Loading...
CR 2012-094 Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Transit Oriented Development GrantA220- City of npldns August 21, 2012 Council Report 2012-094 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL LIVABLE COMMUNITIES TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT GRANT Proposed Action Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Approve Resolution 2012-058, authorizing an application to Metropolitan Council for Livable Communities Transit Oriented Development grant funds for the 8th Avenue North parking ramp and Gallery Flats development on the Lutheran Digest and Park Nicollet sites. Overview The Livable Communities Act (LCA) Transit Oriented Development (TOD) program is accepting applications for grant funds that will leverage the region's public investment in its transit infrastructure. Applications must be for locations that are designated Transit Improvement Areas (TIAs) or meet other criteria. All three proposed Southwest Light Rail Transit (SW LRT) stations in Hopkins were designated as TIAs in 2010. The LCA for TOD grant program includes funds for environmental investigation and clean up, as well as pre -development and development projects in TIAs. The purpose of the grants is to support projects that link housing, jobs, and transit, allow diverse housing options, and develop in a way that is sensitive to the environment. Staff is recommending an application for two projects: 1) $2,000,000 for construction of a public parking ramp as a part of the vision to create a bikable, walkable connection between the downtown station and Mainstreet; and 2) $390,500 for the demolition and clean-up of the Lutheran Digest and Park Nicollet sites as a part of the Gallery Flats development Primary Issues to Consider • What do the applications consist of? • Why should Hopkins apply for LCA for TOD funding? • What other sources are being sought for parking ramp construction? Supporting Information • Resolution 2012-058 • 2012 LCA for TOD application — 8th Avenue Ramp • 2012 LCA for TOD application — Gallery Flats on Lutheran Digest/Park Nicollet sites Tara Beard Community Development Coordinator Financial Impact: $ 0_Budgeted: Y/N _ Source: _PIR fund (501) Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): Notes: Council Report 2012-094 Page 2 Analysis of Issues What do the applications consist of? The parkin ramp application consists of construction funding for the proposed parking ramp between 8t Avenue North and 9th Avenue North, just north of Mainstreet. The proposed public ramp furthers the plans and goals for the 8th Avenue corridor to connect the future station at 8th Avenue and Excelsior Boulevard with Mainstreet and the rest of Downtown Hopkins. In 2011 Hopkins received $600,000 from the LCA for TOD program toward acquisition of the vacant Snyder drug store where the proposed ramp would be located. This application furthers the project by requesting funding to design and construct the ramp. The goals of the ramp are to: 1. Relieve existing parking pressure in Downtown Hopkins, providing an incentive to lease vacant properties downtown and retail space currently under construction. 2. Relieve anticipated parking pressure in Downtown Hopkins as 8th Avenue South is redeveloped at higher transit -supporting densities. 3. Replace surface parking at Lot 200 at 8th Avenue South and Mainstreet, allowing that site to be redeveloped at a later date without the burden of replacing those spaces. 4. Potentially provide Park and Ride spaces for the station. The clean-up and demolition application for the Gallery Flats project consists of a funding request for 1) asbestos and hazardous materials pre -demolition abatement, 2) grading and soil correction in non -contaminated areas, 3) excavation, transportation and disposal of arsenic contaminated soil, 4) environmental reporting and 5) stormwater management improvements. A uses table is below. TBRA Cleanup Asbestos abatement Lutheran Digest Asbestos Abatement $18,000 LCDA Dev Demolition Park Nicollet & Lutheran Brotherhood Bldgs $80,000 LCDA Dev Geotechnical, grading and soil Lutheran Digest Exc & Grading $76,500 correction TBRA Cleanup Excavation/disposal of Lutheran Digest Parcel $77,000 contam. soils TBRA Documentation - environmental Lutheran Digest Parcel $19,000 monitoring LCDA Dev Stormwater management Lutheran Digest & Park Nicollet Parcels $120,000 improvements TOTAL $390,500 Why should Hopkins apply for LCA for TOD funding? The LCA for TOD program is the largest single source of funding available to the city for the ramp project. They have shown previous support for the project by funding acquisition and we are able to demonstrate that their funds would leverage many other sources. It is important to note that by applying for the funds we are not committing to building the ramp and that an extensive public input process would be held if funds were awarded. Council Report 2012-094 Page 3 The Gallery Flats application follows a long history of supporting redevelopment through the acquisition of environmental grant dollars from the Metropolitan Council. The program does require that multiple applications be ranked, and since the Gallery Flats application would have no financial impact on the city were it to be denied, it is listed as the lower priority of the two application in the resolution of support. How will the construction of the proposed parking ramp be paid for? For the purposes of grant applications, staff has used a construction cost estimate ($4,100,000) in the range reflected for a 3 -story ramp in the feasibility study done in July by Collaborative Design Group. In addition to LCA for TOD funds, city staff has prepared grant applications from the state Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) and Hennepin County to fund construction of the ramp. It is also likely that city contributions (via bond sales or TIF revenue) would be needed to fill remaining gaps. A proposed sources and uses table for ramp construction is as follows: Metropolitan Council LCA for TOD 2012 $2,000,000 DEED Redevelopment Grant 2012 $350,000 Hennepin County Supplemental TOD 2012 $250,000 Hennepin County TOD 2013 $500,000 City of Hopkins TIF proceeds $500,000 City of Hopkins Bond sale $500,000 TOTAL $4,100,000 Alternatives The Council has the following alternatives: • Approve resolution 2012-058 as is • Approve resolution 2012-058 with changes • Deny resolutions 2012-058 and opt not to apply for LCA for TOD CITY OF HOPKINS HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2012-058 RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING APPLICATIONS FOR GRANT FUNDS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hopkins, Minnesota, as follows: WHEREAS the City of Hopkins is a participant in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act ("LCA") Local Housing Incentives Program for 2012 as determined by the Metropolitan Council, and is therefore eligible to apply for LCA Livable Communities Demonstration Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account Transit Oriented Development (collectively, "TOD") funds; and WHEREAS the City has identified proposed TOD Projects within the City that meet TOD purposes and criteria and are consistent with and promote the purposes of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and the policies of the Metropolitan Council's adopted metropolitan development guide; and WHEREAS the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to adequately manage an LCA TOD grant; and WHEREAS the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement; and WHEREAS the City acknowledges Livable Communities TOD grants are intended to fund projects or project components that can serve as models, examples or prototypes for TOD development or redevelopment elsewhere in the region, and therefore represents that the proposed TOD Projects or key components of the proposed TOD Projects can be replicated in other metropolitan -area communities; and WHEREAS only a limited amount of grant funding is available through the Metropolitan Council's Livable Communities TOD initiative during each funding cycle and the Metropolitan Council has determined it is appropriate to allocate those scarce grant funds only to eligible TOD Projects that would not occur without the availability of TOD grant funding; and WHEREAS cities may submit grant applications for up to three TOD Demonstration Account Projects and up to six TOD Tax Base Revitalization Account Projects during each funding cycle, but, using the city's own internal ranking processes, must rank their TOD Projects by priority so the Metropolitan Council may consider those priority rankings as it reviews applications and makes grant awards. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that, after appropriate examination and consideration, the governing body of the City: I . Finds that it is in the best interests of the City's development goals and priorities for the proposed TOD Projects to occur at the sites indicated in the grant applications at this particular time. 2. Finds that the components of the TOD Project for which Livable Communities TOD funding is sought: (a) will not occur solely through private or other public investment within the reasonably foreseeable future; and (b) will occur within the term of the grant award (two years for Pre -Development grants, and three years for Development grants, one year for Cleanup Site Investigation grants and three years for Cleanup grants) only if Livable Communities TOD funding is made available for these TOD Projects at this time. Ranks the TOD Project funding applications, according to the City's own internal priorities, in the following order: (List grant applications here; the total number of Development and Pre -Development grant applications from the City cannot exceed three and Tax Base Revitalization Account grant applications cannot exceed six. Funding requests for both TBRA and LCDA grant funds listed in the same application will be counted as separate applications for purposes of the limit of numbers of applications.) Priority TBRA TOD Project Names Grant amount requested 1 Gallery Flats — Park Nicollet/Lutheran Digest site $114,000 2 LCDA TOD Project Names Grant amount requested 1 8`h Avenue Ramp $2,000,000 2 Gallery Flats —Park Nicolet/Lutheran Digest site $276,500 3 3. Authorizes its City Manager to submit on behalf of the City applications for Metropolitan Council Livable Communities TOD grant funds for the TOD Project components identified in the applications, and to execute such agreements as may be necessary to implement the TOD Projects on behalf of the City. Adopted this 21day of August, 2012. Mayor Clerk Eugene Maxwell Kristine A. Luedke 4� Metropolitan Council Livable Communities 2012 Transit Oriented Development Grant Application Section I: TOD Project identification 1. TOD Project ;name, 8th Avenue Ramp 2. Applicant — a city, county or City of Hopkins development authority City's application contact Tara Beard Title Community Development Coordinator Phone 952-548-6343 Email tbeard(cilhopkinsmn.com Authorized contract signatory: Name: Mike Morrison Title: City Manager 3. Application prepared by Name Tara Beard Title Community Development Coordinator Organization City of Hopkins Phone 952-548-6343 Email tbeard@hopkinsmn.com 4, TOD Area name and location — select from the list in Appendix 4. This TOD Area will be referenced throughout the rest of the application as the "Named TOD Area." TOD Area Name Hopkins Station ® Light rail ❑ Commuter rail ❑ Bus 5. Project location City Hopkins Address / 15 9th Ave N, 14 8th Ave N, 22 8th Ave N intersection PINS 2411722420074,2411722420065,2411722420064 LCDA Pre -Development $ TBRA Site Investigation $ 6. Amount requested TBRA Cleanup $ LCDA Development $2,000,000 Total requested $2,000,000 You should read the TOD Application Guide before completing this application. Comment [jl): 82 char Section II. Threshold Criteria Will the following land use guidelines be in place at the time of application or within 36 months from the date of award? Local official controls applicable within the Named TOD Area named in Section I must be generally consistent with direction given in the Metropolitan Council's Guide for Transit Oriented Development. Will be in place Will not be in In place within 36 place within now months 36 months a. Residential densities At least 30 units/acre for rail OR 7 units/acre for ® ❑ ❑ bus or commuter rail b. Floor Area Ratios (FAR) At least 1.5 for rail OR 0.25 for bus or ® ❑ ❑ commuter rails c. If this TOD Area is an employment center, at least1:1 1-150 jobs per acre d• Local planning within the Named TOD Area addresses TOD design features 1. Minimal building setbacks 2. Short blocks with pedestrian connections ® F-1 El to the buildings 3. Optimal pedestrian convenience between the ® ❑ ❑ station and other connecting transit 4. A range of housing densities, types and costs LLJ F] El 5. Connections among housing, retail, 11;71 ❑ ❑ employment centers and recreational uses 6. Cycling and walking conveniences ® FI El 7. Current and future employment opportunities within the Named TOD Area and within the ® F F connecting transit corridor(s) 8. Conservation, protection and enhancement of ® F-1 1:1naturalresources 9. Residential and commercial parking is limited, shared between uses, located to the rear of ® F buildings and/or is structured ' See the 2012 1 OD Application Guide t1or exceptions Section II. Required Threshold Criteria, cont. z See Appendix 5: Areas of Minority and Poverty Concentrations ' The Principle of Equitable Development adopted by the Corridors of Opportunity Policy Board states, that equitable development "creates healthy vibrant communities of opportunity where low income people, people of color, new immigrants and people with disabilities participate in and benefit from systems, decisions, and activities that shape their neighborhoods." See Appendix 6 or the Coo website at: httpl1Lwww.metrocouncil_grgy planningZCOOi index.htrn Will be in place Will not be in within 36 place within 36 In place now months months 2. Equity considerations within the Named TOD Area: the City has adopted a policy / plan / guidelines or official local control to: a. Address both the preservation of existing subsidized and naturally occurring affordable ❑ ® ❑ housing units in the Named TOD Area AND (one or more of the following) The addition of affordable housing units in the ❑ ® ❑ Named TOD Area OR The addition of higher value housing in lower income areas to achieve a mix of housing ❑ ® ❑ opportunities b. Address how the applicant will proactively and ❑ ® ❑ intentionally address gentrification 3. The Named TOD Area planning is consistent with the ® ❑ ❑ city's comprehensive plan. 4. The city has adopted the vision, goals, and principles promoted by the Corridors of Opportunity Initiative, including the principle of Equitable Development to ❑ ® ❑ provide guidance for strategies and planning along its transit corridor or at its transit station.' 5. The proposed TOD Project will have the potential to ® El El the tax base within the Named TOD Area. Note: TOD awardees will be expected to report on progress throughout the grant term towards achieving any of the threshold criteria not met at the time of application. For evaluation use only: Minimum thresholds met Yes NO z See Appendix 5: Areas of Minority and Poverty Concentrations ' The Principle of Equitable Development adopted by the Corridors of Opportunity Policy Board states, that equitable development "creates healthy vibrant communities of opportunity where low income people, people of color, new immigrants and people with disabilities participate in and benefit from systems, decisions, and activities that shape their neighborhoods." See Appendix 6 or the Coo website at: httpl1Lwww.metrocouncil_grgy planningZCOOi index.htrn Section III. Questions pertaining to the Named TOD Area named in Section I 1. Has the City adopted affordability requirements for housing assisted with City funds in the Named TOD Area? ❑ Adopted ❑ Will be adopted within 36 -months ® No plan to adopt requirements 2. Has the city formalized TOD guidelines for the Named TOD Area? ® In place currently ❑ Will be in place within 36 months [I Will not be in place within 36 months 3. How will the Named TOD Area function as an integrated entity? �. Describe how the Named TOD Area is designed to encourage its residents and/or employees to live or work there without reliance on an automobile, meet daily needs through the use of transit or walking, and reduce automobile ownership, vehicular traffic, and associated parking requirements that would otherwise be necessary to support a similar level of more traditional development. The vision for the Hopkins Station is to connect it to the heart of our CBD. Mainstrect, via a pedestrian "seductive" two -block stretch of 8th Avenue South that includes a bike trail. active first -floor uses, and interactive art. This vision includes an intensification of uses. both residential and commercial, that will increase the ability to live, work and play without the need of an automobile. The city is exploring converting 8th Avenue South into a one-way to accommodate more pedestrian and bicycle amenities. Efforts are being made to concentrate parking away front this corridor. �. Describe how the applicant will use TOD design standards. A basic standard of TOD is density. We ha\ e found that despite limiting parking requirements, there is a basic market need for some parking regardless of the transit opportunitics. To increase the capacity of the station area for increased density, concentrated, shared parking away from pedestrian centered corridors is imperative. TOD design standards include the concentration of parking both horizontally and vertically, which this project will do. The design of the actual ramp xvill include open air floors, bicycle and pedestrian access, and capacity to add solar and other green energy sources. This project's true TOD impact, however, is in the parking needs it relocates and removes from the direct link between transit and Mainstrect. COMMent [t2]: 131111 char COMMent []3]: 1300 char lection III. Questions pertaining to the applicable Named TOD Area, cont. 4. Describe how jobs and housing are connected using the following: a. Within the TOD_ Area Comment [j4]: i '; : n ti for each ® Sidewalks Downtown Hopkins is well served by sidewalks and plans to widen sidewalks on 8th Avenue South are underway. ® Paths/ trails 8th Avenue is the designated connection between two major regional trails and plans to improve that connection are underway. ® Bike racks Bike racks are located throughout downtown Hopkins and are required for all new development in the named TOD area. ® Street Plans to redesign 8th Avenue South to minimize the impact of street traffic on pedestrians and bicyclists are underway. ❑ Transit shelters ❑ Pedestrian waiting facilities ❑ Other �. To destinations and housing outside the TOD Area? Commentij5]: 125 char for each . ® Sidewalks Much of the city of Hopkins enjoys a traditional street grid and is heavily sidewalked. ® Paths / trails Hopkins enjoys many local and regional path and trails, including a trail head. The trails intersect in the named TOD area. ® Bike racks Bike racks are located throughout the City and concentrated along regional bike trails. ® Street Streets are well maintained throughout the city. ❑ Transit shelters ❑ Pedestrian waiting facilities ❑ Other ® Sidewalks S. Has the City adopted hiring and procurement goals and/or processes that advance and promote the employment of local workers and/or disadvantaged businesses? a. Employment of local workers ❑ In place now ❑ Will be in place within 36 months of the date of award ® Will not be in place within 36 months of the date of award b. Disadvantaged businesses ❑ In place now ❑ Will be in place within 36 months of the date of award ® Will not be in place within 36 months of the date of award C. A system in place to monitor progress toward and achievement of procurement and employment goals ❑ In place now ❑ Will be in place within 36 months of the date of award ® Will not be in place within 36 months of the date of award Section III. Questions pertaining to the applicable Named TOD Area, cont. 6. How will the planned land uses change over time within the Named TOD Area? Use this question to describe the changes in land use that will be occurring within the TOD Area. The question has two parts: part "A" refers to individual uses (i.e., individual housing units for "residential uses" and individual businesses for "commercial uses"), and part "B" asks for the sizes of the uses (i.e., the acreage or square footage for each use). Note: Applications for TOD Areas composed of buffers along high -frequency bus routes need not complete this section unless there are plans for the entire route. A. Describe the NUMBER of uses and how that number will change. Do not use ranges — use whole numbers only. TOD Area Type of Use # Existing Uses # Uses to be Removed # Uses to be Added Residential 2134 Housing units 0 Housing units 210 Housing units Commercial 51 Businesses I Businesses 4 Businesses Retail 47 Businesses 0 Businesses 4 Businesses Restaurant 12 Restaurants 0 Restaurants 2 Restaurants Office 4 Businesses 0 Businesses 2 Businesses Government/ Civic 6 Civic uses 1 Civic uses 0 Civic uses Arts/Cultural 1 Installations/areas 0Installations/areas I Installations/areas Entertainment 1 Businesses 0 Businesses 0 Businesses Open / Public Space 3 Individual areas 0 Individual areas 0 Individual areas Number of other uses (list below and indicate the unit of measure): Public surface parking lots S existing 2 removed 0 added Public parking ramps I existing 0 removed I added B. Describe the SIZE of the uses listed above, using the most reasonable unit of measure. TOD Area Type of Use Size of Existing Uses Size of Uses to be Removed Size of Uses to be Added Residential 138 Acres 0 Select 3 Acres Commercial 68 Acres I Acres I Acres Retail 6 Acres 0 Select I Acres Restaurant 5 Acres 0 Select 0 Acres Office I 1 Acres 0 Select 2 Acres Government/ Civic 20 Acres I Acres 0 Select Arts/Cultural 1 Acres 0 Select I Select Entertainment I Acres 0 Select 0 Select Open/ Public Space 22 Select 0 Select 0 Select Size of other uses (list below): public surface parking lots 4 Acres existing I Acres removed 0 Select added public parking ramps 1 Acres existing 0 Select removed 5 Acres added Section IV. What specific outcomes will be delivered to the region as a result of activities directly associated with the proposed T D Pr c? If your application is ONLY for an LCDA Pre-Development or TBRA Site Investigation grant, skip Section IV and go to Section V. Section IV DOES NOT pertain to the larger TOD AREA; instead, it refers only to the TOD project. What specific outcomes will be delivered to the region as a result of activities directly associated with the r T ? Do NOT include anything outside of the proposed TOD Project Site. lil. Provide a description of the TOD Project. Hopkins has run a successful shared parking system in its downtown that consists of many small surface lots and one ramp on the west side of town. The current parking capacity is stressed, especially on the east end of Mainstreet. In June of 2012 the City of Hopkins commissioned a parking ramp feasibility study and determined that a new structure serving the east end of Mainstreet was feasible at the project location. Consolidating two 8th Avenue parking lots into a new public ramp on 8th Avenue North (just north of Mainstreet) accomplishes four transit-oriented goals: 1) Allows for the redevelopment of a public surface lot in the critical 8th Avenue South TOD corridor; 2) Directs vehicular traffic north of Mainstreet so that pedestrian and bicycle access can be emphasized south of Mainstreet, and 3) Reduces the need for existing and future TOD to provide 100% of their parking on site, thus reducing the cost of development. 4) Builds capacity within the shared parking system for entertainment and dining uses, strengthening downtown Hopkins as a destination along the SW LRT line. The ramp location is far enough (1/2 mile) from the LRT station that it will not be a desirable park and ride location, but will accommodate vehicular traffic (which will remain despite increased density and access to transit) away from key TOD sites and the station itself. �. Provide a description of the requested grant funded activities: i.e., for what purposes does the applicant propose to use TOD grant funds? Funds would be used for construction of the public ramp, including design & engineering, placemaking elements, utility access and accomodation, and stormwater management strategies. Comment [j6]: 2000 char Comment [j7]: 2500 char Section IV. What specific outcomes will be delivered to the region as a result of activities directly associated with the Proposed TOD Project. cont. 3. Describe the qualities of this TOD Project that make it a good demonstration that can be replicated in other TOD Areas. Address each of the following: This project is an excellent demonstration of how to guide vehicle use in a TOD area through a district parking system. Other TOD areas can benefit from the Project design concentration and direction of parking needs in locations sensitive to TOD goals. Ramp design will focus on maximizing access and integration with surrounding uses, and will examine alternative energy sources such as solar panels. This project reduces the Biot print needed for parking in TOD areas by Compactness consolidating parking locations and using vertical construction. Public parking supports all TOD land uses, including residential, commercial, Mix of uses and office. It also provides an opportunity to share parking for complimentary uses, reducing overall parking infrastructure. We anticipate a 3 story ramp with a footprint close to the entire site: a reasonable Anticipated FAR FAR to expect is 2.5 The functionality of the ramp is in its design, access and location, all of which Functionality will be determined based on the success of the TOD area. Connections The ramp will allow \chicles in the TOD area to have a minimal impact on the internal to the TOD nature of the area. It will be connected to the TOD area through the TOD Area existing street grid. Connections to The ramp site is adjacent to a regional bike trail. and could serve as a entry point outside the TOD for trail access. It is connected to the regional road system and 1;2 mile from the Area future LRT station. Comment [j8]: 400 char each Section IV. What specific outcomes will be delivered to the region as a result of activities directly associated with the proposed TOD project, cont. 4. Jobs - Describe the jobs that will be created as a result of this TOD Project. Consider construction jobs created by 12/31/2014 and other kinds of jobs created by 12/31/2015. Living Type # FT # PT wage Construction jobs by 12/31/2014 65 40 Select by 12/31/2015 Select by 12/31/2015 Select by 12/31/2015 Select by 12/31/2015 Select by 12/31/2015 Select by 12/31/2015 Select by 12/31/2015 5. Housing a. Housing Current/existing0 per acre density/acre Planned 0 per acre b. Current housing: Housino type OuantityAffordability7../. Scicct 0 Select Scicct 0 SelectScicct 0 SelectScicct 0 SelectScicct 0 Select Select 0 Select Select 0 Select c. (Describe the proposal's role in producing or preserving affordable housing within the Named TOD Area. d. Indicate the total number of new or rehabilitated housing units planned for the Project, by type. Units Units Units Units 0 Market # Bldas 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI rate Multi-family rental 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-family ownership 0 0 0 0 0 Townhomes or row houses 0 0 1 0 0 0 Single family 0 0 0 0 0 Senior 0 0 0 0 0 Assisted living 0 0 0 0 0 Memory care 0 0 0 0 0 e. Affordability knechanisms to be employed: Comment [j9]: IRO char Comment [j10]: 195 char Section IV. what specific outcomes will be delivered to the region as a result of activities directly associated with the ar000sed TSD Prolec -, cont. 6. What impact will your proposed TOD Project have on land use? Use this question to describe the changes in land use that will be occurring within the TOD Proiect as a result of this application. The question has two parts: part "A" refers to individual uses (i.e., individual businesses for "commercial uses") and part "B" asks for the sizes of the uses (i.e., the acreage or square footage of each use.) You may count as "added" those uses for which construction will TOD Project Land Use Changes Type of Use O Existing Uses * Uses to be Removed * Uses to be Added Commercial 1 Businesses I Businesses 0 Businesses Retail 0 Businesses 0 Businesses 0 Businesses Restaurant 0 Restaurants 0 Restaurants 0 Restaurants Office 0 Businesses 0 Businesses 0 Businesses Government/ Civic 1 Civic uses 0 Civic uses I Civic uses Arts/Cultural 0Installations/areas 0Installations/areas 0 Installations/areas Entertainment 0 Businesses 0 Businesses 0 Businesses Open / Public Space 0 Individual areas 0 Individual areas 0 Individual areas Number of other uses to be added (list below and indicate the unit of measure): Select Select Select Select Select Select 2011 Housing Performance City Score =Average This application 7. Score(for Metropolitan Council use only) Comment [ill]: 15 char each Size of Changed Land Uses in TOD Project Type of Use Size of Existing Uses Size of Uses to be Removed Size of Uses to be Added Commercial 19000 Square feet 19000 Square feet 0 Select Retail 0 Select 0 Select 0 Select Restaurant 0 Select 0 Select 0 Select Office 0 Select 0 Select 0 Select Government/ Civic 22796 Square feet 0 Select 19000 Square feet Arts/Cultural 0 Select 0 Select 0 Select Entertainment 0 Select 0 Select 0 Select Open / Public Space 0 Select 0 Select 0 Select �lze of other uses to be removed (list below): Select Select Select Select Select Select 2011 Housing Performance City Score =Average This application 7. Score(for Metropolitan Council use only) Comment [ill]: 15 char each Section IV. What specific outcomes will be delivered to the region as a result of activities directly associated with the Dronosed TOD Proiect. cont. 8• What is the walking distance from the Project site to the station/stop? 4 blocks (Along that route': a. Is there a significant grade differential? ® No ❑ Yes - Explain b. Is it entirely handicapped accessible? [I No ® Yes - Explain The ramp will be designed in compliance with ADA requirements. The walk between the station Land the Project site enjoys sidewalks, crosswalks, and crosswalk aprons. C. Will the entire distance be lit at night? ❑ No ® Yes - Explain Pedestrian scale lighting will be provided between the station and the Project site. d. Are there uncontrolled intersections ® No ❑ Yes - Explain e. Are there ponds, marshes or other terrain difficulties that must be traversed? ® No ❑ Yes - Explain 9. Is the TOD Project area ® No V yes, name of plan: within the boundaries of ❑ Yes or subject to a TOD area, neighborhood, �Ypel of plan: corridor or other similar plan adopted by the Is this TOD Project consistent with the plan? municipality in which the TOD Project is no, explain: located? 10. Status of site control Click to select I ther]: City owns approximately 1/2 of the site Status of property ownership? Privately owned What is the expected closing date? 12/31/12 (month/year) M ❑No❑Yes Comment [112]: 260 char each Comment [j13]: 120 char comment [114]: 60 char Comment [115]: 210 char Comment [j16]: 60 char Section IV. What specific outcomes will be delivered to the region as a result of activities 11. Status of the site plan Concept plan Comment [j17]: '.luchar Explain A study was completed in July 2012 to determine the feasibility of a parking ramp on the site. It NNas determined that the site could support approximately 90 stalls per floor v� ith reasonable access. 112. Explain specifically how LCA funds are essential for the Project to commence development or [comment [J181: isooch., redevelopment by 12/31/2015. If the Project is not awarded LCA TOD funds, how will the Project change to move forward? (1,500 characters) The project is extremely dependent on LCA funds. The LCA funds requested would pay for 1 ? to 1/3 of the construction of the ramp, and is the largest single fundino source sought. Without LCA funds the project would not nim e forward. This ,N ould require the return of S600,000 in 2011 LCA funds provided for site acquisition. 13. How is the Project itself a catalyst to attract additional private investment? (1,500 char.) l comment [jig]: 1500 char The proposed ramp would allow an existing public surface parking lot in a key TOD site to be redeveloped. Furthermore, existing parking conditions in this area of downtown Hopkins are already tight, and real estate professionals hay e indicated that a lack of parking has impeded storefront leasing. Six thousand square feet of additional retail is currently under construction and another 4,000 is imminently planned. If a high -parking use such as a restaurant is feasible, additional parking is a must in the area. Residential dei clopment is also under construction and planned. Lower parking requirements are in place to protect TOD. but the\ do not address the current reality of' parking needs, and this pressure will be upheld by the increased density ev en after LRT is in place. This project allows us to meet parking needs that do and will exist despite transit in a %v av that is least impactful on TOD goals. a Section IV. What specific outcomes will be delivered to the region as a result of activities directly associated with the nrovosed TOD Project, cont. 14. TOD Project status: For each milestone, indicate the date completed or the expected date of completion. If the milestone is inapplicable to the project, check "N/A." Pre- Development activities Activity Date Done m/d/yyyy, Expected completion date m/d/yyyy Development area within Named TOD Area fully identified 7/17/20 12 Phase I environmental assessment completed 12/31/2012 Current conditions in the development area have been assessed 12/31/2012 Visioning process completed 12/31/2012 Concept planning completed 12/31/2012 Specific development TOD Project has been identified Site grading completed 12/31/2013 TOD Project feasibility studies completed 12/31/2012 Alternatives analysis completed Detailed design plans completed 12/31/2013 Financing options identified 12/31/2012 TOD Proiect Dhasino aDDroved Development activities Expected Date completion Activity Done date Site control achieved 12/31/2012 Any necessary changes to official controls secured Phase I environmental assessment completed 12/31/2012 Phase II environmental assessment completed 12/31/2013 If necessary, Response Action Plan approved by 12/31/2012 M PCA Site plan completed 12/31/2013 Design work completed 12/31/2013 Stormwater management plan completed 12/31/2013 All necessary approvals secured 12/31/2013 If necessary, demolition completed 12/31/2013 Site grading completed 12/31/2013 Construction started 5/1/2014 a 70 A Section V: Site Acquisition Complete this section ONLY if the applicant is requesting funds for site acquisition. 1. Has the applicant identified the site to be acquired? ❑ No ❑ Yes 2. If acquiring this site, will the applicant have 100% of the land necessary to commence this development? ❑ No ❑ Yes If no, what percentage of the land necessary to commence the TOD Project will this accomplish? % 3. Will all of the parcels for which funding is requested be acquired within two years of the date of award? ❑ No ❑ Yes 4. Is the purpose of the application to reimburse another entity for property acquired within the twelve months prior to the date of award (NOTE: Conditions apply — see Application Guide) ❑ No ❑ Yes If yes, identify the entity to be reimbursed: 5. TOD funds may be used only to finance the independently -appraised value of the property as appraised within six months of the date of the grant application. Will the purchase price exceed the independently appraised value? ❑ No ❑ Yes If yes, describe how the land value was established: Will the requested grant funds cover the total cost of the property? ❑ No ❑ Yes If no, what is the percentage of the total cost of the property financed by the requested TOD funds? What other sources of funding will be used to acquire the property, if any? (Must appear in Sources & Uses.) Section VI. Site Investigation and/or Contamination Complete this section ONLY if the applicant is requesting funds for cleanup or site investigation in this application. 1. Site history: describe the previous uses of this site, the contaminants of concern at the site, how the site likely became contaminated and prior attempts at redevelopment: a. Previous uses: b. Contaminants of concern: c. Likely contamination cause: d. Prior cleanup attempts: 2. Size of contaminated area in acres: acres Comment [j20]: 90 char Comment [j21]: 140 char Comment U22]:175 char Comment []23]: 175 char each Section VI. Site Investigation and/or Contamination, cont. 3. Brownfield cleanup a. Identify one or more of the following type(s) of contamination cleanup required in the Project site: ❑ Soil cleanup ❑ Ground water cleanup ❑ Soil vapor mitigation ❑ Asbestos abatement ❑ Lead-based paint abatement ❑ Other (hdentify): Comment [J24]: 50 char b. Which, if any, have been completed at the time of application? ❑ Phase I environmental site assessment ❑ Phase II environmental site assessment work plan ❑ Phase II environmental site assessment ❑ Asbestos survey ❑ Lead-based paint survey ❑ Response Action Plan (RAP) ❑ Other ('pdentify): Comment [j25]: so char C. Is right of access/right of entry to the property in place? ❑ No ❑ Yes If no, when is the property expected to be accessible for investigation and/or cleanup? (m/d/yyyy) �. Identify which MPCA programs in which the TOD Project site is enrolled at the time of application. Comment [J26]: bo char for each VIC Program ID VIC Program Manager PBP Program ID PBP Project Manager LUST Program ID LUST Project Manager: Other: e. Current Environmental Consultant(s): Consultant Name: Consultant Company: Consultant Phone: Consultant Email: Section VI. Site Investigation and/or Contamination, cont. 4. Summary of Cleanup Objectives: a. What liability assurances are being sought from the MPCA? b. For TBRA TOD requests involving soil contamination: 1. What is the total volume of soil to be disposed off site in cubic yards and tons? cubic yards; tons 2. What are the cost rates for excavation, loading, hauling and disposal of contaminated soil used in your grant request? Excavation $ per Unit of Measure (UoM: tons, cubic yards, etc.) Loading $ per UOM Hauling $ per UOM Disposal $ per UOM C. For TBRA TOD requests involving ground water remediation, describe the results of the ground water investigation and the proposed RAP for ground water. d. For TBRA TOD requests involving soil vapor mitigation: 1. Is funding being requested for soil vapor mitigation? Yes ❑ No ❑ 2. If yes, do the soil vapor intrusion screening values (ISVs) exceed 10 times the ISVs? Yes ❑ No ❑ (For further PCA guidance, see ) 3. Is a vapor barrier required per the Minnesota Building Code? Yes ❑ No ❑ z Comment U271-:610 dru Comment U28]: 640 char Section VII. Pre -Development Applications Complete this section ONLY if you are requesting funds for pre -development funds. 1. jDescribe any planning, visioning or other activities that have been completed for the Project Area, or portions of the Project Area. List or describe the products of these activities, such as planning documents, area or neighborhood plans, etc. Activity Work Product 2. Is there is a specific future development or redevelopment project to be catalyzed by the Grant Funded Activities? ❑ No, the requested Grant -Funded Activities are considered "table -setting' and do not refer to a specific development or redevelopment project identified at the time of this application. Describe the Grant - Funded Activities and their value to the TOD Project Area. Grant -Funded Activit i Value w Comment [j29]: 180 char for the activity and 00 char for the work product Comment [j30]: 75 char for the grant -funded activity and 250 char for the value Section VII. Pre -Development Applications, CONT. ❑ Yes, there is a specific development or redevelopment project. Answer the following: a. IDescribe. the project: b. When will the project commence? C. Include a brief description of the Grant Funded Activities, explaining how they will support and help implement the future development project: Grant -Funded Activity Value to oroiect Comment Ij31]: 500 char Comment Ij321: 100 char Comment [j33]: 75 char fir the grant -funded acucry and 240 char Cot the value Section Vii. Pre -Development Applications, cont. d. Explain the potential of the project to address the following criteria: 1. Provide the opportunity for residents and/or employees in the TOD area to live or work there without reliance on an automobile, for meeting daily needs through the use of transit or walking, for reducing automobile ownership, vehicular traffic, and associated parking requirements that would otherwise be necessary to support a similar level of more traditional development. 2. Produce affordable housing and assist the city in meeting its affordable and lifecycle housing goals. 3. Create or preserve employment opportunities. 4. Demonstrate TOD design features and intensity future land use of the site. 5. Produce meaningful and appropriate public involvement in carrying out the activities funded by a pre -development grant. 6. Secure financial and political commitments for a successful development or redevelopment project. /9 Connnent f j34]: 300 char for each Appendix 1: Submittal instructions • Submit one complete electronic copy of the application and all attachments via email to LCAGrantAdmin(abmetc.stac, us by 4:00 PM on August 13, 2012. Appendix 2 to the LCDA Development Application contains the list of required and allowed attachments, their required naming conventions, and the order of presentation. • Contacts: • For general questions regarding TOD programs or the application, contact Livable Communities Manager Paul Burns: voice: 651.602.1106 email: paud i�trn5ai meCc tac,[in �i5 . For LCDA TOD specific questions contact LCDA TOD Program Coordinator Linda Milashius: voice: 651.602.1541 email: I_inda.mil�,51 ws«r • For TBRA TOD specific questions contact TBRA TOD Program Coordinator Marcus Martin: voice: 651.602.1054 email: marcus_111��1r 11 r�etc.st��te�._mi_us • For technical assistance with the application, attachments or submittals, contact Grant Administrator Deb Jensen: voice: 651.602-1554 email: deb.ienseniametc.state_n,n_us • Submit all electronic elements in PDF format except for the Sources and Uses file, which must be submitted in Excel. Note: The Council can accept incoming attachments of up to 20Mb. If the file size becomes too large to send via email, please split the attachment files among one or more emails. Contact Deb Jensen at (651) 602-1554 for assistance as necessary. • After the application has been reviewed for completeness and found to be acceptable for submittal, the applicant will be notified to submit 20 hard copies, to be printed in duplex (i.e., on both sides) on 81/2 x 11" 3 -hole punched paper except as noted below. Do not attach a cover sheet, bind the copies, use staple, or add section separators. Applications that do not adhere to theses instructions may be rejected as noncompliant. Unless requested by Livable Communities staff, no supplemental information will be accepted after the application deadline of August 13, 2012. Submit all copies to: Linda Milashius Metropolitan Council Livable Communities 390 North Robert Street Saint Paul MN 55101 Appendix 2: List of Attachments to the Grant Application The following items comprise the list of required attachments to be submitted with the application in hard copy and electronic format. Collate the hard copy submittals into sets, in the order in which they are listed below. 1. Grant application in PDF format, named "2011 TOD App - [TOD Project name]" with the TOD Project name inserted into the blank area in the example. 2. Maps and plans, printed on one side only on paper up to 11x17", folded to 8.5x11". Present all electronic copies in PDF, named as shown below. a. An aerial map of the Named TOD Area with Project site boundaries clearly marked. Name the PDF file "Aerial - [TOD Project name]" and present it in PDF. The Project site boundaries AND the TOD Area boundaries must both be clearly marked. b. A Station Area land use plan for the entire Named TOD Area. The Named TOD Area plan must be detailed enough to illustrate the intent of the Project. Annotate the map directionally (i.e., show 'north' on the plan). Name the PDF file "Area plan- [TOD Project name]" and present it in PDF. c. A site plan, showing the Project site in detail and how it relates to the Named TOD Area showing the location of all reauested elements and all proposed TOD Proiect construction. Note: any references to TOD Project elements within the narrative must be illustrated on the site plan. For example, if a trailhead is mentioned in the narrative, the trailhead must be shown on the site plan. If rain gardens are being requested as a grant -funded activity, the location of each rain garden must be shown on the site plan. Name the file "Site plan - [TOD Project name]" and present it in PDF. d. A map showing the walking route from the Project site to the station or stop, noting all of the features noted in question IV -7 (e.g., stairs, lighting, bodies of water, hills, etc.). 3. The Sources and Uses Excel® file, in Excel. Name the Excel file "Sources & Uses - [TOD Project name]." 4. A local resolution of support from the municipality in which the Project will be located (required wording attached). Note there are two forms of resolution: one for those municipalities submitting a single TOD grant application for a single TOD Project, and a second for those municipalities submitting multiple TOD grant applications for multiple TOD Projects. The appropriate resolution may be submitted with the application or within 30 days after the application due date. Electronic copies of the executed resolutions must be presented in both PDF and hard copy. Name the resolution "Resolution - [TOD Project name]" for a single application and "Resolution - City of XXXXX" if you are submitting more than one application. Conditional attachments, in the order in which they are listed below: 1. If the TOD Project proposes actual development, submit an elevation rendering of the proposed development or redevelopment, in PDF. Name the PDF file "Elevation - [TOD Project name]." 2. For applications seeking funding to cleanup soil contamination, provide a figure identifying the locations of proposed soil excavation and soil disposal volume in cubic yards and weight (tons). 3. For applications seeking polluted site cleanup funding, documentation of contamination (e.g., Phase I or Phase II environmental site investigations) and/or Response Action Plan and corresponding approvals from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (submit in electronic format only). You may also submit up to five one-page images of your choice - section drawings, perspective drawings or other that will explain the intent of the Project. All optional images must be presented in both PDF and hard copy. Name the electronic files using the same naming convention as shown above. No late submittals will be accepted for optional items. ai Appendix 3: Applicant Resources Transit -Oriented Development U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Sustainable Communities htti)://Portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?si, c Metropolitan Council: Guide for Transit -Oriented Development www.metrocouncii-org/planning/TOD Urban Land Institute: Ten Principles for Successful Development Around Transit, www.uli.org/ResearchAndPublication,! F P DevTransit.ashx Reconnecting America, Center for Transit -Oriented Development, "What Does Density Look Like?" www . Saint Paul Transit -Oriented Development Guidebook for the Central Corridor, httD://www.StDaul.izov/DocumentView.,.�: , 11)= 5571 Transit Corridors Regional Transortation, http-. www.metloLoUnUl.or trans Ortlitic)n Trans ortiltiOn-htnl Central Light Rail Corridor, www.centralcor i id_oi wr Hiawatha Light Rail Corridor, www.metro Cedar Bus Rapid Transit Corridor, www.co ��h- r� �.�s E �,c default.htm P - - Northstar Commuter Rail Corridor, www.metrocouncil.or trans ortation NS/NutthSt<ii.htm Southwest Transitway Light Rail Corridor, www_southwesttransltway.ork Bottineau Transit Corridor, www.bottransit ore, www metrocourull orr transr)c)rt.�uon NWCorridor/nwcorridor.htm Transit Resources for Employers Metro Transit MetroPass program, www,: Active Living and Complete Streets Active Living Hennepin Communities, wr, _. Active Design Guidelines,www.nyc.gov/lifn,lr+' htmyde- l,h__,_rnvc desi�i i Minnesota Complete Streets Coalition ,:,w,n ncompletc �rcct, otj,/ Soil Vapor Mitigation Risk -Based Guidance for the Vapor Int Appendix 4: Regional Overview LCA TOD Downtown Overviews Minneapolis LCA TOD Saint Paul LCA TOD Eligible TOD Areas Transit Corridor Overview • Hiawatha LRT • Central Corridor LRT • Southwest LRT • Northstar Commuter Rail • I -35W BRT • Cedar Avenue BRT Transit Improvement Areas ITIAsI and TIA Eligible Areas Stations in italics are eligible to apply for Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) designation but have not been designated as such at this time Hiawatha Light Rail Southwest Light Rail Target Field Station, Minneapolis Rovalston Station. Minneapolis Warehouse District Station Minneapolis Van White Station. Minneapolis Nicollet Mall Station. Minneapolis Penn Station. Minneapolis Government Center Station. Minneapolis West Lake Station. Minneapolis Downtown East Station. Minneapolis Beltline Station. St. Louis Park Cedar -Riverside Station. Minneapolis Wooddale Station St. Louis Park Franklin Avenue Station. Minneapolis Louisiana Station St. Louis Park Lake Street Midtown Station. Minneapolis Blake Road Station. Hopkins 38th Street Station. Minneapolis Hopkins Station. Hopkins 46th Street Station. Minneapolis Shady Oak Station. Hopkins and Minnetonka 50th Street Station. Minneapolis Opus Station. Minnetonka VA Medical Center Station. Fort Snelling City West. Eden Prairie American Boulevard Station Bloomington Golden Trionale Station. Eden Prairie Bloomington Central Station. Bloomington Eden Prairie Town Center Station Eden Prairie 28th Avenue Station. Bloomington Southwest Station Eden Prairie Mall of America Station. Bloomington Mitchell Station. Eden Prairie Central Corridor Light Rail (Target Field to Downtown East Stations covered under Hiawatha Northstar Commuter Rail Fridley Station, Fridley Corridor) Riverdale Station. Coon Rapids West Bank Station. Minneapolis Anoka Station. Anoka East Bank Station. Minneapolis Ramsey Station. Ramsey Stadium Village Station. Minneapolis (Elk River & Big Lake outside of Region) Prospect Park Station. Minneapolis Westgate Station. St. Paul I -35W Bus Rapid Transit Raymond Avenue Station. St. Paul Longi Sr,eet 5totion Minneapolis h 46 Street Station. Minneapolis Fairview Station. St. Paul 66"• Street Station Richfield Snelling Avenue Station. St. Paul Hamline Station. St. Paul American Blvd/ 82th Street Station. Bloomington Lexington Parkway Station. Paul 98th Street Station. Bloomington . Victoria Street StationSt. Paul Burnsville Transit Station Burnsville Dale Street Station St. Paul South Burnsville Station, Burnsville Western Avenue Station. St. Paul Lakeville Station Lakeville Capitol/Rice Street Station. St. Paul Cedar Bus Rapid Translt Robert Street Station St Paul Cedar Grove Station. Eagan 10th Street Station. St. Paul 140th Street Station Apple Valley Central Station. St. Paul 147th Street Station Apple Valley Union Depot Station. St. Paul Apple Valley Transit Station. Apple Valley 161 t Street Station Apple Valley Glacier Way Station. Apple Valley Lakeville Cedar Station Lakeville Areas within 1/4 mile of Hieh-Frequency Local Bus Routes: i—ut, � Chicago Ave, Minneapolis Route 6. Hennepin Ave, Minneapolis Route 10. Central Ave, Minneapolis Route 18. Nicollet Ave, Minneapolis Route 19. Penn Ave N, Minneapolis Route 21. Lake St, Minneapolis Route 54, W. 7`" St, St. Paul Route 64. Payne and Maryland Ayes, St. Paul Route 84. Snelling Ave, St. Paul Route 515.66"' St, Richfield ,4 Areas within 1/2 mile of High -Frequency Express Bus Stations: Chaska Chanhassen' ,Shakopee' , Eagan Maplewood .. , Woodbury , Blaine Coon Rapids Maple Grove 'These cities are not currently participating in the Livable Communities program and are therefore not eligible for LCA TOD grants. Appendix 5: Areas of Concentrated Poverty it�,,I Decem ber 2011 1 I I ela-.rte I _� i JI 1 + nnaplr L. nte,rae� 'r -y Fiore VatL �A_P `.'n Share f" J� I Rrdlt 4eu .rd.,n I l• 11'rth �� Ti,,�� F� na:a ra Plan. nl 'V" qTt nsd al -_T_. a/ .' L�•- t._ j7 A!j" "+tF J7' �17 t!''•.i '�..+�:J_• _{ ��:meao:lr. � +' �`atxl lL— j� I `=' ° •ter` ----• --- -- �"�^'.', e:.a fhs+ha::sr �� I I R' iAnyJ » F LCATODEi ibleAreas I I " Percent Povelty' r � k.,,�nP,e. '� rt•R I -- O Less than 20% --•�'!r'`'� sa:.a.3t I F,..,,II,.' 20% to 29.99% 30%to 39.99 % •-- —� �._., -. I t wPla 1 i I,,,r; I. t.: j —' Ph r t .� r•! i :; 40% to 49.99% I 5o% to 59.99% 60% or More 0 5 10 Miles — - -Amencen comm WY Survey 2006-2010, F­�cn I 11S cenau Appendix 6: Corridors of Opportunity The Corridors of Opportunity initiative promotes sustainable, vibrant, and healthy communities, using the region's emerging transitway system as a development focus. The Metropolitan Council and a broad consortium of policymakers, foundations, community organizations, and leaders are engaged in these efforts. Funding is provided by a package of loans and grants from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and Living Cities—a collaboration of 22 of the nation's largest foundations and financial institutions. Expanding the transit system is a foundation for connecting and growing the region. True success will depend on how well the new transit system creates opportunities for the region as a whole, while unlocking opportunities for those with the greatest need. Vision Transitway corridors will guide our region's growth, vitality and competitiveness. Development along transitways will create distinctive places and strengthen local assets while increasing ridership and expanding access to jobs, affordable housing, and essential services for residents of all incomes and backgrounds. Goals • Develop a new model for transitway development by aligning transit planning and engineering with land use planning, affordable housing, workforce development and economic development. • Engage historically underrepresented communities in transitway planning and decision making. • Use transitway development to expand access to jobs and affordable housing, particularly for low-income populations and people of color. • Enhance the region's ability to cooperate in the global economy. • Secure and align public, philanthropic, and private resources to attract robust private investment to the vision. • Accelerate expansion of the transit system. • Incorporate lessons learned from the approach to transitway planning into the Regional Plan for Sustainable Development. Principles Equity The work of the initiative aims to advance the well-being of low-income people and families. Economic Competitiveness The initiative will increase the region's ability to compete in the global economy and benefit local people, businesses and communities. Transparency Active communication about our process and clarity about our results will enhance the value of our work and strengthen our inclusivity. Sustainability An integrated approach that unites economic, environmental and equity concerns; will lead to long-term solutions. Collaboration Wedding collective power of regional stakeholders and local community leadership to effectively address shared challenges and opportunities. Innovation We are creative and entrepreneurial in our outlook, aiming to develop flexible solutions and practice cutting-edge thinking. Equitable Development Creates healthy vibrant communities of opportunity where low income people, people of color, new immigrants and people with disabilities participate in and benefit from systems, decisions, and activities that shape their neighborhoods. a Appendix 7: Required Resolution from Applicants with a Single Application RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS WHEREAS the City of is a participant in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act ("LCA") Local Housing Incentives Program for 2012 as determined by the Metropolitan Council, and is therefore eligible to apply for LCA Livable Communities Demonstration Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account Transit Oriented Development (collectively, "TOD") funds; and WHEREAS the City has identified a proposed TOD Project within the City that meets TOD purposes and criteria and is consistent with and promotes the purposes of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and the policies of the Metropolitan Council's adopted metropolitan development guide; and WHEREAS the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to adequately manage an LCA TOD grant; and WHEREAS the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement; and WHEREAS the City acknowledges TOD grants are intended to fund TOD Projects or TOD Project components that can serve as models, examples or prototypes for TOD development or redevelopment elsewhere in the region, and therefore represents that the proposed TOD Project or key components of the proposed TOD Project can be replicated in other metropolitan -area communities; and WHEREAS only a limited amount of grant funding is available through the Metropolitan Council's Livable Communities TOD initiative during each funding cycle and the Metropolitan Council has determined it is appropriate to allocate those scarce grant funds only to eligible TOD Projects that would not occur without the availability of TOD grant funding. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that, after appropriate examination and due consideration, the governing body of the City: 1. Finds that it is in the best interests of the City's development goals and priorities for the proposed TOD Project to occur at this particular site and at this particular time. 2. Finds that the TOD Project component(s) for which Livable Communities TOD funding is sought: (a) will not occur solely through private or other public investment within the reasonably foreseeable future; and (b) will occur within the term of the grant award (two years for Pre -Development grants, and three years for Development grants, one year for Cleanup Site Investigation grants and three years for Cleanup grants) only if Livable Communities TOD funding is made available for this TOD Project at this time. 3. Authorizes its to submit on behalf of the City an application for Metropolitan Council Livable Communities TOD grant funds for the TOD Project component(s) identified in the application, and to execute such agreements as may be necessary to implement the TOD Project on behalf of the City. Adopted this _ day of , 2012. Mayor Clerk Appendix 8: Required Resolution for Applicants with Multiple Applications RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING APPLICATIONS FOR GRANT FUNDS WHEREAS the City of is a participant in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act ("LCA") Local Housing Incentives Program for 2012 as determined by the Metropolitan Council, and is therefore eligible to apply for LCA Livable Communities Demonstration Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account Transit Oriented Development (collectively, "TOD") funds; and WHEREAS the City has identified proposed TOD Projects within the City that meet TOD purposes and criteria and are consistent with and promote the purposes of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and the policies of the Metropolitan Council's adopted metropolitan development guide; and WHEREAS the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to adequately manage an LCA TOD grant; and WHEREAS the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement; and WHEREAS the City acknowledges Livable Communities TOD grants are intended to fund projects or project components that can serve as models, examples or prototypes for TOD development or redevelopment elsewhere in the region, and therefore represents that the proposed TOD Projects or key components of the proposed TOD Projects can be replicated in other metropolitan -area communities; and WHEREAS only a limited amount of grant funding is available through the Metropolitan Council's Livable Communities TOD initiative during each funding cycle and the Metropolitan Council has determined it is appropriate to allocate those scarce grant funds only to eligible TOD Projects that would not occur without the availability of TOD grant funding; and WHEREAS cities may submit grant applications for up to three TOD Demonstration Account Projects and up to six TOD Tax Base Revitalization Account Projects during each funding cycle, but, using the city's own internal ranking processes, must rank their TOD Projects by priority so the Metropolitan Council may consider those priority rankings as it reviews applications and makes grant awards. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that, after appropriate examination and consideration, the governing body of the City: Finds that it is in the best interests of the City's development goals and priorities for the proposed TOD Projects to occur at the sites indicated in the grant applications at this particular time. Finds that the components of the TOD Project for which Livable Communities TOD funding is sought: (a) will not occur solely through private or other public investment within the reasonably foreseeable future; and (b) will occur within the term of the grant award (two years for Pre -Development grants, and three years for Development grants, one year for Cleanup Site Investigation grants and three years for Cleanup grants) only if Livable Communities TOD funding is made available for these TOD Projects at this time. Ranks the TOD Project funding applications, according to the City's own internal priorities, in the following order: (List grant applications here; the total number of Development and Pre -Development grant applications from the City cannot exceed three and Tax Base Revitalization Account grant applications cannot exceed six. Funding requests for both TBRA and LCDA grant funds listed in the same application will be counted as separate applications for purposes of the limit of numbers of applications.) R Priority TBRA TOD Project Names Grant amount requested 1 2 3 4 5 6 LCDA TOD Project Names Grant amount requested 1 2 3 Authorizes its to submit on behalf of the City applications for Metropolitan Council Livable Communities TOD grant funds for the TOD Project components identified in the applications, and to execute such agreements as may be necessary to implement the TOD Projects on behalf of the City. Adopted this _ day of 2012. Mayor Clerk