79 9 capture tax capacity for TIFF 255,000 and then available uh TIF from the district um at 300,000 um and then the they give you a present value. Let me look in um >> look at exhibit A. Is that the same one? >> So I have exhibit three and exhibit four. >> Is that I don't know if that's what you're looking at. looking at section four item A. >> Pardon? >> You're looking at section four item A exhibit two. >> Yeah. >> So the >> Yeah, the section four item A >> the original ACE tax capacity that stays on the >> that's what >> tax roll. Correct. And then it's just the captured part that >> I'm trying to make sure because you got you got the left side first four columns capture tax capacity for TIF. The next one says available tiff from district. So the district and make sure I understand a district is just this development. >> That's correct. >> It's 2-1 which is just this development. >> Yeah, it's just these five properties. That's correct. And so that's all that's available. Sometimes the these districts do extend outside um because they would maybe anticipate a future project happening. >> That's not the case here. We've we've limited it to this partly because we only have the ability to do the redevelopment on a limited area. Uh we couldn't expand this outside of that current area because we're right right at at or about the threshold to meet all of the uh requirements for establishment of that tip district. >> Okay. Okay. So then if you go back said year two capture tax is 255981 available from the district is 300687 one's larger than the other. I'm just trying to understand why the capture tax capacity is 255 but the available >> Matt can you speak to that or do you know >> that bump I'd have to look >> I don't know. Yeah. >> Then you have tips to the city is 90, but then you keep going across and you have to the developer. >> Well, and so you've got um >> just make sure I understand. >> Yeah. So the so the new tax capacity that's being created 269 base captured 255 estimated I think it's it's based on an estimated um I I I I think that estimated is an estimated number. You see the city, you're saying uh city tiff, related share, county tiff, and then school district. That's just a breakdown of the um various entities that are are contributing to the tip, but that's not >> on page 74 is what? >> No, we're looking at page 74. >> Okay, let me keep going. >> I'm on page 54. >> Oh, 54. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I'm looking at >> the very first exhibit in the tip district. That's all. Yeah. Which was I thought was the most simplest 50. >> Go bet. I'm not on that one yet. >> Oh, that packet particularly. I can't see 45. >> I don't want I don't want >> I I keep skipping it. >> Yeah. I don't Yeah, I'd have to I'd have to ask um Tammy on her on that math on the table um of why why that goes across. I think if you look at the total real estate taxes paid um there is a um there's a different number and so I think there's an estimated amount. I don't know the discrepancy between the 255 and the 300 in the table. >> Yeah. Just >> so the available tiff from the district has a higher amount than the captured >> right >> tax increment. Does it say it says after deduction available to from the district is after deduction state auditor estimated based on 25 present value base tax based on so I think she's noting this is an estimate based on the taxes payable at a rate of 117.89% So it's a greater percent estimated based on the taxable market value. So I don't know why the the captured tiff number um is a different number than that estimated tiff something we could see. Um I mean these tables like I said Northland prepares these for the city um to to calculate that and I ju I just don't know that one difference in that particular table what that represents. >> Yeah kind of >> table on page 74 or I mean 76 breaks it down a little bit different. It shows the base tax capacity, the capture tax, the estimated total. Then >> break it all in there >> breakdown of what goes with the city, the county, the school, and other >> gives you numbers. It doesn't >> Yeah, it doesn't it just doesn't >> Okay. >> You know what it says? Um she she notices that it the total estimated tax increment is before deducting the state auditor's fee which is payable um and then that total tax increment collected is um provides estimated total tax increment after deducting state otter's fees. So I don't know if that first number is based on that deduction and then the the total number is without it. I I don't know if that's the discrepancy, but I didn't do that math backwards, but it might be that. >> When do they provide a final set? >> Well, so this this set of numbers is the projected final set of numbers, but um I I can totally I can get you that answer if you're curious about that answer for sure. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, we can we can get you that. understand. >> Yeah. And it would be presented when the council sees it, they're going to be presented with that um that finding from city and everyone else as >> Yeah. And unfortunately like on our on our side from the planning side, we're not responsible on the financial piece of it. we're finding on the planning piece of it, even though I know it's all part of conversation, it's just not our finding essentially on that. So, um, so I went I went through uh preliminary and final plat also with this particular piece. So with that um on the on the tax increment financing side um of the district um in this particular case, the city does have a the city planning commission has a piece of um the the overall uh park dedication I mean the park the overall taxing financing uh for this project um just as a result of of the tiff requirements. um in this case making the finding that um is presented in the resolution for this project. Um one other thing I noted that um that I I talked about the streetscape. I didn't just at a high level uh go over the landscape piece of this project. I just wanted to note that um if we could just look at that landscape plan uh that was provided. It's on 31 of the PDF packet. Um, I just wanted to note that outside of that streetscape, the applicant is proposing uh some parking lot landscaping, some perimeter landscaping, and some buffering from uh Highway 12. And so I just wanted to kind of note that we had also worked with the developer on um just screening from the parking lot, providing uh kind of a deciduous or canopy tree cover back to the back side of the parking lot along Highway 12 and then adding in some additional evergreen um and and con can coniferous trees that would help to um just provide additional layer between the Highway 12 side and that parking lot. uh noting that at some level um that will provide um kind of a driver level um buffer to that project. And then with that um on the site plan, you can see that the developer is proposing what they're calling an outdoor amenity area right next to the like right on the inside of that parking ramp. And then on the outside, they're they're talking about having a dog run or a designated dog area. Um, other amenities on this site include a sky deck that was noted by the developer on the rooftop um on that east side of the building overlooking Main Street. So, just to highlight that in addition um to some of the things we talked about with the landscaping and some of the amenities um the developer is trying to create kind of a comprehensive uh plan that does provide the residents for this particular project with some additional um both on grade and uh above grade um amenities through that site. So, with all of that, I'd be happy to go into as much detail or answer questions. Um and then uh obviously we have a public hearing um on a number of items tonight. So uh with that I will yield to the planning commission. >> Um okay. So public hearing. I need a motion to open the public hearing. Motion to open the public hearing. >> I guess let me let me be more specific. I need a motion to open the public hearing associated to the site plan first. >> I think you could take public on the whole thing. >> Okay. >> Uh so then then here's here's the more specific is uh a public hearing associated to both the site plan review and the resolution review that's presented in front of us today. >> I motion for that. Okay, Nick. Nick, first motions, Adam. Second motions. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All oppose say the same. >> Hearing none. Eyes have it 4 to zero. So the public hearing is open as of 7:25 p.m. Um just a quick mention. Uh public comment is a courtesy extending to anyone who wishes to address the council or the planning commission. um you will be heard. Um and we will consider your comments as part of this process. Um but the other thing I'd like to state is just be courteous um and use your words wisely. So the first person that has uh written down that they plan to speak here is Rya. >> Yes, that's me. >> Or is it Rya? >> No, you got it right. >> Okay. >> Rya. And um we'll love to hear your name and then uh address. >> Sure. This is working right. Okay. Um good evening commissioners. My name is Rya Smiley. I'm a land use attorney with Larkin Hoffman and uh prior to joining Larkin Hoffman, I actually worked as a land use planner at the Metropolitan Council for over 10 years uh working in comprehensive planning. I'm here tonight on behalf of our client, Magnolia 8 Properties LLC, who is the owner of the uh one parcel that's immediately adjacent to the uh Maple and Maine development at 5210 Main Street. And I just want to uh mention that our comments really focus on how this project fits within the city's adopted uh planning framework and how it affects the immediate adjacent uh property. Um as it goes to the consistency of uh the comp of the redevelopment or development project with the comprehensive plan. Um we just want to note that um and this was mentioned uh during the presentation just a little while ago as well that the density of the uh project was mentioned to be about 56 units per acre. um which uh on a um 95 units on 1 and a4er uh acre property, but that density is actually closer to 76 units per acre. Uh the 2040 comp plan designates this area as downtown mixed use and calls for a density range of 20 to 40 units per acre. Um the density is evaluated uh from the comp plan and land use plan perspective at a parcel level and not districtwide. So at 76 units per acre, this project uh far exceeds the maximum 40 unit per acre allowable. Um and this isn't something that is averaged across a zoning district. And the right path forward for that would be a comprehensive plan amendment to consider extending or or basically increasing the maximum density allowed in the downtown mixeduse land use category. Um and the PUD ordinance itself also calls for project consistency with the comprehensive plan. So we think this is a point uh to be considered um very closely. Uh if not resolved right now, this inconsistency will resurface again when the time comes for this project uh to get a sewer extension permit uh for the review and uh and authorization by the Metropolitan Council. So that will happen at a later time regardless. And going back to the parcel that my client owns, um it's the one other parcel on this block that is being proposed for the entirety of it for development. The in the intensity and scale of the development will directly influence the future potential for marketability of uh this parcel and general compatibility with the surrounding area. Um it doesn't mean that we don't like higher density. We actually are very excited about a project that brings this area uh back to vibrancy from the its current state. But um basically what we're asking for is that the city should consider this block as a whole and not create an isolated condition um for this parcel that can become very difficult to resolve later. And one note about the tiff uh district that you are considering right now as mentioned uh the public hearing on the tiff district itself is not until Monday um when the when the city council will actually establish the tiff district and the tiff district is being established solely for this project. So, and we believe that it is very important to ensure that the uh comprehensive plan framework and the tiff district are fully aligned and publicly vetted before any entitlements are uh granted uh to this development. So, uh to wrap that up, I just want to again mention that um we do support a very active downtown. We're not opposing this project. Uh but we just want to make sure that it's the right um project for this area and is moving along the correct path um as an adjacent property owner and um we are willing to absolutely work with the developer to make sure that that happens. Thank you for your attention. >> Thank you. >> That is the only person who signed up. So this I can give that to you. Um well I'll just open it up to any other public comments at all. >> Yeah. >> Otherwise we we it looks like we have the applicant here, right? Sure. certainly come front and introduce yourself, please. >> Thank you, commissioners. Uh my name is Matt Alexander with Northshore Development Partners and Northshore Contractors. Uh we're a local apartment company that uh this is what we do. We uh recent projects in the area was a uh the stacks of Long Lake on Weetta Boulevard. Worked with the city there uh for an acquisition redevelopment tiff as well. Um, we're very familiar with that with the process. Um, and it there's a it takes a village for these types of projects as you guys have figured out over the years that this has been attempted and not not worked out. So, I just want to commend your staff and uh for working very diligently and and it's it's a lot of things you have to navigate, especially dealing with uh Mind DOT on Highway 12 and then rightways and public improvement projects and how you're going to fund them and very thoughtful process they've gone through and it truly does feel like a partnership. So, commend you guys for uh uh find a good team to to work with. Uh, as Mark had mentioned, we'd started really getting into some fun stuff about how the the elevations present themselves around the site, mostly about how it looks towards Main Street and how it looks back towards McGarry's. Uh, we've and I sent these to Mark and unfortunately they weren't able to it's overhead. >> So, you pass that around. The concept is the lower level window is the one facing directly across the street to the post office. So that would be open windows across the hallway going from the front door back into Main Street that would be open lit lit up at night and we branded the the name of the project Maple and Maine Maple and Maine. Maple plane just seems to roll off the tongue and we wanted to honor some history of of the neighborhood. And in that behind that that that wall would be the the large letters maple and mine with spotlights at night open to the glass. So you could see that when you walk out of a Garry's or drive down 12. And there's also in there is embedded a historical historical timeline of the city of Maple Plane and the surrounding areas. And there's a lot of cool stories about James J. Hill Hill and there's uh the establishment of uh the community, the Bud family and uh there's some there's some cool pictures. We've been working with uh the Judy at the historical society. She's been great. Um so we've got a number of pictures. And then on the main street elevation, we've a lot of communities that have done this in other areas, but we've identified some areas on those that would be panels similar to shown over here. This is a project called The Yards in uh East St. Paul. They're metal panels that are printed black and white aluminum and you can do a historic scene. So, we would purchase uh the rights to use one of the photos from the historic society uh for a dollar and then print them and and mount them as kind of a walk down history. Uh history history is opportunity how we're seeing it. So yes, we're we are having parking on the first level. That is just a product of the site and the tight site constraints and having enough parking uh for residents to not park on the streets around around Main Street, Ma Maple and Maine. And uh so we're very excited about this um process and and working with the staff and I think we can as a true partner come up with solutions for any problem. Um but that's all I have. I I just wanted to say thank you so much and you know it's been a a year of of effort and and it's uh these things do take that long. So this is what I do for a living. It's not a hobby and uh so I deal with this process everywhere we go. So but you guys thank you very much for your time. >> Thank you. >> I mean over 20 years if you're a Maple Plane, right? >> Yeah. >> Talking about the redevelopment of this place. >> Yeah. the city um I don't I don't remember the year that the city uh started assembling properties but I want to say 200 four maybe or 2005 the city uh went after and received a livable communities demonstration grant for this project um with the idea that that would help kind of provide a catalyst for downtown redevelopment. Um, and so this the city obtained that. With that grant, they were able to uh purchase Olsen's Market, which was kind of that other piece. Um, as well as one of the properties to the east, um, in order to to try to get that to go together. Um, and then kind of went through the demolition of that site. So, I mean, this has been an ongoing process for many, many years. Um, and like I said, I mean, we've we've seen every variation of this. We've seen every level of um kind of redevelopment concept um with each one. We were we were really um uh supportive of trying to get it to work, right? So when it was an all retail concept, when it was a mixeduse concept, when it had office, when it uh became retail um and residential, when it became city hall, library uh and um residential, all of those the city really championed to try to get a project to work. understanding that this particular site, I mean, it really is a catalyst site for the city. Um, I think once you see redevelopment occur, um, and you you realize, um, you know, significant, you know, tens of millions of dollars of investment, it sets the stage then for other people on a much easier path to come in and say, "Hey, they've already done it. Let's do more." Um, and we see that with small towns. Um when we're in the western part of Henipin County, uh we're at a significant disadvantage because we're uh we don't have available to us. Many of the outstate resources that uh communities literally five minutes from here in Wright County have available or Mloud County or some of those counties. Um and we don't compete for Henipin County funding uh or for my council funding um because of our location. And so it makes it difficult. It also makes it difficult for a developer um like Matt's group um to be able to get the math to work in Maple Plane uh when they could charge higher rents five miles east of here um in another community. Right. So, a lot of the these outlined communities um uh it's very difficult to realize projects and so you know it's been 20 years we've got um this is the furthest uh we've come with a project at this level to get it all the way to planning commission as you know we've talked about a lot of projects um but they never have gotten to you and so um we're super excited to try to get this across the the finish line uh to the extent that we and the city support you know this particular redevelopment So, >> got another >> uh could you Oh, do you have >> person would like to speak? >> Yeah. >> Hello. >> Hi. I'm Katie Vasser. I live at 5161 Independent Street. Um I just have a few questions. I don't have prepared remarks. Um, with respect to walkability, if that's going to be in the intent of this downtown space, um, is there discussion of additional safety features on Highway 12? Maybe putting in a stoplight at that BUD and 12 intersection with visibility turning west on BUD, um, or even turning east. Right now, you can barely see around like the bush. So there's additional trees and everything that's going to really block um turning on to 12 coming north on Bud. Um and then just excuse me thinking of connecting like the park the baseball fields on north side um to make Maple Plane fully walkable. Um that would just be a safer keep the traffic lower especially with additional residents, more cars, everything kind of incorporate our spaces a little better. Just sorry just to address uh one item. So um Bud Avenue be on the right hand side there um as part of our downtown street project will be closed >> permanently. >> Permanently. >> Oh okay. >> So um you would not be able to access Highway 12 from that anymore. >> So not just during construction but in >> permanently. Okay. Um, interesting. >> But I do agree there is some level of uh need for a residents on the south side of Highway 12 to get across more than a stoplight by the library. So >> yes, that is about half the year. I could I can So with that, so BUD BUD is one of the safety um things that we've been talking about and the city council supported um closing BUD, not vacating Bud, but closing Bud for the for the time being so that uh that particular intersection um is eliminated as a full through, which really is going to help traffic um at other intersections. The city's long-term plan, and obviously we need Mandot to help fund, is a full intersection, signalized intersection at County Road 19 and Main Street and Highway 12. Um, in order to make that all work really well, one of the things that was identified was the library is in a really poor location uh for visibility. And so the city has had for about 10 years now conversations with the library um and as recent as yesterday uh conversations with Henipin County Library about partnering with the city to uh to build a um library city hall um and then util and then take down that library um so that it could open up sight lines for a much better signalized intersection at that location. So that that is part of our our walkability. I mean that's part of a broader plan. Um but this particular project um is really kind of spurring than the city to do some of these other improvements in the downtown. So >> wonderful. Um and then just two project questions. Um, and I know we're not talking like the financing of the project right now, but will there be asurances to the city like for landscape, hardscape, um, performance, letters of credit or some other >> Yes. >> for the city to >> Yes. So any of the anything that's approved on the approved plan, including the landscape plan, and then any of the the hardscape, um would have to be um secured by the developer, and then we would not release that until it's completed. Um now, on the on the public improvement side and the sidewalks and some of the the street facing landscaping, we're not sure yet who it might be the city building that um up to a certain point and then it would hand off to the developer. We're still working on coordination of some of that. >> Okay. Um, and then final question slash comment. Um, just for lighting, uh, I'd like to understand what the lighting on the sidewalks looks like for the pedestrian if it's like similar street lamps to what we have now. Um, or if it will be I know you mentioned shooting up at the building. It sounds like like spotlights on the building. >> No, the lights I was talking about were actually inside the building. Shooting at the wall behind glass. The hallway would be the mural. >> Pedestrian lighting would be done by the city. So, we're still working on our lighting plan because we would we would install or design, install, and then own our street lights. They would be consistent with the ones in front of the post office McGaries. That's our intent is to continue that pattern. So, >> thank you. >> Thank you. Final call. Anyone else? >> Well, I do want to ask Mark related to the Oh, wait. >> I was just going to say um >> can close it. >> Yeah, I was um I need a motion to close the public hearing. >> I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. >> Second. >> Uh Adam first the motion. David seconds the motion. Um all in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All oppose say the same. Eyes have a 4 zero. As of 7:45 p.m., the public hearing is closed. >> Okay. Yes, Nick, please. >> Uh, Mark, I did want to hear your thoughts on the I I know we have a a PUD kind of in place for this to get around the density that was talked about. This is uh in relation to what the first speaker was was bringing up. Has there been conversation of a comp plan amendment or is that is this a unique scenario and that's why the PUD is being used? I guess just any comments >> response to the first speaker. >> Yeah, so we had um we had looked at um the density and the PD is is not the vehicle to it's not trying to to change or get around the comp plan. The comp plan is a comp plan. The city has a rational basis for its interpretation of the comp plan which is what we need to have. um the if you were to take the literal interpretation of the comp plan on a parcel by parcel basis in a mixeduse district, it it does not it does not work. Um so it could never have been the city's intent um to uh establish a range of density specifically that was contained within each parcel. Um for example, you had a retail building with a mixed use. We encourage in all of our language, in all of our density, multiple story mixeduse buildings, retail on the first floor, maybe a couple apartments on the second floor, um th those types of uses are encouraged, they're discussed, but they would not be possible um if you were to take a partial partial basis of that range. So our RA the rational basis we established with the interpretation of the comp plan is that um we have a kind of minimum density that we projected and we have a maximum density that we projected across that district and that that relates to uh people that relates to a certain number of units. And so we are going to be well right within the the number of units on the overall acreage of that downtown development district. noting that we have percentages of that that are going to be mixed with different types of land uses with our with our finding um of that that we've established a regional basis for how we've interpreted that. That's what we need to do. Um, in this particular case, the PUD is really we're taking the mixeduse development uh downtown development district and we're saying that um the if we were to try to stick within the the rules that were created specifically for that uh we would be limited um and not be able to realize certain types of redevelopment. Um, so we utilize planned unit developments in um cases where we think that the outcome meets all of the criteria and the and the requirements um that the city um that the district was intending but needs some flexibility. So that height has always been a topic of discussion for the city. Where do we cap a height? Um, you know, ideally everybody wants um a two and a half story kind of quaint mixeduse downtown that has um individual 2500 foot buildings on it. The reality is those don't happen very easily and it's difficult to realize that. And so we've talked about this height issue quite a bit. We've also noted quite a bit that high groundwater, it's got bad soils. Um and so we and we want parking to work. Um and so with that, you know, things like that height limitation, that 50 foot setback, um are just things that make sense to provide flexibility on. And so if you're if we make that finding um that we want to provide some flexibility, then that planning and development becomes our our best tool um in order to do that. In our case, we're proposing that we reszone this property from mixed use downtown to mixeduse downtown PUD. Um, so that we have a new zoning district and then this building becomes wholly compliant with that new zoning district. >> Thank you. >> Any other thoughts or comments or Did um Stefan provide any feedback? I know he was he would probably have a lot of comments on landscaping, but >> Well, and if he does, we still I would I would encourage him. I thought we were going to maybe see comments from him. He had noted that he wasn't going to be here. >> Yeah. >> And I thought maybe we'd see comments. >> I'm right. You didn't see any, right? I'm stepping. um just a little more time. I I don't I don't think I did, but he and I had talked about the landscaping um and the streetscape of the of the project um previously >> and he had commented on that and obviously if he has other comments, we'd be happy to >> consider those. I guess personally I think from seeing some earlier design concepts I like where it's going like to try to break down the the facade to because it is a large building and the scale much larger scale than what's existing today. Um so I'm encouraged to see that and um yeah I think for what it is the design's going in the right direction. Um, see my computer died to see my packet. Um, >> I was just wondering like along Highway 12, what kind of seeing what screenings there or what uh there's quite a few trees there. Okay. >> Black Hills. Mhm. >> I'm not sure Stefan would have a comment about adding any trees because there's not not much you can add. They've they've done >> He was questioning on angled parking versus parallel parking spots. I being that we are on the western edge of the metro, we are largely carbased community. I think it's important that we maintain the street parking for the current businesses and patrons that come to McGarry's, the post office, the library, the little building across the street that um hopefully we'll see some more this opportunity with more residents that likely the patrons are going to be driving as a destination to come here. Um, so I think it's important that we try to maximize the street parking as much as possible. >> Well, I guess to that then are the diagonal I didn't think about this. Are the diagonal spaces being developed for public use or for Okay, it is for public use. >> Yeah. Originally with the 71 unit um uh building and only one floor of parking, we were struggling to get to parking counts without utilizing the on street parking, which is not it's something we specifically don't want to do in our ordinance. But one of the things we want to see in downtown is an expansion of public parking spaces, right? We know that we need that. Um so trying to maximize that with the diagonal parking I think it's you know starts to speak to that in this particular case um you know you're adding over 20 um on street spaces uh with that diagonal noting that we are taking you know some on street uh spaces off so that net is still going to be a positive though in the in the teens uh for the overall net parking um but I just think trying to concentrate wherever we can additional parking is important And yes, Stephan had questioned the diagonal parking really more from the aspect of trying to provide more space for for planting. Um, not surprisingly, but um, so I, you know, we've always looked at and and the city has been driving the the angled parking just with the idea that we got to maximize to the extent possible parking um, on street so that that net increases more. But those are public parking spaces. So >> I have a I guess a question to the street trees like in the grates like is that the city's responsibility to maintain those or >> it is >> because I know there's in front of McGary is the one tree that's been missing for a couple years now and it's just >> so we've replaced that those trees um once I think um in their life but yeah I I mean our intent is to try to create a streetscape that has the trees and I think that was the guide design guidelines when we looked at those that also speaks to that um I mean there's there's definitely a school of thought between street trees in an urban area and and not street trees. I would I would argue and of course I'm a landscape architect so that um that's what I do that if if they're planted right um you're going to get you know maybe 20 25 years out of a a street tree. Um but they're not they're not forever. that I would argue um any of the downtowns that I think people uh relate to in our area or anywhere else for that matter, >> they have street trees. Um the ones that people say are the best, right? Or the ones that people use as examples for Boy, I'd really like to have that downtown. >> Yeah, I would like to see them. I'd like to see the one get replaced that's gone. >> Is there still one gone? >> Yeah, >> I thought we just an open hole there that >> Yeah, >> kind of dangerous. Yeah. Noted, Jacob. >> Let's get a treatment. >> Yeah, >> but they are city responsibility. >> Yeah, I think it was brought like a resident or a city person or someone commented in a previous meeting about the tree being gone or would like to see it replaced. >> I guess I'll just echo. I appreciate the sort of chicken and the egg situation that uh the city is dealing with here and how this presents a solution to that problem from a development perspective and I do think it is within the spirit of the comprehensive plan. So, your point is taken, Mark. >> Um, and just another question that I have is, um, yeah, we've certainly seen a lot of projects, uh, related to this area over the years. Um, and so from what I'm hearing, the city has found that this is the best compromise out of all of the projects we've reviewed, or is there potential for that there's something better out there that we need to think about or >> Yeah, here's what I'd tell you. I mean, and this is coming from from me, just my own opinion on this, but um I've been um doing this same job for 29 years, so that's my perspective. And I work for a variety of clients that are very similar to Maple Plane in this western area. Um, with that said, these projects are extraordinarily difficult to get off the ground. It takes a huge effort and it takes a high level of risk by the city and the developer to make them work. So, they don't come easy. Um, and so what I would say is is this is this the best project? And I'm not say anything about the project. I don't know that it's the best project. I don't know that there isn't a better project that is out there that we could still, you know, realize or obtain. But what I would say is this is a real project and this is a project that now has gotten to a level where all the pieces seem to fit together and we think we can make it work. And so what I would what I would say to you is the best project is one that checks the majority of your boxes but that is also in in the ground, right? And so because you can you can do as much as I we can do as much as we want and we can find try to keep finding the perfect project. And um I say that with we don't think this project's a bad project. We think this project checks a lot of our boxes. Would we like uh first floor retail? 100%. Everybody wants it. Um, but when you do the math on first floor retail in our town, Mads Group's got to charge $40 to $50 a square foot or $35 to $50 a square foot. The vacant space right across the street um in the blue building, I'll call it, right, is uh $6 to $8 a foot. So, >> okay. >> Who who's going to be able to come in and realize um that price point? We keep hearing that, right? So then who's going to take the risk of vacant space? We went out on a national and a kind of regional hunt for retail with um kind of some of our local experts, right? That 2016 1516 push. Um, we used some local guys who are nationally connected, meaning they had ties to like they were the developer for Hi-Ve, for uh uh Culver's, for Starbucks, for they like they they developed all their stores and they tried to get their own clients to build here and we didn't we don't meet the criteria. We don't have the rooftops. So at the end of that, I think we spent two and a half years and we had some of the best um real estate um commercial level real estate people working on our behalf because they lived here and they were like well selfishly I just want to have this work. Um, at the end of that 2 and a half year like blitz that we put on, um, where we were offering every financial incentive possible, uh, we had a, I think it was a Planet Fitness signed on for our entire redevelopment area. That was it. That was the only one that could say, "I'm coming." So, um, over the years, uh, um, Dollar General 25 times has reached out to the city saying, "We want to build on that spot. Will you give us that spot for a Dollar General?" And we've said, "No, that's not the right fit. That's not the right development." We've had a Casey's probably three or four times, quick trip before we got them to there. So, are you sure you don't want to give us that Primo spot? Um, and we said, "No, that's just not the right spot. We need houses here. We need rooftops. We don't have a product at all like this, right? We have no market rate housing in our city right now that's been built in the last 50 years. So, you know, you factor in all that and you say, well, we've got a developer who's ready to go. We got a project that we think makes sense and we have to grant some funding and a little bit of flexibility. That's how we're getting it off the ground. Well, I mean, that's why those tools are available. So, back to your question, is it the best? I I don't know that it's the best, but I would say the best is is closest to what we want and is in the ground, right? And so the other thing that I think we do know, and I've seen this over and over again, is if we can get one project to go, then we're going to see other projects go and we haven't gotten one project to go. We, you know, I mean, we're waiting. We've been trying to put together projects, but um more times than not, you get one, you'll see momentum then on that. And I think that's gonna, you know, then that that starts to to spiral a little bit. And I mean, obviously, we all know we're in a great geographic location. Um, density-wise, we're not where we should be to be able to attract other things like retail. And so, you know, from a city standpoint, one of our goals is to try to generate rooftops, and we want to generate them at a price point that makes sense for the for the area. um this isn't affordable per se, but um by all metrics, it's going to probably hit most affordability uh levels in that probably like 60% AMI range, right? I mean, but we're not put we're not putting that on there, but if you look at what that is for Henipin County, um this could be a really a really good project. So, >> any other comments from the commissioners? Um any changes to the recommendation? So uh right now here's how it reads. Um planning commission uh staff is seeking direction from the planning commission related to the requested preliminary and final plat site plan review planned unit development and tiff program finding. Should planning commission recommend approval of the requested actions to the city council, the following findings and conditions should be included. Um and then it lists A, B. Um A is the proposed site plan, planned unit development and preliminary area and final plat meets all applicable conditions, criteria and restrictions slated in the city of Maple Plain zoning and subdivision ordinance. Prior to city council consideration of application, the following items shall be completed by the applicant. And then it lists a couple of requirements there. Um and then it looks like we would uh and in a way be recommending approval for the development or the creation of development district number two for TIFF and then um specifically the TIFF district 2-1 um based on several factors and Then any sign plan will have to be done in accordance with the approved plans. Um, it looks like maybe signage is a part of the process but was not included in our our review in particular. different >> any ads or amend or um otherwise I'll take a motion to either approve or deny the recommendations as listed in the proposal. What do we do first? I guess >> so. I would do it was me. I think you could make one motion because again you're recommending recommending approval. >> There you go. Make one motion recommending approval for the planning related items and then I would make a separate motion relating to the resolution for the tax increment finance uh financing finding. So if you do those in those two steps, I think that's fine. >> Okay. So first step is a recommendation of approval or a denial um for the site plan review and then another >> well site plan review reszoning PUD and preliminary and final plat. >> Yep. Okay. Site plan, let's see, preliminary final plat site plan review planned unit development. That's one part. And then the other part is um and this can be done in the same motion right we can do or do we need two separate >> do them separate do that one first and then do that >> so the first motion is uh recommending approval or denial of the uh requested preliminary and flat PL final plat site plan review and planned unit development. >> Okay. I will motion to approve the preliminary and final plat uh and the was it site plan. >> Yeah. >> Uh Nick motions to approve the preliminary final plat site plan review and planned unit development. Can I get a second? >> I'll second the motion. >> Adam second the motion. All in favor say I. >> I. All oppose say the same. Eyes have it four to zero. Then we need to recommend approval or denial of the um TIFF program finding. So I need a motion to approve or deny the TIFF program finding. >> I'll make a motion to recommend approval of the >> Is that the resolution? >> Yes, further resolution. Yes. Okay. >> For the resolution of the >> Is that kind of that's the second part of this whole thing, right? If I could, I would like to uh recommend uh adding one clause or one phrase at the very very end of uh the last paragraph of resolution uh 2026 uh- 02 05-01 uh where the last paragraph will read as follows. Now therefore be it resolved by the Maple Plane Planning Commission that the development program and the TIFF plan are consistent with Maple Plan's comprehensive plan and the general plans for development and redevelopment of the community. And this is the addition and are hereby recommended to the Maple Plain City Council and that's it. >> Okay. So, I need a motion to approve resolution 2026 020501 with the addition of the last sentence of paragraph >> paragraph 6 which says and hereby recommend to Maple Plane City Count Council. >> I'll make the motion. >> David makes the motion. Can I get a second? >> Second. >> Nick seconds the motion. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All oppose say the same. Eyes have it four to zero. >> Great. It's anticipated this goes to the next city council meeting which be the February 23rd. Um that we have all the conditions met and satisfied and ready to go. So >> good. Okay. >> Scroll back up to the top. Um okay then. Is there any other business that commissioners want to discuss or bring up or otherwise I'll take a motion to adjurnn? >> We close the meeting first, right? >> Uh public hearing. We already >> Okay. >> Yeah, we already closed the public hearing. Yeah. >> We move a motion to adjourn the meeting. >> Second. >> Adam makes a motion to adjourn the meeting. Nick seconds the meeting. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All opposed. Eyes have it four to zero. Meeting adjourned. It is 8:05 p.m. Thanks everyone.