Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2015 03-09 EDAP
EDA MEETING City of Brooklyn Center March 9, 2015 AGENDA 1.Call to Order —The EDA requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full City Council packet, including EDA (Economic Development Authority), is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. 2.Roll Call 3.Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda —The following items are considered to be routine by the Economic Development Authority (EDA) and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end of Commission Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes 1. February 23, 2015 - Regular Session 4.Commission Consideration Items a.Resolution Approving and Authorizing the Execution of Sub-Grant Agreements for Environmental Cleanup (Howe Site) Requested Commission Action: —Motion to adopt resolution. b.Resolution Designating Buildings as Structurally Substandard (Opportunity Site) Requested Commission Action: —Motion to adopt resolution. 5. Adjournment EPA Agenda Item No. 3a MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION FEBRUARY 23, 2015 CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1.CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Regular Session called to order by President Tim Willson at 7:35 p.m. 2.ROLL CALL President Tim Willson and Commissioners April Graves, Lin Myszkowski, and Dan Ryan were present. Commissioner Kris Lawrence-Anderson was absent and excused. Also present were Executive Director Curt Boganey, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, City Attorney Troy Gilchrist and Brittney Berndt, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 3.APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Ryan moved and Commissioner Myszkowski seconded approval of the Agenda and Consent Agenda, and the following itemwas approved: 3a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. February 9, 2015 - Regular Session Motion passed unanimously. 4.COMMISSION CONSIDERATION ITEMS 4a. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-03 APPROVING A THIRD AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, A SECOND AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT, AND RELATED DOCUMENTS (SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING PROJECT) Executive Director Curt Boganey introduced the item and referred to Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel to provide the staff report. Mr. Eitel provided a PowerPoint Presentation which retraced the history of the redevelopment of the former Brookdale Mall into Shingle Creek Crossing Project; reviewed the major features of the initial 2011 Development 02/23/15 -1- DRAFT Agreement and the changes approved with the 2012 First Amendment and the 2014 Second Amendment; and outlined the major changes being considered by the Third Amendment: 1.To redefine the Food Court Work to mean the demolition of the Food Court Building, the construction of buildings El, E2, E3, E4, E5, Nl, N2, and N3 (buildings 1-8) and construction of food court parking and streetscaping. 2.To extend the five-year $1 illion Forgivable Loan project completion date from June 28, 2016, to December 31, 2018. 3.To accept the status of the development and approve a partial forgiveness of the $1 million Forgivable Loan in the amount of $780,000 (78%). 4.To adjust the terms of the $1 million Forgivable Loan to reflect an adjusted balance of $220,000 and the additional development of 52,280 sq. ft. to achieve total forgiveness. 5.To allow the developer to pledge the $2.3 million TIF PAYG Note as collateral toward the new mortgage. 6.Remove the potential suspension or termination of the TIF Note as a remedy in the event of Default by the Developer. Additionally, the developer is requesting a Second Amendment to the Purchase Agreement (Shingle Creek Crossing Project) which would allow an extension of the closing date for their acquisition of the Land (EDA parcel) from June 30, 2017, to no later than December 31, 2018. Mr. Eitel indicated that the changes are being requested at this time to enable the developer to refinance the Shingle Creek Crossing Project from a commercial construction loan, which was reported to have an annual interest rate of 15%, to a commercial mortgage that has an interest rate of 8%. The EDA thanked Mr. Eitel for his time and energy in this current project, mentioning that when developers come to the City, the redevelopment work that Mr. Eitel has done is mentioned in many conversations. Commissioner Ryan inquired on the current leasing status of the existing buildings and the motivation of the developer to request an extension to the deadlines at this time. Mr. Eitel indicated that the request relates to the terms by the new mortgage company to accept the assignment of the Development Agreement and PAYG Note as collateral to the Mortgage. Mr. Eitel also commented on the status of the development of the remaining ten (10) building pad sites that are illustrated on the PUD plans as approximately 109,000 sq. ft.; the status of the Tax Increment Financing Plan that provides the funding for the $2.3 million PAYG Note, the repayment of the $2.4 million Inter-Fund Loan to TIF 2; and the projections that additional funds will be generated for other EDA-approved In-District and Out-of-District expenditures. Commissioner Ryan moved and Commissioner Graves seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2015-03 Approving a Third Amendment to Development Agreement, a Second Amendment to Purchase Agreement, and Related Documents (Shingle Creek Crossing Project). 02/23/15 -2- DRAFT Motion passed unanimously. 5. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Myszkowski moved and Commissioner Ryan seconded adjournment of the Economic Development Authority meeting at 8:17 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 02/23/15-3- DRAFT EPA Agenda Item No. 4a EDA ITEM MEMORANDUM ( DATE: March 9, 2015 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business & Development A-. SUBJECT: Resolution Approving and Authorizing the Execution of Sub Grant Agreements for Environmental Cleanup (Howe Fertilizer Site) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Economic Development Authority consider approval/adoption of the Resolution Approving and Authorizing the Execution of Sub Grant Agreements for Environmental Cleanup (Howe Fertilizer Site) Background: On October 13, 2014, the Economic Development Authority adopted the following resolutions associated with grant applications for the proposed environmental remediation (soils cleanup) of the industrial property located at 4821 Xerxes Avenue North (former Howe Fertilizer Site): o Resolution No.2014-27, A Resolution Authorizing the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota to Apply for a Contamination Cleanup Grant from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development. o Resolution No. 2014-28, A Resolution Authorizing the Submission of a Grant Application to the Metropolitan Council for the Tax Base Revitalization Account. On December 19, 2014, the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development notified the EDA that its application, a $610,000 grant for the Howe Fertilizer Site, was one of seventeen projects that were approved for funding. On February 2, 2015, the City also received notice that the Metropolitan Council had awarded a $400,000 Livable Communities Tax Base Revitalization Account Grant to the Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority for the MBC II redevelopment project (Howe Site). Attached for your reference are copies of the notices of award, the above referenced EDA resolutions, and the October 13, 2014 staff memorandum. The City Attorney has reviewed the DEED Contamination Cleanup Grant Agreement and the Metropolitan Council's Livable Communities Tax Base Revitalization Account Grant Agreement and in accordance with the authorizations provided by EDA Resolutions No. 2017-27 and 2014-28 these agreements were executed. 4'Iissio;z: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive coinnuinit' that enhances the quality of life for all people and preserves the public trust I D N I MYA U I Dk'A [II 1ihI I1iI31 Sub Grant Agreement between the EPA of Brooklyn Center and MBC II, LLC. The City Attorney has prepared the attached Sub Grant Agreements between the Economic Development Authority and MBC II, LLC which contractually assigns the EDA's responsibilities within the DEED's Grant Agreement and the Metropolitan Council's Grant Agreement to MBC II, LLC. The attached resolution approves and authorizes the execution of the Sub Grant Agreements with MBC II, LLC. Budget Issues: The EDA's budget impact associated with Environmental Cleanup Grants has been limited to the staff time necessary to monitor the grant programs; process payment requests to MBC II, LLC's for performing grant related work; and maintaining the required financial records for the grant programs. Strategic Priorities: e Focused Redevelopment 114ission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life for all people and preserves the public trust Commissioner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO.__________ RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF SUB-GRANT AGREEMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP (Howe Fertilizer Site) WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority ("EDA") has entered into the following agreements providing grants for environmental cleanup on the Howe Fertilizer Project in the City of Brooklyn Center (the "City"): Agreement with the State of Minnesota acting through its Department of Employment and Economic Development entitled "Contamination Cleanup Grant Contract, CCGP-14-0025-Z-FY1 5." Agreement with the Metropolitan Council entitled "MBC II Grant No. SG- 02013." (collectively the "Grant Contracts"); and WHEREAS, MBC II, LLC, has proposed to enter into a sub-grant agreement for each of the Grant Contracts under which MBC II, LLC, as sub-grantee, will assume the responsibilities of the EDA under the Grant Contracts (the Sub-Grant Agreements"); and WHEREAS, the EDA has determined that it is reasonable, appropriate, and in the best interests of the public that the EDA enter into such Sub-Grant Agreements with MBC II, LLC NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center as follows:, 1.That the Sub-Grant Agreement for each of the Grant Contracts is approved. 2.The President and Executive Director are authorized and directed to execute the Sub-Grant Agreements. 3. The Executive Director is authorized and directed to take any and all additional steps necessary or convenient to effect the terms of the Sub-Grant Agreements. March 9, 2015 Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. BROOKLYN CENTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SUB-GRANT AGREEMENT WITH MBC II, LLC THIS SUB-GRANT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made as of this day of 2015, by and between the Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of Minnesota (the "Grantee"), and MBC II, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, 1350 Lagoon Avenue South, Suite 920, Minneapolis, MN 55408 ("Sub-grantee"): RECITALS WHEREAS, Grantee has entered into a grant contract with the Metropolitan Council ("Council") entitled "MBC II Grant No. SG-02013" (the "Grant Contract"), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit One, and is hereby made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the Grant Contract provides that the Council shall grant to Grantee a sum not to exceed Four Hundred Thousand and No/i 00 Dollars ($400,000.00), which funds shall be used to perform the duties and tasks specified in the Grant Contract; and WHEREAS, the Grantee will be passing the funds provided pursuant to the Grant Contract through to Sub-grantee; and WHEREAS, the Grantee and Sub-grantee have agreed for Sub-grantee to assume certain of the duties and responsibilities of Grantee under the Grant Contract in consideration of receiving funds provided for in the Grant Contract and subject to the terms, conditions, and limitations set forth therein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual promises set forth herein, the parties hereto covenant and agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1.Grant Funds. Grantee will forward to Sub-grantee funds received under the Grant Contract upon receipt and upon the continuing compliance by Sub-grantee with its obligations hereunder and under the Grant Contract. Grantee shall not be obligated to reimburse Sub-grantee for any amounts in excess of funds received by Grantee under the Grant Contract. If the Council requires reimbursement of funds advanced under the Grant Contract, Sub-grantee will promptly reimburse such funds to Grantee upon demand. 2.Sub-Grantee Obligations. Sub-grantee will perform and satisfy all obligations of Grantee under the Grant Contract, except those that, by their nature, can only be performed by Grantee. Sub-grantee will provide any information or assistance requested by Grantee for the purpose of satisfying the obligations of the Grant Contract that, by their nature, can only be performed by Grantee. 1 457156v2 AMB BR305-1 3.Assignment. Sub-grantee may neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior consent of the Grantee and an Assignment Agreement executed and approved by the parties. This restriction includes, but is not limited to, the Sub- grantee being prohibited from using any portion of the Grant Contract funds for loans to any subrecipient at any tier without prior written consent of the Grantee and the Council. 4.Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been executed and approved by the parties. 5.No Waiver. If Grantee fails to enforce, or delays in the enforcement of, any provisions of this Agreement, such failure or delay does not waive the provision or Grantee's right to enforce it. Each right, power, or remedy conferred on the Grantee by this Agreement is cumulative, not exclusive, and is in addition to every other right, power, or remedy, express or implied, available to the Grantee at law or in equity. 6.Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including the recitals and the attached Grant Contract, contains all negotiations and agreements between Grantee and Sub-grantee. No other agreements or understandings regarding the Grant Contract or this Agreement may be used to bind either party. 7.Indemnification. Sub-grantee will defend, indemnify, save, and hold harmless the Council and Grantee, their officers, agents, and employees, from any claims or causes of action, including attorney's fees incurred by Grantee, arising from the performance of this Agreement or failure to perform any obligation under this Agreement by Sub-grantee, its officers, agents or employees. 8.Audit of Records. Sub-grantee's books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by Grantee, the Council, the State of Minnesota and/or the State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six (6) years from the end of this Agreement. 9.Data Practices. Sub-grantee shall comply with applicable provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13. If Sub-grantee receives a request to release data referred to in this paragraph, Sub-grantee must immediately notify Grantee. Grantee will give Sub-grantee instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party, prior to such release. 10.Legal Compliance. Sub-grantee certifies that it is in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, section 176.181, subdivision 2, pertaining to workers' compensation insurance coverage. Sub-grantee will comply with all applicable state and federal laws, including, but not limited to, all applicable OSHA regulations, specifically the federal Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standards (29 CFR 1910.120 and 29 CFR 1926.65), and, if applicable, the President's Executive Order 12549 and the implementing regulation "Nonprocurement Debarment and Suspension; Notice and Final Rule and Interim Final Rule," found at 53 FR 19189, May 26, 1988, as amended at 60 FR 33041, June 26, 1995, including Appendix B, "Certification Regarding 2 457156v2 AMB BR305-1 Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion - Lower Tier Covered Transactions"; unless excluded by law or regulation. 11.Independent Contractor. Sub-grantee shall select the means, method, and manner of performing the Project as defined in the Grant Contract. Nothing is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties or as constituting Sub-grantee as the agent, representative, or employee of the Grantee for any purpose. Sub-grantee shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services and activities performed under this Agreement. Any personnel of Sub-grantee or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by Sub-grantee under this Agreement will have no contractual relationship with the Grantee and will not be considered employees of the Grantee. The Grantee shall not be responsible for any claims that arise out of employment or alleged employment under the Minnesota Economic Security Law or the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of any personnel, including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against Sub-grantee, its officers, agents, contractors or employees. Sub-grantee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless, including attorneys' fees, the Grantee and the Council, their officials, officers, agents, and employees from all such claims irrespective of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission, or court. Such personnel or other persons shall neither require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the Grantee, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick leave, Workers' Compensation, Re-employment Compensation, disability, severance pay, and retirement benefits. 12.Governing Law and Venue. The law governing the obligations of this Agreement and the venue for all legal proceedings associated therewith shall be in the State of Minnesota. 13. This Agreement is subject to termination or reduction of reimbursement in accordance with the Authorized Use of Grant Funds, Ineligible Uses, and Termination sections of the Grant Contract. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into this Agreement effective as of the date first written above. BROOKLYN CENTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By: Its President And by: Its Executive Director 3 457156v2 AMB BR305-1 Date: MBC II, LLC By: Its: Date: 4 457156v2 AMB BR305-1 EXHIBIT ONE Metropolitan Council MBC II Grant Agreement (Grant No. SG-02013) [attached hereto] 457156v2 AMB BR305-1 BROOKLYN CENTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SUB-GRANT AGREEMENT WITH MBC II, LLC THIS SUB-GRANT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made as of this day of 2015, by and between the Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of Minnesota (the "Grantee"), and MBC II, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, 1350 Lagoon Avenue South, Suite 920, Minneapolis, MN 55408 ("Sub-grantee"): RECITALS WHEREAS, Grantee has entered into a grant contract with the State of Minnesota acting through its Department of Employment and Economic Development ("DEED"), entitled "Contamination Cleanup Grant Contract CCGP-14-0025-Z-FY1 5, Howe Fertilizer Project" (the "Grant Contract"), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit One, and is hereby made a part hereof, and WHEREAS, the Grant Contract provides that DEED shall grant to Grantee a sum not to exceed Six Hundred Ten Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($610,000.00), which funds shall be used to perform the duties and tasks specified in the Grant Contract; and WHEREAS, the Grantee will be passing the funds provided pursuant to the Grant Contract through to Sub-grantee; and WHEREAS, the Grantee and Sub-grantee have agreed for Sub-grantee to assume certain of the duties and responsibilities of Grantee under the Grant Contract in consideration of receiving funds provided for in the Grant Contract and subject to the terms, conditions, and limitations set forth therein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual promises set forth herein, the parties hereto covenant and agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1.Grant Funds. Grantee will forward to Sub-grantee ftmds received under the Grant Contract upon receipt and upon the continuing compliance by Sub-grantee with its obligations hereunder and under the Grant Contract. Grantee shall not be obligated to reimburse Sub-grantee for any amounts in excess of funds received by Grantee under the Grant Contract. If DEED requires reimbursement of funds advanced under the Grant Contract, Sub-grantee will promptly reimburse such funds to Grantee upon demand. 2.Sub-Grantee Obligations. Sub-grantee will perform and satisfy all obligations of Grantee under the Grant Contract, except those that, by their nature, can only be performed by Grantee. Sub-grantee will provide any information or assistance requested by Grantee for the purpose of satisfying the obligations of the Grant Contract that, by their nature, can only be 1 455748v2 AMB BR305-1 performed by Grantee. Specifically, but without limiting the foregoing, Sub-grantee will perform all of the following: (a)Sub-grantee shall keep and maintain all records and prepare audits required by the Accounting and related sections of the Grant Contract. (b)Sub-grantee shall submit payment request forms in accordance with the Payment section of the Grant Contract. (c)Sub-grantee shall submit the reports required by the Reporting section of the Grant Contract. (d)Sub-grantee will perform the work of the Project, as defined in the Grant Contract, during the period specified in the Term of Grant Contract section of the Grant Contract. (e)Sub-grantee will be responsible for satisfying the Local Match requirements in the Total Obligation section of the Grant Contract (f)Sub-grantee shall use all funds received pursuant to this Agreement as grant funds that cannot be used, treated, or converted into a loan, whether it is an interest bearing loan, a non-interest bearing loan, a deferred loan, a forgivable deferred loan, or any other type of loan. (g)Sub-grantee shall, to the extent required by Minnesota Statutes, section 161L.66, subdivision 1, post any applicable vacant or new positions with the state workforce center. The sub-grantee shall list, to the extent applicable, any job vacancies in its personnel complement with MinnesotaWorks.net at www.minnesotaworks.net as soon as it occurs. (h)Sub-grantee shall ensure that all contractors and subcontractors performing work covered by the Grant Contract are paid for their work that is satisfactorily completed. 3.Assignment. Sub-grantee may neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior consent of the Grantee and an Assignment Agreement executed and approved by the parties. 4.Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been executed and approved by the parties. 5. No Waiver. If Grantee fails to enforce, or delays in the enforcement of, any provisions of this Agreement, such failure or delay does not waive the provision or Grantee's right to enforce it. Each right, power, or remedy conferred on the Grantee by this Agreement is cumulative, not exclusive, and is in addition to every other right, power, or remedy, express or implied, available to the Grantee at law or in equity. 2 455748v2 AMB BR305-1 6.Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including the recitals and the attached Grant Contract, contains all negotiations and agreements between Grantee and Sub-grantee. No other agreements or understandings regarding the Grant Contract or this Agreement may be used to bind either party. 7.Indemnification. Sub-grantee will defend, indemnify, save, and hold harmless DEED and Grantee, their officers, agents, and employees, from any claims or causes of action, including attorney's fees incurred by Grantee, arising from the performance of this Agreement or failure to perform any obligation under this Agreement by Sub-grantee, or its officers, agents or employees. 8.Audit of Records. Sub-grantee's books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by Grantee, DEED, the State of Minnesota and/or the State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six (6) years from the end of this Agreement. 9.Data Practices. Sub-grantee shall comply with applicable provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13. If Sub-grantee receives a request to release data referred to in this paragraph, Sub-grantee must immediately notify Grantee. Grantee will give Sub-grantee instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party, prior to such release. 10.Legal Compliance. Sub-grantee certifies that it is in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, section 176.181, subdivision 2, pertaining to workers' compensation insurance coverage. Sub-grantee will comply with all applicable state and federal laws, including, but not limited to, all applicable OSHA regulations, specifically the federal Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standards (29 CFR 1910.120 and 29 CFR 1926.65), and, if applicable, the President's Executive Order 12549 and the implementing regulation "Nonprocurement Debarment and Suspension; Notice and Final Rule and Interim Final Rule," found at 53 FR 19189, May 26, 1988, as amended at 60 FR 33041, June 26, 1995, including Appendix B, "Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion - Lower Tier Covered Transactions"; unless excluded by law or regulation. 11.Independent Contractor. Sub-grantee shall select the means, method, and manner of performing the Project as defined in the Grant Contract. Nothing is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties or as constituting Sub-grantee as the agent, representative, or employee of the Grantee for any purpose. Sub-grantee shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services and activities performed under this Agreement. Any personnel of Sub-grantee or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by Sub-grantee under this Agreement will have no contractual relationship with the Grantee and will not be considered employees of the Grantee. The Grantee shall not be responsible for any claims that arise out of employment or alleged employment under the Minnesota Economic Security Law or the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of any personnel, including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against Sub-grantee, its officers, agents, contractors or employees. Sub-grantee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless, including attorneys' fees, the Grantee and DEED, their officials, 3 455748v2 AMB BR305-1 officers, agents, and employees from all such claims irrespective of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission, or court. Such personnel or other persons shall neither require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the Grantee, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick leave, Workers' Compensation, Re-employment Compensation, disability, severance pay, and retirement benefits. 12.Governing Law and Venue. The law governing the obligations of this Agreement and the venue for all legal proceedings associated therewith shall be in the State of Minnesota. 13.This Agreement is subject to termination or reduction of reimbursement in accordance with the Eligible Costs and Termination sections of the Grant Contract. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into this Agreement effective as of the date first written above. BROOKLYN CENTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By: Its President And by: Its Executive Director Date: MBC II, LLC By: Its: Date: 4 455748v2 AMB BR305-1 EXHIBIT ONE Contamination Cleanup Grant Contract (CCGP-14-0025-Z-FY1 5) [attached hereto] 455748v2 AMB BR305-1 Grant Awards - Contamination Cleanup and Investigation December 19, 2014 Mr. Curt Boganey Executive Director, Brooklyn Center EDA 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Mr. Boganey: The Department of Employment and Economic Development is pleased to announce the recent awards from the Contamination Cleanup and Investigation Grant Program. Following is a list of the projects selected for funding along with the grant amounts. GRANTEE PROJECT GRANT AWARD Blue Earth County Brad's Auto Salvage $232,275 Brooklyn Center EDA Howe FertilizerSite $610,000 Duluth Port Authority Dock C & D $990,000 Fridley HRA NIROP Site Phase II $903,500 Hastings Hudson Manufacturing Site $256,142 Mankato 224 Lamm Street $98,497 Mankato Civic Center Expansion (investigation)$46,875 Minneapolis 602 Residences $291,561 Minneapolis New Horizon Academy (3354 Penn Ave. N.)$242,876 Minneapolis Washington & Chicago $226,875 New Ulm City Center Apartments $227,854 South St. Paul HRA Bridgepoint Building #4 $358,204 St. Paul Higher Ground $368,962 St. Paul West 7 Redevelopment $200,000 St. Paul Port Authority Midway Stadium $1,250,000 Vadnais Heights Garceau Hardware (investigation)$17,512 White Bear Lake Waters of White Bear Lake $171,525 Congratulations to the above grant recipients! The Contamination Cleanup and Investigation Grant Program continues to be a very popular program that is often over-subscribed with funding requests. We are very proud of this program and the positive effects it has on communities. We are pleased to partner with our grantees to revitalize areas and provide opportunities for job creation and tax base increases that help our communities and State thrive. For additional information, contact Meredith Udoibok at 651-259-7449. My best regards, ça& CL ut4x Katie Clark Sieben Commissioner C: Senator Bobby Joe Champion Representative Joe Mullery Business and Community Development Division 1st National Bank Building 0 332 Minnesota Street, Suite E200 M Saint Paul, MN 55101-1351 USA M www.mn.gov/deed Toll Free: 800-657-3858 0 Phone: 651-259-7114 M Fax: 651-296-5287 11 TTY: 651-296-3900 AN EQUAIJ OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER AND SERVICE PROVIDER February 2, 2015 The Honorable Tim Willson . . . . City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 RE: Grant Award under the Livable Communities Tax Base Revitalization Account Dear Mayor Willson: . . .• . ::I. '.. . . •.; .' I am pleased to inform-YOU t hat the Metropolitn .COñciI has arded throbkn Center Economic Development Authority a contamination cleanup grant under the-Council's Livable Communities Tax Base Revitalization Account. The Council awarded the grant for the MBC II redevelopment project in the amount of $400,000. A grant agreement will be drafted for the authority's review within the next few weeks. The grant agreement will specify the payment procedures and reporting requirements. If you have questions about grant administration procedures, please contact Deb Jensen at 651-602-1554. The authority's project was among those that best met a range of goals in a competitive process. This process favors projects that improve the environment and protect human health, increase tax base, add jobs or affordable housing units, and support the policies and goals of theCouricil's Metropolitan Development Guide — Thrive MSP 2040. In this grant cycle, the Council received 21 applications and awarded grants to 13 redevelopment projects. Congratulations on your successful application. The Metropolitan Council is pleased to assist local communities through its Livable Communities programs with projects that help achieve both local and regional goals. Sincerely, Adam Duininck Chair cc: GeyEitet Business and Development Director, City of Brooklyn .Cnter Lone Schreiber, Metropolitan Council Member, District 2 Beth Reetz, Interim Director, Community Development, Metropolitan Council DATE: October 13, 2014 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Business and Development Director SUBJECT: Consideration of Approval of Grant Applications for Contamination Cleanup of the Former Howe Chemical Site Located at 4821 Xerxes Avenue North in Brooklyn Center Recommendation: It is recommended that the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (EDA) consider approval of the following resolutions: A.Resolution Authorizing the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota to Apply for a Contamination Cleanup Grant from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development. B.Resolution Authorizing the Submission of a Grant Application to the Metropolitan Council for the Tax Base Revitalization Account. Background: On April 21, 2010, the EDA adopted resolutions authorizing the submittal of applications to the Environmental Cleanup Grant programs offered through the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED), the Metropolitan Council, and Hennepin County. At that time, the developer, Real Estate Recycling, as known as MBC II, LLC, had received an approval letter from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) on a Remedial Investigation and Cleanup Action Plan (RI-CAP), but did not have the necessary approval from the Department of Agriculture (MDA). The applications were determined to be incomplete and not considered as candidates for the May ist grant cycle. Attached for reference is a copy of the staff memo which accompanied the three Resolutions. Subsequent applications were made on October 20, 2010 and April 25, 2011 with the expectation that the necessary approvals or other actions would occur to allow the investigation and cleanup plan proposed by the developer to proceed. However, without the necessary MDA approvals, these applications were also considered incomplete and not funded. u'tissioiz: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive coiflinuflhty that enhances the qualify of fife for all people and preserves the public trust During the winter of 2013-2014, the Responsible Parties identified by the Ag Department to have had agricultural products stored on the site, continued the investigation of the former Howe Fertilizer Operation in a method acceptable to the Ag Department. A mobile testing lab was set up at the site in January-February, 2014 and the Ag Department coordinated a thorough soils investigation of the Howe site and adjacent railroad property known to have been used in the former Howe Fertilizer operation. In addition to defining the volume of the contaminated soils on the Howe Site, the investigation found areas within the adjacent railroad property that had previously been used as disposal sites for the burying of agricultural products. On March 7, 2014, Environmental Scientific, a consultant for the companies identified as the Responsible Parties, submitted a Remedial Investigation Report and Corrective Action Plan for the Howe Site and the adjacent railroad property to the MN Department of Agriculture. The plan specifically identified the perimeter and depth of several areas with levels of contaminated soils to be removed and properly disposed at an approved landfill. It is staffs understanding that approximately 15,000 cubic yards of contaminated soils, (10,000 cubic yards on the Howe site and 5,000 cubic yards on the railroad property) will need to be exported with clean soils imported to balance the grading plans for the planned industrial development of the site. In anticipation of an approval of this RI-CAP, the developer proceeded with the necessary modifications to the prior cleanup budgets for the May 1, 2014 grant cycle. On April 28, 2014, the Economic Development Authority adopted the following resolutions associated with grant applications for the proposed environmental remediation (soils cleanup) of the industrial property located at 4821 Xerxes Avenue North (former Howe Fertilizer Site): • Resolution No.2014-05, A Resolution Authorizing the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota to Apply for a Contamination Cleanup Grant from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development. • Resolution No. 2014-06, A Resolution Authorizing the Submission of a Grant Application to the Metropolitan Council for the Tax Base Revitalization Account. • Resolution No. 2014-07, A Resolution Approving an Application for a Hennepin County Environmental Financial Grant. On June 24, 2014, the Hennepin County Board approved the Environmental Financial Grant (ERF) application in the amount of $440,000 with conditions that included the necessary approval letters from the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA. However, the MDA review of the RI-CAP took longer than expected and the grant applications submitted for DEED's Contamination Cleanup Grant ($610,000) and the Metropolitan Council's Tax Base Revitalization Account ($400.000) were once again deemed premature and/or incomplete until the necessary MDA and MPCA approval letters were available. Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life for all people and preserves the public trust I M Y'U I k'A U'A I Mk'4 [I) 11I P1iJh!A1 On August 28, 2014, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) sent a notice of their approval of the Remedial Investigation Report/Corrective Action Plan for the Howe Agricultural Chemical Incident Investigation to the ConAgra, Syngenta, and their environmental consultants. On September 4, 2014, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) provided a letter to Paul Hyde, President of MBC II LLC, confirming their approval of modifications to its 2010 conditional approval of a Response Action Plan for Non-Ag Substances, as specified in Braun Intertec' s report entitled "Response Action Plan Modification Former Howe Chemical/Fertilizer Site", dated April 3, 2014. . The modifications were generally referenced as the approach to soil cleanup being changed from excavating and re-compacting the Non Ag Substances and placing a building on top of them, to excavations and removal of the Non Ag Substances incidental to the implementation of the MDA approved RAP. On September 22, 2014, the EDA reviewed an agreement with Hennepin County relating to the previously approved Environmental Financial Grant (ERF) application and moved to adopted Resolution No. 2014-21, A Resolution Approving and Authorizing the Execution of Grant and Sub Grant Agreements for the Environment Cleanup (Howe Fertilizer Site). The developer has revised his budget and developed a strategy that would enable the maximum use of the Hennepin County's grant funds to commence with the cleanup action plans approved by the MDA and prepared applications for the November 1, 2014 grant cycle to complete the required environmental cleanup plans by both the MDA and MPCA in 2015. Available Contamination Clean Up Grants: The resolutions to be considered by the EDA address two contamination cleanup grant programs. The programs are as follows: •• Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) The Minnesota Contamination Cleanup Grant Program was established in 1993 to clean up contaminated sites and convert contaminated property into a marketable asset. The Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) is the administering state agency for the grant program. The DEED grant requires a 25% local match which will be provided by MBC II, LLC (Real Estate Recycling) This program does have provisions for the reimbursement of eligible costs that have occurred up to six months from the date of approval. The grant application is requesting $610,000. •• Metropolitan Council Tax Base Revitalization Account (TBRA) Enacted by the Legislature in 1995, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act designated the Metropolitan Council as the administrator of the Tax Base Revitalization Program. This program makes grants to clean-up contaminated land for subsequent redevelopment, job retention and job growth in areas that have lost some of their commercial industrial base. No local match is required. Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive conununity that enhances the quality of life for (Ill people and preserves the public trust This grant program restricts the use of funds to only eligible costs that have occurred after the execution of agreements with the EDA. The grant application is requesting $400,000. The developer has identified a cleanup budget of $2,206,700 with the following funding sources to complete the clean activities: dollar amounts identified from the various grant programs are as follows: $440,000 from Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund and/or EPA Brownfield's Grant Program. • $610,000 from DEED contamination cleanup grant program. $400,000 from Metropolitan Council Tax Base Revitalization Account (TBRA) program. $356,300 from Developer as a local match for investigation costs • $300,000 from the Developer to provide capping of The Site and also to meet the 25 percent local match funding required by the DEED grant program. $50,000 from the 2010 DEED Investigation Grant o $50,000 from the 2011 Met Council Investigation Grant. The developer's budget for the projected building costs for the 60,000 sq.ft. multi-tenant industrial building are identified as $5,800,000. Budget Issues: There are no direct budget impacts to consider since Hyde Development will provide the local match for the DEED grant and the various grant agencies will provide all funding for contamination cleanup, including demolition of the buildings on the site. Presently, the EDA's budget impact will be the staff time necessary to monitor the grants, process payment requests to RER's contractors performing grant related work and maintain the required financial records for the various funding agencies. Strategic Priorities: o Focused Redevelopment !Iissio,i: Ensiiiiiig an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of lift for all people and preserves the public trust _ _ H C) :------ ----: - ., J ve Sju I / i f F / - : • I /f4 7q ti CA 1,1/ •. - i.iLi I LiEl El A; F -I i; :IlI II ! ;-tFII1IIi!llL Jdt ZI - - LI !Jj JLL...L2 ;!i!Ji Øt JILJ_ 7 - TTiTTrTT --i T --7- I I I EPA Agenda Item No. 4b i rn:L takA • I Dk'A (I) i1I mii DATE: March 9, 2015 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development SUBJECT: Resolution Designating Buildings as Structurally Substandard (Opportunity Site) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Economic Development Authority consider approval/adoption of a Resolution Designating Buildings as Structurally Substandard (Opportunity Site). Background: The Tax Increment Laws provides cities and development authorities that are pursing redevelopment projects the option of determining if a project area meets the criteria necessary to qualify it as a future Tax Increment District and reserves the potential creation of a tax increment district for a period of three years/ To determine whether the EDA owned properties within the Opportunity Site meet the building and site conditions necessary to establish a future tax increment district, the EDA retained the services of LHB, Inc. an architectural finn with expertise in preparing reports on building and site conditions that comply with the statutory requirements of creating a tax increment financing district. Attached for your reference is a memorandum from the City's Financial Consultant, Springsted Inc. which summarizes the following: - requirements and findings necessary for the creation of a tax increment redevelopment district, - the flexibilities that the adoption of these findings provides the EDA with respect to proceeding with the demolition of buildings and developing a financial strategy to assist in the future redevelopment of this project area.. Report of Inspections Procedures and Results for Determining Qualifications of a Tax Increment Financing District as a Redevelopment District. The attached report describes the inspection and evaluations of 6 buildings within the Brookdale Square Commercial Center and the commercial building located at 5939 John Martin Drive and includes the following conclusions relative to the creation of a redevelopment district that includes the entire southern portion of the Opportunity Site: 1. The proposed project area (TIF District) has a coverage calculation of 99.97 percent which is above the 70 percent requirement. (Diagram 2, identifies the qualifying parcels) Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life for all people and preserves the public trust Ii 7'U N N 11 J ilMYA 0) ii UiJ I 2.53.8 percent of the buildings of the buildings are structurally substandard which is above the 50 percent requirement. (Diagram 3 identifies the substandard buildings) 3.The substandard buildings are reasonably distributed with the project area. (Diagram 1 identifies the project area and buildings lying south of John Martin Drive) Appendix A- Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet. Appendix B - Building Code and Condition Deficiencies Reports, and Appendix C- Building Replacement Cost Reports, Code Deficiency Cost Reports, and Photographs are available at City Ball. Resolution Designating Buildings as Structurally Substandard (Opportunity Site) Jenny Boulton, the EDA's TIF legal counsel with Kennedy & Graven, has prepared the attached resolution which provides for the following: 1.Finds that the 7 building owned by the EDA are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance based on the L1{B, Inc. report dated March 3, 2015 2.Enables the EDA to proceed with the demolition of these 7 buildings. 3.Identifies that the EDA intends to include these designated properties in one or more redevelopment or renewal and renovation tax increment financing district within 3 years after the date of building demolition on the designated property. 4.Establishes the process for determining base value of the tax increment district. Budget Issues: The costs associated with the building analysis and developing strategies for redevelopment options and opportunities of the Opportunity Site are funded by Tax Increment District 3. A complete tax increment report, which includes a financial analysis, will be prepared at such time as the City/EDA decides to proceed with the creation of a new tax increment district. Strategic Priorities: Focused Redevelopment 13'Iission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life for all people and preserves the public trust S p r 1 n g ste d Springsted Incorporated 380 Jackson Street, Suite 300 Saint Paul, MN 55101-2887 Tel: 651-223-3000 Fax: 651-223-3002 www.springsted.com MEMORANDUM TO: Gary Eitel, Business and Development Director FROM: Tom Denaway, Assistant Vice President/Consultant DATE: March 3, 2015 SUBJECT: Brookdale Square - Resolution Designating a Building as Structurally Substandard The creation of a Redevelopment TIF District requires that specific statutory findings be made in regards to the current condition of the building(s) to be redeveloped. In order for a District to be eligible it has to be found that more than 50% of the existing buildings within the boundaries of the District are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. Structurally substandard is defined by statute as a building requiring modifications to satisfy building code at a cost of 15% or more of than the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type. Once a building has been inspected and found to be substandard, the City is able to adopt by resolution a finding that the parcel was occupied by a structurally substandard building and that after demolition and clearance the City intends to include the parcel within a TIF District. Adopting a resolution finding the parcel occupied by a structurally substandard building, followed by either undertaking the demolition of the building by the City itself or entering into a development agreement for its removal by a developer, allows for the parcel to be eligible for inclusion in a Redevelopment TIF District for up to three years following the demolition. This allowance by statute allows for a quicker disposition blighted buildings, without jeopardizing the ability to create a redevelopment TIF district. The demolition of the blighted buildings, following designation as structurally substandard, creates a three year window in which a Redevelopment TIF District can be created. This allows the City the flexibility to create a TIF District either in response to a specific developer proposal, or in anticipation of future private development at the conclusion of the three year window. If a redevelopment TIF District is created the City would have an additional five- years from the creation of the TIF District to enter into obligations related to the redevelopment of the site. In total from the designation as structurally substandard, the City is able to maintain a full 8-years of maximum flexibility as it. relates to the potential use of TIF assistance for the redevelopment of the site. The ability to qualify parcels as structurally substandard in advance of the creation of a Redevelopment TIF District, allows for the City to maintain maximum TIF flexibility, while also realizing the immediate benefit of removing blighted property. Commissioner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING BUILDING AS STRUCTURALLY SUBSTANDARD (Opportunity . Site) WHEREAS, Under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subd. 10(d), the Economic Development Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota ("Authority") is authorized to deem parcels as occupied by structurally substandard buildings despite prior demolition or removal of the buildings,, subject to certain terms and conditions as described in this resolution. and WHEREAS, The Authority previously acquired the property described in Exhibit A hereto (the "Designated Property") and intends to cause demolition of 7 buildings located on that property; and WHEREAS, The Authority may in the future include the Designated Property in a redevelopment or renewal and renovation tax increment financing district as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174, Subd. 10a, respectively, and to that end has determined to designate 6 existing buildings on the Designated Property to be substandard prior to demolition. and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center as follows: The Authority finds that 7 buildings located on the Designated Property as described in Exhibit A are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance, based upon the analysis of such building set forth in the "Report of Inspection Procedures and Results for Determining Qualifications of a Tax Increment Financing District as a Redevelopment District," dated March 3, 2015, prepared by LHB, Inc. on file in City Hall. 2.After the date of approval of this resolution, 7 buildings on the Designated Property may be demolished or removed by the Authority, or such demolition or removal may be financed by the Authority, or may be undertaken by a developer under a development agreement with the Authority. 3.The Authority intends to include the Designated Property in one or more redevelopment or renewal and renovation tax increment financing districts, and to file the request for certification of such district(s) with the Hennepin County auditor within 3 years after the date of building demolition on the Designated Property. 4.Upon filing the request for certification of the new tax increment financing district(s), the Authority will notify the Hennepin County auditor that the original tax capacity of the Designated Property must be adjusted to reflect the greater of (a) the current net tax capacity of the parcel, or (b) the estimated market value of the parcel for the year in which the buildings were demolished or removed, but applying class rates for the current year, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subd. 10(d). 5.Authority staff and consultants are authorized to take any actions necessary to carry out the intent of this resolution. T\/farch9,20l5 Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 1*iTflIB Description of Designated Property The Designated Property is located within the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota and consists of 2 parcels described below: Parcel Identification Number: 02-118-21-21-0014 Legal Description: Tract A, RLS No. 1529 Parcel Identification Number: 02-118-21-24-0020 Legal Description: Lot 1, Block 1, Brookdale Square 2ns Addition 4 / S / \ / \ J • s<,', o N •' - - • L. / -- - \ , - = ThA \\ - I 'H U - -:7' - -- i N L\1& - : t,__ell __-__' 9 - d. I U Report of Inspection Procedures and Results for Determining Qualifications of a Tax Increment Financing District as a Redevelopment District ook©ao Square MaH RocoevoVoprno TIF Mstdd BrooHyn CeMo, March 3, 2015 Prepared For the Cfty of BO ookDy CoMo Prepared by: .LHB, Inc. 701 Washington Avenue North, Suite 200 EIvtinneapolis, Minnesota 55401 LHB Project No. 150010 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................2 Purposeof Evaluation ................................................................................ 2 Scopeof Work...........................................................................................3 Conclusion.................................................................................................3 PART 2 MINNESOTA STATUTE 469.174, SUBDIVISION 10 REQUIREMENTS .......3A.Coverage Test......................................................................................4 B.Condition of Buildings Test...................................................................4 C. Distribution of Substandard Buildings...................................................5 PART 3 PROCEDURES FOLLOWED .........................................................................6 PART4 FINDINGS ......................................................................................,.,,...,.,,6 A.Coverage Test......................................................................................6 B.Condition of Building Test.....................................................................7 I. Building Inspection....................................................................7 2.Replacement Cost ..................................................................... 8 3.Code Deficiencies .....................................................................8 4. System Condition Deficiencies..................................................9 C. Distribution of Substandard Structures.................................................9 PART 5 TEAM CREDENTIALS..................................................................................11 APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet APPENDIX B Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Reports APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs PART I EXECUTWE SUMMARY PURPOSE OF EVALUATION LHB was hired by the City of Brooklyn Center to inspect and evaluate the properties within a Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment District ("TIF District") proposed to be established by the City. The proposed TIF District is bounded by Shingle Creek Parkway, John Martin Drive, Highway 100 and Bass Lake Road (Diagram 1). The purpose of LHB's work is to determine whether the proposed TIF District meets the statutory requirements for coverage, and whether thirteen (13) buildings on nine (9) parcels and one (1) right of way parcel, located within the proposed TIF District, meet the qualifications required for a Redevelopment District. 4 / ( ., - - - (C, - -2 - Lr ell ( 1 - (çj - II - Diagram 1 - Proposed TIF District L '-I SCOPE OF WORK The proposed TIF District consists of nine (9) parcels and one (1) right of way parcel with thirteen (13) buildings. Seven (7) buildings were inspected on January 5, 2015 and February 11, 2015. Six (6) buildings were determined to be not substandard during our field inspection or were inaccessible on the interior, so we did not complete further analysis. Building code and Condition Deficiency reports for the buildings that were inspected and determined substandard are located in Appendix B. CONCLUSION After inspecting and evaluating the properties within the proposed TIF District and applying current statutory criteria for a Redevelopment District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision 10, it is our professional opinion that the proposed TIF District qualifies as a Redevelopment District because: The proposed TIF District has a coverage calculation of 99.97 percent which is above the 70 percent requirement. 53.8 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard which is above the 50 percent requirement. o The substandard buildings are reasonably distributed. The remainder of this report describes our process and findings in detail. PART 2 MINNESOTA STATUTE 469174, SUBDIA=N 10 REQUIREMENTS The properties were inspected in accordance with the following requirements under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision 10'c,), which states: INTERIOR INSPECTION "The municipality may not make such determination [that the building is structurally substandard] without an interior inspection of the property..." EXTERIOR INSPECTION AND OTHER MEANS "An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1)the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2)the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard." DOCUMENTATION "Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspection was not conducted must be made and retained under section 469.175, subdivision 3(1)." I .. •- -• t: - .-o QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision 10 (a) (1) requires three tests for occupied parcels: A.COVERAGE TEST "parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or paved or gravel parking lots.. The coverage required by the parcel to be considered occupied is defined under iV[innesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision 10('e), which states: "For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures." B.CONDITION OF BUILDINGS TEST Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision 10('a) states, "...and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance;" 1.Structurally substandard is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision 10(b), which states: "For purposes of this subdivision, 'structurally substandard' shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance." a. We do not count energy code deficiencies toward the thresholds required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b) defined as "structurally substandard", due to concerns expressed by the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals in the W/alserAuto Sales, Inc. vs. C'iy of Richfield case filed November 13, 2001. 2.Buildings are not eligible to be considered structurally substandard unless they meet certain additional criteria, as set forth in Subdivision 10(c) which states: "A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable evidence." "Items of evidence that support such a conclusion [that the building is not disqualified] include recent fire or police inspections, on-site property tax appraisals or housing inspections, exterior evidence of deterioration, or other similar reliable evidence." • =: LHB counts energy code deficiencies toward the 15 percent code threshold required by Minnesota Stcztntes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c)) for the following reasons: • The Minnesota energy code is one of ten building code areas highlighted by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry website where minimum construction standards are required by law. • The index page of the 2007 Minnesota Building Code lists the Minnesota Energy Code as a "Required Enforcement" area compared to an additional list of "Optional Enforcement" chapters. • The Senior Building Code Representative for the Construction Codes and Licensing Division of the IlVlinnesota Department of Labor and Industry confirmed that the Minnesota Energy Code is being enforced throughout the State of Minnesota. • In a January 2002 report to the Minnesota Legislature, the Management Analysis Division of the Minnesota Department of Administration confirmed that the construction cost of new buildings complying with the Minnesota Energy Code is higher than buildings built prior to the enactment of the code. • Proper TIF analysis requires a comparison between the replacement value of a new building built under current code standards with the repairs that would be necessary to bring the existing building up to current code standards. In order for an equal comparison to be made, all applicable code chapters should be applied to both scenarios. Since current construction estimating software automatically applies the construction cost of complying with the Minnesota Energy Code, energy code deficiencies should also be identified in the existing structures. C. DISTRIBUTION OF SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision 10, defines a Redevelopment District and requires one or more of the following conditions, "reasonably distributed throughout the district." (1)"Parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; (2)the property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used rail yards, rail storage facilities, or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way; (3) tank facilities, or property whose immediately previous use was for tank facilities.. Our interpretation of the distribution requirement is that the substandard buildings must be reasonably distributed throughout the district as compared to the location of all buildings in the district. For example, if all of the buildings in a district are located on one half of the area of the district, with the other half occupied by parking lots (meeting the required 70 percent coverage for the district), we would evaluate the distribution of the substandard buildings compared with only the half of the district where the buildings are located. If all of the buildings in a district are located evenly throughout the entire area of the district, the r It substandard buildings must be reasonably distributed throughout the entire area of the district. We believe this is consistent with the opinion expressed by the State of lVlinnesota Court of Appeals in the W"alserAuto Sales, Inc. vs. (ity of Richfield case filed November 13, 2001. PART 3 PROCEDURES FOLLOWED LHB inspected seven (7) of the thirteen (13) buildings on the interior and exterior during the day of January 5, 2015 and February 11, 2015. Six (6) buildings were determined to be not substandard during our field inspection or were inaccessible on the interior, so we did not complete further analysis. PART FDRGS A. COVERAGE TEST 1.The total square foot area of the parcel in the proposed TIF District was obtained from City records, GIS mapping and site verification. 2.The total square foot area of buildings and site improvements on the parcels in the proposed TIF District was obtained from City records, GIS mapping and site verification. 3. The percentage of coverage for each parcel in the proposed TIF District was computed to determine if the 15 percent minimum requirement was met. The total square footage of parcels meeting the 15 percent requirement was divided into the total square footage of the entire district to determine if the 70 percent requirement was met. FINDING: The proposed TIF District met the coverage test under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision 10e), which resulted in parcels consisting of 99.97 percent of the area of the proposed TIF District being occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel panting lots, or other similar structures (Diagram 2). This exceeds the 70 percent area coverage requirement for the proposed TIF District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision (a) (1). ffu iB Iii 111WMOM IXO j t® J3@iI (4 *67 Diagram 2— Coverage Diagram Shaded area depicts a parcel more than 15 percent occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures B. CONDITION OF BUILDING TEST 1, BUILDING INSPECTION The first step in the evaluation process is the building inspection. After an initial walk- thru, the inspector makes a judgment whether or not a building "appears" to have enough defects or deficiencies of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or jf 1Y1I rtiiTW ttIi1i fttiki) clearance. If it does, the inspector documents with notes and photographs code and non- code deficiencies in the building. 2.REPLACEMENT COST The second step in evaluating a building to determine if it is substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance is to determine its replacement cost. This is the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on site. Replacement costs were researched using R.S. Means Cost Works square foot models for 2015. A replacement cost was calculated by first establishing building use (office, retail, residential, etc.), building construction type (wood, concrete, masonry, etc.), and building size to obtain the appropriate median replacement cost, which factors in the costs of construction in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Replacement cost includes labor, materials, and the contractor's overhead and profit. Replacement costs do not include architectural fees, legal fees or other "soft" costs not directly related to construction activities. Replacement cost for each building is tabulated in Appendix A. 3.CODE DEFICIENCIES The next step in evaluating a building is to determine what code deficiencies exist with respect to such building. Code deficiencies are those conditions for a building which are not in compliance with current building codes applicable to new buildings in the State of Minnesota. Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision 10(c), specifically provides that a building cannot be considered structurally substandard if its code deficiencies are not at least 15 percent of the replacement cost of the building. As a result, it was necessary to determine the extent of code deficiencies for each building in the proposed TIF District. The evaluation was made by reviewing all available information with respect to such buildings contained in City Building Inspection records and making interior and exterior inspections of the buildings. LHB utilizes the current Minnesota State Building Code as the official code for our evaluations. The Minnesota State Building Code is actually a series of provisional codes written specifically for Minnesota only requirements, adoption of several international codes, and amendments to the adopted international codes. After identifying the code deficiencies in each building, we used R.S. Means Cost Works 2015: Unit and Assembly Costs to determine the cost of correcting the identified deficiencies. We were then able to compare the correction costs with the replacement cost of each building to determine if the costs for correcting code deficiencies meet the required 15 percent threshold. flii FINDING: Seven (7) out of thirteen (13) buildings (53.8 percent) in the proposed TIF District contained code deficiencies exceeding the 15 percent threshold required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(). Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis reports for the buildings in the proposed TIF District can be found in Appendix B of this report. 4. SYSTEM CONDITION DEFICIENCIES If a building meets the minimum code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Snbdivisio;i 10(c), then in order for such building to be "structurally substandard" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10('b), the building's defects or deficiencies should be of sufficient total significance to justify "substantial renovation or clearance." Based on this definition, LHB re-evaluated each of the buildings that met the code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision lO('ç), to determine if the total deficiencies warranted "substantial renovation or clearance" based on the criteria we outlined above. System condition deficiencies are a measurement of defects or substantial deterioration in site elements, structure, exterior envelope, mechanical and electrical components, fire protection and emergency systems, interior partitions, ceilings, floors and doors. The evaluation of system condition deficiencies was made by reviewing all available information contained in City records, and making interior and exterior inspections of the buildings. LHB only identified system condition deficiencies that were visible upon our inspection of the building or contained in City records. We did not consider the amount of "service life" used up for a particular component unless it was an obvious part of that component's deficiencies. After identifying the system condition deficiencies in each building, we used our professional judgment to determine if the list of defects or deficiencies is of sufficient total significance to justify "substantial renovation or clearance." FINDING: In our professional opinion, seven (7) out of thirteen (13) buildings (53.8 percent) in the proposed TIF District are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance, because of defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. This exceeds the 50 percent requirement of Subdivision lOa(l). C. DISTRIBUTION OF SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURES Much of this report has focused on the condition of individual buildings as they relate to requirements identified by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 174, Subdivision 10. It is also important to look at the distribution of substandard buildings throughout the geographic area of the proposed TIF District (Diagram 3). S5 •• 'I HI FINDING: The parcels with substandard buildings are reasonably distributed compared to all parcels that contain buildings. In addition, the substandard buildings are reasonably distributed within the parcels that contain buildings. 'N% '/• -• S. _, 'y 5, • /I '::ç5 '.S,(\ \.'2' (ç I • ___( •;I S-i 5 5 • - L •• — w ,•_• \\ - - --5 55 •, S - •• - Tii r' \ \\)E: - - - - Diagram 3 - Substandard Buildings Shaded green area depicts parcels with buildings. Hatched area depicts parcels with substandard buildings. Shaded orange area depicts substandard buildings. [LJi[li13lj ,• jgjfoa PART 5 TEAM CREDEh\TDALS Michael A. Fischer, AIA, LEED AP Project Principal/TIF Analyst Michael has 28 years of experience as project principal, project manager, project designer and project architect on planning, urban design, educational, commercial and governmental projects. He has become an expert on Tax Increment Finance District analysis assisting over 100 cities with strategic planning for TIF Districts. He is a Senior Vice President at LHB and currently leads the Minneapolis office. Michael completed a two-year Bush Fellowship, studying at l\'IIT and Harvard in 1999, earning Masters degrees in City Planning and Real Estate Development from MIT. He has served on more than 50 committees, boards and community task forces, including a term as a City Council President and as Chair of a Metropolitan Planning Organization. Most recently, he served as Chair of the Edina, Minnesota planning commission. Michael has also managed and designed several award- winning architectural projects, and was one of four architects in the Country to receive the AIA Young Architects Citation in 1997. Philip Waugh Project Manager/TIF Analyst Philip is a project manager with 13 years of experience in historic preservation, building investigations, material research, and construction methods. He previously worked as a historic preservationist and also served as the preservation specialist at the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission. Currently, Phil sits on the Board of Directors for the Preservation Alliance of Minnesota. His current responsibilities include project management of historic preservation projects, performing building condition surveys and analysis, TIF analysis, writing preservation specifications, historic design reviews, writing Historic Preservation Tax Credit applications, preservation planning, and grant writing. Jonathan Pettigrew, AIA Inspector Jonathan Pettigrew has worked in architecture and construction for the last twenty years in Minnesota, California and Washington. His experience includes a variety of commercial and residential project types and scales, from single-family homes to a 300,000 square foot multi-building office complex. He has significant experience in code reviews and building systems inspections and analysis. Jonathan received his Minnesota architect's license in 2004. He brings a strong interest in sustainability and an eye for detail to his work. He enjoys working with clients, consultants and contractors to bring projects together successfrully. Phil Fisher Inspector For 35 years, Phil Fisher worked in the field of Building Operations in Minnesota including White Bear Lake Area Schools. At the University of Minnesota he earned his Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology. He is a Certified Playground Safety Inspector, Certified Plant Engineer, and is trained in Minnesota Enterprise Real Properties (MERP) Facility Condition Assessment (FCA). His FCA training was recently applied to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Facilities Condition Assessment project involving over 2,000 buildings. M:\1 5Proj\1 50 0 1 0\400 Design\406 Reports\Final Report\1 50010 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Final Report.docx - xf jrirullftI 1mrCL1llt EliiUc1i .lilK APPENDICES APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet APPENDIX B Building Code and Condition Deficiencies Reports APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs JFK th tt Report of Inspection Procedures and Results for Determining Qualifications of a Tax Increment Financing District as a Redevelopment District Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Brooklyn Center, MN March 3, 2015 Prepared For the City of Brooklyn Center Prepared by: LHB, Inc. 701 Washington Avenue North, Suite 200 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 LHB Project No. 150010 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................ 2 Purpose of Evaluation ................................................................................ 2 Scope of Work ........................................................................................... 3 Conclusion ................................................................................................. 3 PART 2 – MINNESOTA STATUTE 469.174, SUBDIVISION 10 REQUIREMENTS ....... 3 A. Coverage Test ...................................................................................... 4 B. Condition of Buildings Test ................................................................... 4 C. Distribution of Substandard Buildings ................................................... 5 PART 3 – PROCEDURES FOLLOWED ......................................................................... 6 PART 4 – FINDINGS ...................................................................................................... 6 A. Coverage Test ...................................................................................... 6 B. Condition of Building Test ..................................................................... 7 1. Building Inspection .................................................................... 7 2. Replacement Cost ..................................................................... 8 3. Code Deficiencies ..................................................................... 8 4. System Condition Deficiencies .................................................. 9 C. Distribution of Substandard Structures ................................................. 9 PART 5 - TEAM CREDENTIALS .................................................................................. 11 APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet APPENDIX B Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Reports APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 12 Final Report PART 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PURPOSE OF EVALUATION LHB was hired by the City of Brooklyn Center to inspect and evaluate the properties within a Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment District (“TIF District”) proposed to be established by the City. The proposed TIF District is bounded by Shingle Creek Parkway, John Martin Drive, Highway 100 and Bass Lake Road (Diagram 1). The purpose of LHB’s work is to determine whether the proposed TIF District meets the statutory requirements for coverage, and whether thirteen (13) buildings on nine (9) parcels and one (1) right of way parcel, located within the proposed TIF District, meet the qualifications required for a Redevelopment District. Diagram 1 – Proposed TIF District Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 12 Final Report SCOPE OF WORK The proposed TIF District consists of nine (9) parcels and one (1) right of way parcel with thirteen (13) buildings. Seven (7) buildings were inspected on January 5, 2015 and February 11, 2015. Six (6) buildings were determined to be not substandard during our field inspection or were inaccessible on the interior, so we did not complete further analysis. Building code and Condition Deficiency reports for the buildings that were inspected and determined substandard are located in Appendix B. CONCLUSION After inspecting and evaluating the properties within the proposed TIF District and applying current statutory criteria for a Redevelopment District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10, it is our professional opinion that the proposed TIF District qualifies as a Redevelopment District because: • The proposed TIF District has a coverage calculation of 99.97 percent which is above the 70 percent requirement. • 53.8 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard which is above the 50 percent requirement. • The substandard buildings are reasonably distributed. The remainder of this report describes our process and findings in detail. PART 2 – MINNESOTA STATUTE 469.174, SUBDIVISION 10 REQUIREMENTS The properties were inspected in accordance with the following requirements under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), which states: INTERIOR INSPECTION “The municipality may not make such determination [that the building is structurally substandard] without an interior inspection of the property...” EXTERIOR INSPECTION AND OTHER MEANS “An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard.” DOCUMENTATION “Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspection was not conducted must be made and retained under section 469.175, subdivision 3(1).” Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 3 of 12 Final Report QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10 (a) (1) requires three tests for occupied parcels: A. COVERAGE TEST …“parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or paved or gravel parking lots…” The coverage required by the parcel to be considered occupied is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(e), which states: “For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures.” B. CONDITION OF BUILDINGS TEST Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(a) states, “…and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance;” 1. Structurally substandard is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b), which states: “For purposes of this subdivision, ‘structurally substandard’ shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance.” a. We do not count energy code deficiencies toward the thresholds required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b) defined as “structurally substandard”, due to concerns expressed by the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals in the Walser Auto Sales, Inc. vs. City of Richfield case filed November 13, 2001. 2. Buildings are not eligible to be considered structurally substandard unless they meet certain additional criteria, as set forth in Subdivision 10(c) which states: “A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable evidence.” “Items of evidence that support such a conclusion [that the building is not disqualified] include recent fire or police inspections, on-site property tax appraisals or housing inspections, exterior evidence of deterioration, or other similar reliable evidence.” Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 4 of 12 Final Report LHB counts energy code deficiencies toward the 15 percent code threshold required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c)) for the following reasons: • The Minnesota energy code is one of ten building code areas highlighted by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry website where minimum construction standards are required by law. • The index page of the 2007 Minnesota Building Code lists the Minnesota Energy Code as a “Required Enforcement” area compared to an additional list of “Optional Enforcement” chapters. • The Senior Building Code Representative for the Construction Codes and Licensing Division of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry confirmed that the Minnesota Energy Code is being enforced throughout the State of Minnesota. • In a January 2002 report to the Minnesota Legislature, the Management Analysis Division of the Minnesota Department of Administration confirmed that the construction cost of new buildings complying with the Minnesota Energy Code is higher than buildings built prior to the enactment of the code. • Proper TIF analysis requires a comparison between the replacement value of a new building built under current code standards with the repairs that would be necessary to bring the existing building up to current code standards. In order for an equal comparison to be made, all applicable code chapters should be applied to both scenarios. Since current construction estimating software automatically applies the construction cost of complying with the Minnesota Energy Code, energy code deficiencies should also be identified in the existing structures. C. DISTRIBUTION OF SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10, defines a Redevelopment District and requires one or more of the following conditions, “reasonably distributed throughout the district.” (1) “Parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; (2) the property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used rail yards, rail storage facilities, or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way; (3) tank facilities, or property whose immediately previous use was for tank facilities…” Our interpretation of the distribution requirement is that the substandard buildings must be reasonably distributed throughout the district as compared to the location of all buildings in the district. For example, if all of the buildings in a district are located on one half of the area of the district, with the other half occupied by parking lots (meeting the required 70 percent coverage for the district), we would evaluate the distribution of the substandard buildings compared with only the half of the district where the buildings are located. If all of the buildings in a district are located evenly throughout the entire area of the district, the Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 5 of 12 Final Report substandard buildings must be reasonably distributed throughout the entire area of the district. We believe this is consistent with the opinion expressed by the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals in the Walser Auto Sales, Inc. vs. City of Richfield case filed November 13, 2001. PART 3 – PROCEDURES FOLLOWED LHB inspected seven (7) of the thirteen (13) buildings on the interior and exterior during the day of January 5, 2015 and February 11, 2015. Six (6) buildings were determined to be not substandard during our field inspection or were inaccessible on the interior, so we did not complete further analysis. PART 4 – FINDINGS A. COVERAGE TEST 1. The total square foot area of the parcel in the proposed TIF District was obtained from City records, GIS mapping and site verification. 2. The total square foot area of buildings and site improvements on the parcels in the proposed TIF District was obtained from City records, GIS mapping and site verification. 3. The percentage of coverage for each parcel in the proposed TIF District was computed to determine if the 15 percent minimum requirement was met. The total square footage of parcels meeting the 15 percent requirement was divided into the total square footage of the entire district to determine if the 70 percent requirement was met. FINDING: The proposed TIF District met the coverage test under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(e), which resulted in parcels consisting of 99.97 percent of the area of the proposed TIF District being occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures (Diagram 2). This exceeds the 70 percent area coverage requirement for the proposed TIF District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision (a) (1). Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 6 of 12 Final Report Diagram 2 – Coverage Diagram Shaded area depicts a parcel more than 15 percent occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures B. CONDITION OF BUILDING TEST 1. BUILDING INSPECTION The first step in the evaluation process is the building inspection. After an initial walk- thru, the inspector makes a judgment whether or not a building “appears” to have enough defects or deficiencies of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 7 of 12 Final Report clearance. If it does, the inspector documents with notes and photographs code and non- code deficiencies in the building. 2. REPLACEMENT COST The second step in evaluating a building to determine if it is substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance is to determine its replacement cost. This is the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on site. Replacement costs were researched using R.S. Means Cost Works square foot models for 2015. A replacement cost was calculated by first establishing building use (office, retail, residential, etc.), building construction type (wood, concrete, masonry, etc.), and building size to obtain the appropriate median replacement cost, which factors in the costs of construction in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Replacement cost includes labor, materials, and the contractor’s overhead and profit. Replacement costs do not include architectural fees, legal fees or other “soft” costs not directly related to construction activities. Replacement cost for each building is tabulated in Appendix A. 3. CODE DEFICIENCIES The next step in evaluating a building is to determine what code deficiencies exist with respect to such building. Code deficiencies are those conditions for a building which are not in compliance with current building codes applicable to new buildings in the State of Minnesota. Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), specifically provides that a building cannot be considered structurally substandard if its code deficiencies are not at least 15 percent of the replacement cost of the building. As a result, it was necessary to determine the extent of code deficiencies for each building in the proposed TIF District. The evaluation was made by reviewing all available information with respect to such buildings contained in City Building Inspection records and making interior and exterior inspections of the buildings. LHB utilizes the current Minnesota State Building Code as the official code for our evaluations. The Minnesota State Building Code is actually a series of provisional codes written specifically for Minnesota only requirements, adoption of several international codes, and amendments to the adopted international codes. After identifying the code deficiencies in each building, we used R.S. Means Cost Works 2015; Unit and Assembly Costs to determine the cost of correcting the identified deficiencies. We were then able to compare the correction costs with the replacement cost of each building to determine if the costs for correcting code deficiencies meet the required 15 percent threshold. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 8 of 12 Final Report FINDING: Seven (7) out of thirteen (13) buildings (53.8 percent) in the proposed TIF District contained code deficiencies exceeding the 15 percent threshold required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c). Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis reports for the buildings in the proposed TIF District can be found in Appendix B of this report. 4. SYSTEM CONDITION DEFICIENCIES If a building meets the minimum code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), then in order for such building to be “structurally substandard” under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b), the building’s defects or deficiencies should be of sufficient total significance to justify “substantial renovation or clearance.” Based on this definition, LHB re-evaluated each of the buildings that met the code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), to determine if the total deficiencies warranted “substantial renovation or clearance” based on the criteria we outlined above. System condition deficiencies are a measurement of defects or substantial deterioration in site elements, structure, exterior envelope, mechanical and electrical components, fire protection and emergency systems, interior partitions, ceilings, floors and doors. The evaluation of system condition deficiencies was made by reviewing all available information contained in City records, and making interior and exterior inspections of the buildings. LHB only identified system condition deficiencies that were visible upon our inspection of the building or contained in City records. We did not consider the amount of “service life” used up for a particular component unless it was an obvious part of that component’s deficiencies. After identifying the system condition deficiencies in each building, we used our professional judgment to determine if the list of defects or deficiencies is of sufficient total significance to justify “substantial renovation or clearance.” FINDING: In our professional opinion, seven (7) out of thirteen (13) buildings (53.8 percent) in the proposed TIF District are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance, because of defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. This exceeds the 50 percent requirement of Subdivision 10a(1). C. DISTRIBUTION OF SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURES Much of this report has focused on the condition of individual buildings as they relate to requirements identified by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10. It is also important to look at the distribution of substandard buildings throughout the geographic area of the proposed TIF District (Diagram 3). Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 9 of 12 Final Report FINDING: The parcels with substandard buildings are reasonably distributed compared to all parcels that contain buildings. In addition, the substandard buildings are reasonably distributed within the parcels that contain buildings. Diagram 3 – Substandard Buildings Shaded green area depicts parcels with buildings. Hatched area depicts parcels with substandard buildings. Shaded orange area depicts substandard buildings. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 10 of 12 Final Report PART 5 - TEAM CREDENTIALS Michael A. Fischer, AIA, LEED AP - Project Principal/TIF Analyst Michael has 28 years of experience as project principal, project manager, project designer and project architect on planning, urban design, educational, commercial and governmental projects. He has become an expert on Tax Increment Finance District analysis assisting over 100 cities with strategic planning for TIF Districts. He is a Senior Vice President at LHB and currently leads the Minneapolis office. Michael completed a two-year Bush Fellowship, studying at MIT and Harvard in 1999, earning Masters degrees in City Planning and Real Estate Development from MIT. He has served on more than 50 committees, boards and community task forces, including a term as a City Council President and as Chair of a Metropolitan Planning Organization. Most recently, he served as Chair of the Edina, Minnesota planning commission. Michael has also managed and designed several award- winning architectural projects, and was one of four architects in the Country to receive the AIA Young Architects Citation in 1997. Philip Waugh – Project Manager/TIF Analyst Philip is a project manager with 13 years of experience in historic preservation, building investigations, material research, and construction methods. He previously worked as a historic preservationist and also served as the preservation specialist at the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission. Currently, Phil sits on the Board of Directors for the Preservation Alliance of Minnesota. His current responsibilities include project management of historic preservation projects, performing building condition surveys and analysis, TIF analysis, writing preservation specifications, historic design reviews, writing Historic Preservation Tax Credit applications, preservation planning, and grant writing. Jonathan Pettigrew, AIA – Inspector Jonathan Pettigrew has worked in architecture and construction for the last twenty years in Minnesota, California and Washington. His experience includes a variety of commercial and residential project types and scales, from single-family homes to a 300,000 square foot multi-building office complex. He has significant experience in code reviews and building systems inspections and analysis. Jonathan received his Minnesota architect’s license in 2004. He brings a strong interest in sustainability and an eye for detail to his work. He enjoys working with clients, consultants and contractors to bring projects together successfully. Phil Fisher – Inspector For 35 years, Phil Fisher worked in the field of Building Operations in Minnesota including White Bear Lake Area Schools. At the University of Minnesota he earned his Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology. He is a Certified Playground Safety Inspector, Certified Plant Engineer, and is trained in Minnesota Enterprise Real Properties (MERP) Facility Condition Assessment (FCA). His FCA training was recently applied to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Facilities Condition Assessment project involving over 2,000 buildings. M:\15Proj\150010\400 Design\406 Reports\Final Report\150010 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Final Report.docx Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 11 of 12 Final Report APPENDICES APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet APPENDIX B Building Code and Condition Deficiencies Reports APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 12 of 12 Final Report APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet Br o o k d a l e S q u a r e M a l l R e d e v e l o p m e n t TI F A n a l y s i s - B r o o k l y n C e n t e r , M N Pr o p e r t y C o n d i t i o n A s s e s s m e n t S u m m a r y S h e e t TI F Ma p N o . PI D # P r o p e r t y A d d r e s s Im p r o v e d o r Va c a n t Su r v e y M e t h o d Us e d Si t e A r e a (S . F . ) Co v e r a g e A r e a o f Im p r o v e m e n t s (S . F . ) Co v e r a g e P e r c e n t of I m p r o v e m e n t s Co v e r a g e Qu a n t i t y (S . F . ) No . o f Bu i l d i n g s Building Replacement Cost15% of Replacement CostBuilding Code DeficienciesNo. of Buildings Exceeding 15% CriteriaNo. of buildings determined substandard A 21 1 8 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 2 5 9 3 0 S h i n g l e C r e e k P k w y I m p r o v e d E x t e r i o r 8 0 , 0 7 2 6 1 , 7 2 0 7 7 . 1 % 8 0 , 0 7 2 1 N o t e 1 0 0 B 21 1 8 2 1 2 1 0 0 1 4 5 9 3 9 J o h n M a r t i n D r I m p r o v e d I n t e r i o r / E x t er i o r 6 9 , 4 7 5 6 6 , 1 0 8 9 5 . 2 % 6 9 , 4 7 5 1 $ 5 2 4 , 2 0 0 $ 7 8 , 6 3 0 $ 1 9 4 , 6 0 0 1 1 C 21 1 8 2 1 2 1 0 0 1 5 5 9 2 7 J o h n M a r t i n D r I m p r o v e d E x t e r i o r 5 9 , 0 6 0 5 5 , 8 5 7 9 4 . 6 % 5 9 , 0 6 0 1 N o t e 1 0 0 D 21 1 8 2 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 5 9 1 5 J o h n M a r t i n D r V a c a n t E x t e r i o r 5 1 , 4 2 3 4 7 , 5 1 5 9 2 . 4 % 5 1 , 4 2 3 0 E 21 1 8 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 5 9 1 0 S h i n g l e C r e e k P k w y I m p r o v e d E x t e r i o r 3 4 7 , 6 0 1 2 4 2 , 4 4 5 6 9 . 7 % 3 4 7 , 6 0 1 1 N o t e 1 0 0 F 21 1 8 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 5 5 9 0 1 J o h n M a r t i n D r I m p r o v e d E x t e r i o r 5 0 , 1 7 0 3 1 , 8 8 4 6 3 . 6 % 5 0 , 1 7 0 1 N o t e 1 0 0 G 21 1 8 2 1 2 4 0 0 2 0 5 9 0 0 S h i n g l e C r e e k P k w y I m p r o v e d 1 , 0 1 0 , 6 4 2 9 9 9 , 3 1 4 9 8 . 9 % 1 , 0 1 0 , 6 4 2 1 5 9 0 0 S h i n g l e C r e e k P k w y E x t e r i o r 1 N o t e 1 0 0 2 5 9 7 0 S h i n g l e C r e e k P k w y I n t e r i o r / E x t e r i o r 1 $ 3 , 1 0 6 , 7 3 6 $ 4 6 6 , 0 1 0 $ 6 1 6 , 2 1 5 1 1 3 5 9 8 0 - 5 9 9 0 S h i n g l e C r e e k P k w y I n t e r i o r / E x t e r i o r 1 $ 3 , 2 2 7 , 0 9 2 $ 4 8 4 , 0 6 4 $ 6 7 7 , 4 3 6 1 1 4 6 0 0 0 - 6 0 2 0 S h i n g l e C r e e k P k w y I n t e r i o r / E x t e r i o r 1 $ 9 1 0 , 6 9 0 $ 1 3 6 , 6 0 4 $ 1 7 0 , 6 9 8 1 1 5 6 0 3 0 S h i n g l e C r e e k P k w y I n t e r i o r / E x t e r i o r 1 $ 2 , 6 7 1 , 3 5 0 $ 4 0 0 , 7 0 3 $ 5 4 3 , 9 9 2 1 1 6 5 8 1 0 S h i n g l e C r e e k P k w y E x t e r i o r 1 N o t e 1 0 0 7 6 0 4 0 S h i n g l e C r e e k P k w y I n t e r i o r / E x t e r i o r 1 $ 2 , 9 8 1 , 3 3 9 $ 4 4 7 , 2 0 1 $ 5 3 1 , 2 0 2 1 1 8 5 8 0 1 J o h n M a r t i n D r i v e I n t e r i o r / E x t e r i o r 1 $ 3 , 9 4 7 , 0 0 0 $ 5 9 2 , 0 5 0 $ 7 7 3 , 2 3 6 1 1 H 21 1 8 2 1 2 4 0 0 1 9 2 5 0 0 C o R d N o 1 0 I m p r o v e d E x t e r i o r 3 7 5 , 2 9 1 3 7 1 , 3 7 1 9 9 . 0 % 3 7 5 , 2 9 1 0 $ 0 0 I 21 1 8 2 1 1 3 0 0 0 7 2 2 A d d r e s s U n a s s i g n e d V a c a n t E x t e r i o r 5 9 6 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 $ 0 0 J NA R i g h t o f W a y I m p r o v e d E x t e r i o r 2 9 0 , 4 1 8 1 7 6 , 0 1 0 6 0 . 6 % 2 9 0 , 4 1 8 0 $ 0 0 TO T A L S 2 , 3 3 4 , 7 4 8 2 , 3 3 4 , 1 5 2 1 3 7 7 99 . 9 7 % 53.8% M: \ 1 5 P r o j \ 1 5 0 0 1 0 \ 4 0 0 D e s i g n \ 4 0 6 R e p o r t s \ F i n a l Re p o r t \ [ 1 5 0 0 1 0 B r o o k d a l e S q u a r e M al l R e d e v e l o p m e n t T I F S u m m a r y S p r e a d s h e e t . x l s x ] P ro p e r t y I n f o 53.8% To t a l C o v e r a g e P e r c e n t : Pe r c e n t o f b u i l d i n g s e x c e e d i n g 1 5 p e r c e n t c o d e d e f i c i e n c y t h r e s h o l d : Percent of buildings de termined substandard: No t e 1 : T h i s b u i l d i n g d i d n o t a p p e a r t o b e s u b s t a n d a r d d u r i n g o u r f i e l d i n s p e c t i o n o r w a s in a c c e s s i b l e o n t h e i n t e r i o r , s o w e d i d n o t c o m p l e t e f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s . Br o o k d a l e S q u a r e M a l l R e d e v e l o p m e n t T I F D i s t r i c t LH B P r o j e c t N o . 1 5 0 0 1 0 Pa g e 1 o f 1 Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet APPENDIX B Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Reports Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report February 26, 2015 Map No. & Address: Map B Building B - 5939 John Martin Drive Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): January 5, 2015 1:30 PM Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: - Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. - Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $524,200 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $ 194,600 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 37.12% Defects in Structural Elements 1. Numerous stains were noted on the roof deck where water has entered into the interior. Staining was also noted on ceiling tile. According to staff the roof is original. 2. Sheet rock walls are stained and damaged indicating water intrusion from exterior walls. 3. Steel column in the freezer is rusting, indicative of poor dehumidification and maintenance. 4. Exterior wall paneling is rotting and delaminating from water intrusion. 5. Exterior wood siding is rotting allowing water intrusion. 6. Mortar joints are failing allowing water intrusion. 7. Exterior door frames are not caulked allowing water intrusion. 8. Cap brick is damaged allowing water intrusion. 9. There are holes in exterior brick allowing water intrusion. Combination of Deficiencies 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a. Plumbing has been removed randomly throughout the building. b. Restrooms are non-functional and vandalized. 2. Light and Ventilation a. Ventilation to entire building is non-functional. b. Electrical wiring has been removed from lighting circuits. c. Electrical circuit panels have been vandalized. 3. Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a. Riser pipe is rusting indicating that the valve is not holding pressure. b. All sprinkler heads are rusted indicative of the system having been frozen. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Analysis Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 2 Map B Building B 4. Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a. Mold is present through out the building on both vertical and horizontal surfaces indicating a lack of proper ventilation. b. Flooring is discolored. Some areas show signs of water damage. c. Acoustical ceiling tiles are deteriorating. d. Paint is peeling at exit door casing and mechanical area walls. e. There are holes in some areas of the ceiling in the mechanical area. f. Column exhibits signs of rust. 5. Exterior Construction a. The exterior is discolored where previous signage was installed. b. Paint is peeling on exterior walls in multiple areas. c. Exterior wood siding panels are rotting allowing water intrusion. d. Brick veneer needs tuck pointing to prevent water intrusion. e. Hollow metal exterior doors are non-compliant because of excessive differential in height to landing when exiting. f. Exterior metal doors exhibit signs of rust. Description of Code Deficiencies 1. Replace roof to prevent water intrusion. 2. Replace exterior siding to prevent water intrusion. 3. Tuck point and repair exterior brick to prevent water intrusion. 4. Install adequate plumbing for accessibility. 5. Renovate restrooms for accessibility and proper function. 6. Replace HVAC system that is non-existent. 7. Replace all electrical wiring and electrical panels in order to provide adequate illuminated egress. 8. Provide adequate water supply for fire and life safety system. 9. Replace all sprinkler pipe and heads that were frozen for fire and life safety. Overview of Deficiencies According to county records this building was built in 1982. The roof has never been replaced (confirmed by a review of city building permit records) and has exceeded its life cycle as noted by the number of roof leaks. The HVAC system is also original and in poor condition as noted by paint peeling and ceiling tile curling. The building has been vandalized with copper wire and pipe being removed. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Analysis Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 2 Map B Building B Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Analysis Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report 26 January 2015 Map No. & Address: Map G Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): 5 January 2015, 10:00am Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: - Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. - Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $ 3,106,736 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $ 616,215 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 19.8% Defects in Structural Elements 1. Rusty lintels 2. Cracks in grout joints and through blocks and bricks. Combination of Deficiencies 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a. Restroom accessible stalls lack required grab bars; bar that is present is mounted too high. b. Building lacks an accessible drinking fountain in warehouse. c. There are open electrical junction boxes and loose wires. d. Building lacks required GFCI outlets at wet areas, garage and counter tops. e. Building lacks accessible service counters. 2. Light and Ventilation a. Some light fixtures are out – required for proper exiting lighting. b. Building lacks code compliant ventilation system. c. Building air conditioning has been damaged by removal of copper coils by vandals and is non-functional. 3. Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a. North (rear) exit doors have non-compliant steps down to landing. b. Lack of required clearance at north exit door. c. Thresholds at egress doors exceed allowable 1/2”. d. Aluminum and glass doors at old speaker listening room lack required 10” high kick. e. Ship’s ladder for roof access in warehouse lacks exceeds code-maximum 60 degree slope. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Analysis Building Report LHB Project No.150010 Page 1 of 2 Map G Building 2 4. Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a. Holes in walls and partitions from environmental services sampling and removal of fixtures. b. Damaged, sagging, stained and missing acoustic ceiling tiles. c. Damaged and moldy wall and ceiling gyp board in restrooms and janitor’s closet. d. Back offices and meeting and work rooms have moldy carpet, walls and ACT. e. Moldy and stained carpet; loose, damaged and stained VCT and ceramic tile. f. There are areas of exposed plywood where retail fixtures have been removed. 5. Exterior Construction a. Widespread cracking of exterior brick and grout joints. b. Holes in exterior brick. c. Damaged and broken bricks at overhead door openings. d. As reported by building manager and evident by ceiling stains and rusted roof trusses, the roof has leaks in numerous locations and is due for replacement. e. Efflorescence on interior of garage walls indicates leakage through them. f. Rusty and corroded metal doors and frames. Description of Code Deficiencies 1. Restroom accessible stalls lack required grab bars; bar that is present is mounted too high. 2. Building lacks an accessible drinking fountain in warehouse. 3. There are open electrical junction boxes and loose wires. 4. Building lacks required GFCI outlets at wet areas, garage and counter tops. 5. Building lacks accessible service counters. 6. Some light fixtures are out – required for proper exiting lighting. 7. Building lacks code compliant ventilation system. 8. Building air conditioning has been damaged by removal of copper coils by vandals and is non- functional. 9. South and east exit doors have non-compliant steps down to landing. 10. Lack of required clearance at north exit door. 11. Thresholds at egress doors exceed allowable 1/2”. 12. Aluminum and glass doors at old speaker listening room lack required 10” high kick. 13. Ship’s ladder for roof access in warehouse lacks exceeds code-maximum 60 degree slope. 14. Widespread cracking of exterior brick and grout joints. 15. Holes in exterior brick. 16. Damaged and broken bricks at overhead door openings. 17. As reported by building manager and evident by ceiling stains and rusted roof trusses, the roof has leaks in numerous locations and is due for replacement. 18. Efflorescence on interior of garage walls indicates leakage through them. 19. Rusty and corroded metal doors and frames. Overview of Deficiencies This one-story building that housed several retail stores in the years since its construction in 1986, most recently Circuit City. The building has been vacant for approximately ten years and is in fair to poor condition. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Analysis Building Report LHB Project No.150010 Page 2 of 2 Map G Building 2 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Analysis Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report February 26, 2015 Map No. & Address: Map G Building 3 – 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): January 5, 2015 12:20 PM Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: - Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. - Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $3,227,092 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $677,435 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 20.99% Defects in Structural Elements 1. Lintel rusting over exterior hollow metal doors. 2. Exterior windows broken. 3. Roof leaking and needs to be replaced. 4. Water stains on window sills indicating water penetration from exterior. Combination of Deficiencies 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a. Water is disconnected to building. b. Sink in staff break room is non-compliant. c. Non-compliant drinking fountain. d. Restrooms do not meet accessibility compliance. 2. Light and Ventilation a. Lights are missing and or damaged. b. HVAC system is non-functional and needs replacement. c. Mold is present indicating lack of proper ventilation. d. Paint pealing on spiral duct work indicating lack of proper ventilation. e. Diffusers are damaged and or missing. f. Interior wall panels curling indicating lack of proper ventilation. g. Ceiling tile cupped indicating lack of proper ventilation and dehumidification. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 2 Map G Building 3 3. Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a. Emergency lighting is damaged and or missing. b. Flooring is torn and missing causing trip hazard during egress. c. Improper or missing door hardware. d. Thresholds higher than 1/2 inch allowance. e. Stoops are not flush with threshold. f. Non-compliant locking mechanism on exterior door. 4. Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a. Interior wall panels have holes and paint is peeling in multiple areas. b. Ceiling paint is peeling in multiple areas. c. Acoustical ceiling tiles are discolored and some have deteriorated. d. Interior wood door is cracked near door handle. Other doors are missing hardware. e. Glass insert on interior wood door is broken. f. Flooring in some areas is not securely installed. Other flooring materials are discolored. 5. Exterior Construction a. Roof is in need of replacement due to age and water leaks (confirmed with staff). b. Exterior lighting cover is cracked. c. Columns require a new coat of paint – paint is peeling. d. Exterior wall is discolored where previous signage was installed. e. Window is broken and requires replacement. f. Exterior door frame is damaged. g. Loading dock bumper is damaged and sagging. Description of Code Deficiencies 1. Roof needs replacement because of age and numerous water leaks. 2. HVAC system needs replacement because of age and it is non-functional. 3. Restrooms need renovation for compliance. 4. Emergency lighting needs to be re-installed for proper egress. 5. Proper door hardware needs to be installed for accessibility. 6. Interior floor elevation needs to be at the same level as the exterior landing. 7. Flooring needs to be securely installed to create a slip resistant pathway to egress. Overview of Deficiencies According to county records this building was built in 1986. The roof is still original (confirmed by a review of city building permit records) and has outlived its life cycle which is noticeable by the amount of ceiling stains. There are no records that the HVAC system has been replaced and or upgraded. This is evident by the mold in the building caused by a lack of proper ventilation. The building shows signs of vandalism and abandonment. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 2 Map G Building 3 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Analysis Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report February 26, 2015 Map No. & Address: Map G Building 4 - 6000-6020 Shingle Creek Parkway Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): January 5, 2015 12:35 PM Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: - Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. - Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $910,690 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $170,698 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 18.74% Defects in Structural Elements 1. Roof leaks. 2. Exterior bricks are cracking indicating dissimilar settlement. 3. Exterior bricks are missing allowing water intrusion. 4. Mortar joints are cracked and missing. Combination of Deficiencies 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a. The restrooms are non-compliant. b. The staff sink is inaccessible. 2. Light and Ventilation a. HVAC system is not functioning b. Mold is present throughout building indicating lack of proper ventilation. 3. Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a. Appropriate door hardware is missing. b. 10 inch kick plates are missing on front doors. c. Floor tile is damaged and or missing preventing emergency egress. d. Side access to egress is non-compliant at back door. 4. Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a. Floor tile is cupped indicating moisture intrusion from slab and poor ventilation. b. Acoustical ceiling tile is stained indicating water intrusion from roof. c. Acoustical ceiling tiles are cupped indicating lack of proper ventilation. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 2 Map G Building 4 d. Wall boards are stained and damaged from water intrusion. e. Paint drips present on rubber wall trim and flooring in some areas. f. Exit door casing exhibits signs of rust. 5. Exterior Construction a. Exterior bricks are missing. b. Exterior bricks are cracked. c. Exterior mortar joints are cracked. d. Paint is peeling on the exterior columns. Description of Code Deficiencies 1. Roof needs replacement because of age and numerous water leaks. 2. HVAC system needs replacement because of age and it is non-functional. 3. Restrooms need renovation for accessibility compliance. 4. Repair exterior brick and joints to prevent water intrusion. 5. Replace door hardware with accessible code compliant hardware. 6. Install code compliant 10 inch kick plate on glass doors. 7. Modify back door area for accessible code compliance from the side. Overview of Deficiencies According to county records this building was built in 1986. The roof appears to be original (confirmed by a review of city building permit records) and has outlived its life cycle which is noticeable by the amount of ceiling stains. There are no records that the HVAC system has been replaced and or upgraded. This is evident by the mold in the building caused by a lack of proper ventilation. The building shows signs of vandalism and abandonment. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 2 Map G Building 4 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Analysis Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report February 26, 2015 Map No. & Address: Map G Building 5 - 6030 Shingle Creek Parkway Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): January 5, 2015 12:45 PM Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: - Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. - Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $2,671,350 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $ 543,992 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 20.36% Defects in Structural Elements 1. Ceiling tile is stained and damaged from water intrusion from roof. 2. Walls are stained from water intrusion. Combination of Deficiencies 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a. Water is disconnected. b. Sink in staff break room is non-compliant. c. Threshold is non-compliant. It is higher than 1/2 inch. d. Stoop at exterior rear door is non-compliant – it is not flush with the threshold. 2. Light and Ventilation a. HVAC system is non-functional. b. Floor tile in main room is cupped indicative of poor ventilation. 3. Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a. Riser valve is leaking water indicative of a damaged seal or a valve. b. Floor tile by rear exit is damaged preventing unimpeded egress. 4. Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a. Interior walls are stained and damaged. b. Mold is present. c. Floor tile is discolored and cracking in some areas. d. Acoustical ceiling tiles are discolored indicating water intrusion. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 2 Map G Building 5 5. Exterior Construction a. Effervescence on the mortar joints on the loading dock wing wall indicative of water intrusion within the block. b. Exterior door exhibits signs of rust. c. Railing near loading dock is rusting. d. Exterior wall is discolored in areas where previous signage was installed. Description of Code Deficiencies 1. Roof needs replacement because of age and numerous water leaks. 2. HVAC system needs replacement because of age and it is non-functional. 3. Sink in staff break room should be made compliant. 4. Interior floor elevation needs to be at the same level as the exterior landing. 5. Flooring needs to be securely installed to create a slip resistant pathway to egress. 6. Main valve on fire suppression system shall be properly maintained. Overview of Deficiencies According to county records this building was built in 1986. The roof is still original (confirmed by a review of city building permit records) and has outlived its life cycle which is noticeable by the amount of ceiling stains. There are no records that the HVAC system has been replaced, upgraded or maintained. This is evident by the mold in the building caused by a lack of proper ventilation. The building shows signs of abandonment. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 2 Map G Building 5 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Analysis Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report February 26, 2015 Map No. & Address: Map G Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): January 5, 2015 1:05 PM Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: - Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. - Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $2,981,339 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $ 531,202 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 17.82% Defects in Structural Elements 1. Rusting lintel above rear door. 2. Brick cracking indicating differential settlement. 3. Caulking separating around exterior doors allowing water intrusion. 4. Hollow metal frames are rusted through allowing water intrusion. 5. Water intrusion onto ceiling tile from the roof leaking. 6. Hollow metal door frames are rusting through allowing water intrusion. 7. Exterior wooden facade paint is peeling. Combination of Deficiencies 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a. Public restrooms are vandalized, unusable as well as non-compliant. b. Staff restroom is non-compliant, missing grab bars. 2. Light and Ventilation a. Ceiling tile is cupped indicative of inadequate ventilation. b. Lighting is missing and or damaged. c. Mold is evident throughout building indicating inadequate ventilation. 3. Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a. Thresholds are higher than the 1/2 inch allowance by code. b. 10 inch code compliant kick plates are absent on entrance doors. c. Stair treads and risers are non-compliant. d. Door hardware is missing or non-compliant. e. Exiting from women's restroom lacks compliant accessible width at door. f. Handrails on stairs are non-compliant. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 2 Map G Building 7 4. Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a. Interior wall panels are damaged with holes and staining. b. Wall tile is restroom is missing in some areas. c. Public restrooms are vandalized and unusable. d. Tile and carpet flooring is damaged and discolored in some areas. e. Rubber floor trim is damaged and missing in some areas. f. Paint drips present on stair handrails. g. Acoustical ceiling tiles are discolored. h. Door hardware missing on interior door. i. Exit door exhibits signs of rust. 5. Exterior Construction a. Tuck pointing is needed to prevent water intrusion. b. Brick replacement is required to prevent water intrusion. c. Control joint caulking needs replacement to prevent water intrusion. d. Exterior hollow metal door frames have rusted through allowing water intrusion. e. Roof appears to be leaking into interior spaces and is beyond its life expectancy (confirmed by staff reports). f. Signs of rust and vandalism on exterior doors. g. Signage is damaged and will need to be removed. h. Paint is peeling at exterior entrance. Description of Code Deficiencies 1. Roof needs replacement because of age and numerous water leaks. 2. HVAC system needs replacement because of age and it is non-functional. 3. Restrooms need renovation for compliance. 4. Repair exterior brick and joints to prevent water intrusion. 5. Interior floor elevation needs to be at the same level as the exterior landing. 6. Stairs need to comply with risers being no more than 7 inches high and treads being no less than 11 inches wide. 7. Hand rails on stairs need to be made compliant extending beyond bottom stair face. Overview of Deficiencies This building was built in 1986. The roof appears to be original as well as the ventilation system (confirmed by a review of the city building permit records). It is apparent that both the roof and ventilation system are in need of replacement based on water intrusion into the building. It is also apparent that the ventilation system should be replaced because of the cupping of ceiling tile. There is significant vandalism to the non-compliant restrooms. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 2 Map G Building 7 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF Analysis Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report February 26, 2015 Map No. & Address: Map G Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): February 11, 2015 1:30 PM Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: - Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. - Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $3,947,000 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $ 773,236 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 19.59% Defects in Structural Elements 1. Aggressive rusting is noticeable on interior metal wall panels. 2. Stained ceiling tile indicative of leaking roof. 3. Rusted roof deck indicating water intrusion and lack of proper ventilation. 4. Hollow metal door frames rusting from weather. 5. Lintels above exterior hollow metal framed doors rusting from water intrusion. 6. Exterior CMU is deteriorating in many areas on the west side of building. 7. Holes are evident in exterior CMU allowing water intrusion. 8. Sidewalk is cracked in front of main entrance in close proximity to cracked glass in store front indicative of differential settlement. 9. Columns are rusting at the base in the vestibule from improper drainage. Combination of Deficiencies 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a. Restrooms are non compliant. 2. Light and Ventilation a. Ventilation is non-compliant by evidence of mold, ceiling cupping, and rust on the exterior wall panels. 3. Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a. Conduit is laid across the floor in the concession area at a height greater than 1/2 inch. b. Door thresholds are to high on exterior doors. c. Hand railings are non compliant. d. Door hardware on auditorium is non compliant. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 2 Map G Building 8 e. Non-compliant hand rail on ramp in auditorium. f. Restroom door does not have side access compliance. g. No side access to drinking fountain. h. No mirror in ADA lavatory. i. Carpet missing causing trip hazard during egress. j. Auditorium accessible ramp railing is spaced improperly. 4. Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a. Interior acoustical wall panels are rusting from water intrusion. b. Ceiling tile is cupped from lack of proper ventilation. c. Flooring needs to be securely installed. d. Wood handrails at ramp are worn and require new paint. e. Paint peeling at metal handrails. f. Interior doors exhibit signs of damage. g. Bottom of exit door is rusting. 5. Exterior Construction a. CMU is deteriorating on west side of building. b. Exterior door frame is rusting. c. Pavement is cracked in some areas. Description of Code Deficiencies 1. Roof needs replacement because of age and numerous water leaks. 2. HVAC system needs replacement because of age and it is functioning improperly. 3. Restrooms need renovation for compliance. 4. Flooring needs to be securely installed to create a slip resistant pathway to egress. 5. Repair exterior CMU and joints to prevent water intrusion. Overview of Deficiencies According to county records this building was built in 1986. The roof is still original (confirmed by a review of the city building permit records) and has outlived its life cycle which is noticeable by the amount of ceiling stains. There are no records that the HVAC system has been replaced, upgraded or maintained. This is evident by the mold in the building caused by a lack of proper ventilation. The building shows signs of abandonment. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Building Report LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 2 Map G Building 8 APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Map B Building B 5939 John Martin Drive Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Building Type: Store, Convenience with Face Brick Veneer / Wood Frame Location:MINNEAPOLIS, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):14 Floor Area (S.F.):4000 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2015 Cost Per Square Foot:$131.05 Building Cost:$524,200 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 10.81% $12.91 $51,600 A1010 Standard Foundations $2.16 $8,650 A1030 Slab on Grade $5.58 $22,300 A2010 Basement Excavation $0.59 $2,350 A2020 Basement Walls $4.58 $18,300 47.32% $61.17 $244,640 B1010 Floor Construction $16.25 $65,000 B1020 Roof Construction $7.47 $29,880 B2010 Exterior Walls $18.75 $75,000 Estimate Name: Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. Excavate and fill, 4000 SF, 4' deep, sand, gravel, or common earth, on site storage Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .099 CY/LF, 4.8 PLF, 8" thick B Shell Wood column, 6" x 6", 20' x 20' bay, 12' unsupported height, 90 BF/MSF, 50 PSF total allowable load A Substructure Strip footing, concrete, unreinforced, load 2.6 KLF, soil bearing capacity 3 KSF, 8" deep x 16" wide Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 25K, soil bearing capacity 3 KSF, 3' - 0" square x 12" deep Slab on grade, 4" thick, non industrial, reinforced Wood beam and joist floor, 10"x14" girder, 10"x12" beam, 2x8 joists @ 16", 20'x20' bay, 40 PSF LL, 63 PSF total load Roof, steel joists, beams, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns and bearing wall, 25'x25' bay, 20" deep, 40 PSF superimposed load, 60 PSF total load, add for column Brick veneer wall, standard face, 2x6 studs @ 16" back-up, running bond Roof, steel joists, beams, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns and bearing wall, 25'x25' bay, 20" deep, 40 PSF superimposed load, 60 PSF total load Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map B Building B % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost B2020 Exterior Windows $8.58 $34,300 B2030 Exterior Doors $2.88 $11,500 B3010 Roof Coverings $7.24 $28,960 11.44% $13.60 $40,950 C1010 Partitions $2.70 $10,800 C1020 Interior Doors $0.98 $3,900 C3010 Wall Finishes $0.44 $1,750 C3020 Floor Finishes $2.78 $11,100 C3030 Ceiling Finishes $6.70 $13,400 30.43% $36.24 $145,000 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures $3.82 $15,300 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution $1.32 $5,300 D3050 Terminal & Package Units $7.28 $29,100 D4010 Sprinklers $4.82 $19,300 D4020 Standpipes $2.09 $8,350 Glazing panel, plate glass, 1/4" thick, clear Door, aluminum & glass, without transom, wide stile, double door, hardware, 6'-0" x 7'-0" opening Door, birch, solid core, double door, hinged, 3'-0" x 7'-0" opening Roofing, asphalt flood coat, gravel, base sheet, 3 plies 15# asphalt felt, mopped Aluminum flush tube frame, thermo-break frame, 2.25" x 4.5", 5'x6' Wood partition, 5/8"fire rated gypsum board face, none base,2 x 4,@ 16" OC framing,same opposite face, 0 insul 5/8" gypsum board, taped & finished, painted on 2 x 4 studs 16" O.C. Door, single leaf, wood frame, 3'-0" x 7'-0" x 1-3/8", birch, solid core Door, double leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, B label, 2 - 3'-0" x 7'-0" x 1-3/8" Insulation, rigid, roof deck, composite with 2" EPS, 1" perlite Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick C Interiors Water closet, vitreous china, tank type, 2 piece close coupled Lavatory w/trim, vanity top, PE on CI, 18" round Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 22" x 18" Gas fired water heater, residential, 100< F rise, 30 gal tank, 32 GPH Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, brushwork, primer & 2 coats Vinyl, composition tile, maximum Acoustic ceilings, 5/8" mineral fiber, 12" x 12" tile, 1" x 3" wood, 12" OC grid, wood support D Services Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, food supermarkets, 5,000 SF, 14.17 ton Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, light hazard, 1 floor, 5000 SF Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, 1 floor Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map B Building B % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution $3.05 $12,200 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring $10.70 $42,800 D5030 Communications and Security $2.82 $11,300 D5090 Other Electrical Systems $0.34 $1,350 0% $0.00 $0 E1090 Other Equipment $0.00 $0 0% $0.00 $0 0% $0.00 $0 100% $123.92 $482,190 10.00% $12.39 $48,219 0.00% $0.00 $0 0.00% $0.00 $0 $131.05 $524,200 Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 200 A Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 1 phase, 400 A Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 2.5 per 1000 SF, .3 watts per SF Miscellaneous power, 1 watt Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 200 A F Special Construction G Building Sitework Central air conditioning power, 4 watts Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 2.4 watt per SF, 60 FC, 15 fixtures @ 32 watt per 1000 SF Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 25 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire Fire alarm command center, addressable without voice, excl. wire & conduit Total Building Cost SubTotal Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees User Fees Generator sets, w/battery, charger, muffler and transfer switch, gas/gasoline operated, 3 phase, 4 wire, 277/480 V, 7.5 kW E Equipment & Furnishings Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 3 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map B Building B Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Map B Building B - 5939 John Martin Drive Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Renovate restrooms for accessibility compliance 3.82$ SF 4,000 15,280.00$ Structural Elements Exiting Fire Protection Sprinklers Remove and replace frozen sprinkler system 4.82$ SF 4,000 19,280.00$ Replace standpipe 2.09$ SF 4,000 8,360.00$ Exterior Construction Repair exterior walls to prevent water intrusion Remove EIFS 5.00$ SF 4,000 20,000.00$ Replace EIFS 10.00$ SF 4,000 40,000.00$ Tuck point all brick mortar joints 8.00$ SF 640 5,120.00$ Roof Construction Replace failed roof 7.47$ SF 4,000 29,880.00$ Mechanical- Electrical Plumbing Reinstall domestic water distribution lines 1.32$ SF 4,000 5,280.00$ Mechanical ventilation Remove and reinstall new HVAC system 7.28$ SF 4,000 29,120.00$ Electrical Replace all branch wiring that was removed 5.57$ SF 4,000 22,280.00$ Total Code Improvements 194,600.00$ Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 1 Code Deficiency Cost Report Map B Building B Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map B, Building B - 5939 John Martin Drive Photos Page 1 of 9 DSCN1213.JPG DSCN1214.JPG DSCN1215.JPG DSCN1216.JPG DSCN1217.JPG DSCN1218.JPG DSCN1219.JPG DSCN1220.JPG DSCN1221.JPG DSCN1222.JPG DSCN1223.JPG DSCN1224.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map B, Building B - 5939 John Martin Drive Photos Page 2 of 9 DSCN1225.JPG DSCN1226.JPG DSCN1227.JPG DSCN1228.JPG DSCN1229.JPG DSCN1230.JPG DSCN1231.JPG DSCN1232.JPG DSCN1233.JPG DSCN1234.JPG DSCN1235.JPG DSCN1236.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map B, Building B - 5939 John Martin Drive Photos Page 3 of 9 DSCN1237.JPG DSCN1238.JPG DSCN1239.JPG DSCN1240.JPG DSCN1241.JPG DSCN1242.JPG DSCN1243.JPG DSCN1244.JPG DSCN1245.JPG DSCN1246.JPG DSCN1247.JPG DSCN1248.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map B, Building B - 5939 John Martin Drive Photos Page 4 of 9 DSCN1249.JPG DSCN1250.JPG DSCN1251.JPG DSCN1252.JPG DSCN1253.JPG DSCN1254.JPG DSCN1255.JPG DSCN1256.JPG DSCN1257.JPG DSCN1258.JPG DSCN1259.JPG DSCN1260.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map B, Building B - 5939 John Martin Drive Photos Page 5 of 9 DSCN1261.JPG DSCN1262.JPG DSCN1263.JPG DSCN1264.JPG DSCN1265.JPG DSCN1266.JPG DSCN1267.JPG DSCN1268.JPG DSCN1269.JPG DSCN1270.JPG DSCN1271.JPG DSCN1272.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map B, Building B - 5939 John Martin Drive Photos Page 6 of 9 DSCN1273.JPG DSCN1274.JPG DSCN1275.JPG DSCN1276.JPG DSCN1277.JPG DSCN1278.JPG DSCN1279.JPG DSCN1280.JPG DSCN1281.JPG DSCN1282.JPG DSCN1283.JPG DSCN1284.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map B, Building B - 5939 John Martin Drive Photos Page 7 of 9 DSCN1285.JPG DSCN1286.JPG DSCN1287.JPG DSCN1288.JPG DSCN1289.JPG DSCN1290.JPG DSCN1291.JPG DSCN1292.JPG DSCN1293.JPG DSCN1294.JPG DSCN1295.JPG DSCN1296.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map B, Building B - 5939 John Martin Drive Photos Page 8 of 9 DSCN1297.JPG DSCN1298.JPG DSCN1299.JPG DSCN1300.JPG DSCN1301.JPG DSCN1302.JPG DSCN1303.JPG DSCN1304.JPG DSCN1305.JPG DSCN1306.JPG DSCN1307.JPG DSCN1308.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map B, Building B - 5939 John Martin Drive Photos Page 9 of 9 DSCN1309.JPG DSCN1310.JPG DSCN1311.JPG DSCN1312.JPG DSCN1313.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 2 5970 Shingle Creek Pkwy Brooklyn Center, MN Building Type: Store, Retail with Face Brick on Concrete Block / Steel Joists Location:MINNEAPOLIS, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):15 Floor Area (S.F.):36391 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2015 Cost Per Square Foot:$85.37 Building Cost:$3,106,736 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 9.41% $8.03 $ 292,220 A1010 Standard Foundations $0.80 $29,113 A1030 Slab on Grade $5.56 $202,334 A2010 Basement Excavation $0.34 $12,373 A2020 Basement Walls $1.33 $48,400 27.23% $23.25 $ 846,091 B1020 Roof Construction $7.47 $271,841 B2010 Exterior Walls $7.75 $282,030 B2020 Exterior Windows $1.26 $45,853 B2030 Exterior Doors $0.70 $25,474 B3010 Roof Coverings $6.07 $220,893 Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. Estimate Name: Brick wall, composite double wythe, standard face/CMU back-up, 8" Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 50K, soil bearing capacity Aluminum flush tube frame, for 1/4"glass,1-3/4"x4", 5'x6' opening, Slab on grade, 4" thick, non industrial, reinforced Excavate and fill, 10,000 SF, 4' deep, sand gravel, or common Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 B Shell Roof, steel joists, beams, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns and Door, aluminum & glass, with transom, black finish, hardware, 3'-0" Roofing, asphalt flood coat, gravel, base sheet, 3 plies 15# asphalt Insulation, rigid, roof deck, composite with 2" EPS, 1" perlite Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 5.1 KLF, soil bearing A Substructure Glazing panel, insulating, 1/2" thick, 2 lites 1/8" float glass, clear Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'- Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 2 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost B3020 Roof Openings $0.03 $1,092 16.82% $14.36 $ 522,575 C1010 Partitions $1.12 $40,758 C1020 Interior Doors $1.94 $70,599 C3010 Wall Finishes $1.11 $40,394 C3020 Floor Finishes $2.76 $100,439 C3030 Ceiling Finishes $7.43 $270,385 37.45% $31.97 $ 1,163,420 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures $2.93 $106,626 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution $1.14 $41,486 D2040 Rain Water Drainage $1.68 $61,137 D3050 Terminal & Package Units $7.83 $284,942 D4010 Sprinklers $4.53 $164,851 D4020 Standpipes $1.04 $37,847 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution $0.61 $22,199 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring $10.52 $382,833 D5030 Communications and Security $1.69 $61,501 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler Roof hatch, with curb, 1" fiberglass insulation, 2'-6" x 3'-0", C Interiors Metal partition, 5/8"fire rated gypsum board face, 1/4" sound Door, single leaf, wood frame, 3'-0" x 7'-0" x 1-3/8", birch, solid core Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, Gas fired water heater, commercial, 100< F rise, 500 MBH input, Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, department stores, 10,000 SF, Fire alarm command center, addressable without voice, excl. wire & Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 8 per 1000 SF, .9 watts Miscellaneous power, 1.5 watts Central air conditioning power, 4 watts Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 1.6 watt per SF, 40 Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 25 Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, ordinary hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, 1 Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung Lavatory w/trim, vanity top, vitreous china, 20" x 16" Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 22" x 18" Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 4" diam, 10' high Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 4" diam, for each additional foot add Carpet, tufted, nylon, roll goods, 12' wide, 36 oz Vinyl, composition tile, maximum Acoustic ceilings, 3/4" fiberglass board, 24" x 48" tile, tee grid, D Services Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 2 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost D5090 Other Electrical Systems - none $0.00 $0 0.00% $0.00 $ - E1090 Other Equipment 0 0 0%0 0 0%0 0 100% $77.61 $2,824,306 10.0% $7.76 $282,431 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $85.37 $3,106,736Total Building Cost E Equipment & Furnishings F Special Construction G Building Sitework SubTotal Generator sets, w/battery, charger, muffler and transfer switch, Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees User Fees Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 3 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 2 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Provide accessible restroms for both sexes Revise (2) existing acccessible toilet rooms w/ compliant clearances, accessories and fixtures remove existing grab bar 100.00$ each 2 200$ new grab bar set 300.00$ each 2 600$ Provide accessible route from parking lot to street level bldg. entry - MN 1341.0401& 1341.0405 H provide ramp to reduce threshold to less 600.00$ Each 1 600$ than 1/2". IBC1008.1.6 Replace north exit door / reverse swing to provide 600.00$ Each 1 600$ required clearance reconfigure wall layout Provide accessible drinking fountain 1,600.00$ ea 1 1,600$ Structural Elements Replace rusty steel lintels at door openings 800.00$ Each 3 2,400$ Exiting Provide compliant landing and steps at north (back) exit doors new concrete landing/stoop 2,500.00$ lump 2 5,000$ Replace thresholds at all exit doors with code compliant 400.00$ Each 7 2,800$ Replace existing roof access ship's ladder 2,500.00$ Each 1 2,500$ with compliant one Fire Protection Fire alarms Install smoke detectors 250.00$ ea -$ Install CO detector 250.00$ ea -$ Exterior Construction Provide code compliant exterior wall covering Repoint grout joints (25%) 6.40$ SF 2,250 14,400$ fill and repair holes and damaged exterior brick walls 2,500.00$ lump 1 2,500$ replace/repoint at lintels 3.75$ SF 120 450$ Replace rusted exterior door frames - single doors 1,900.00$ ea 2 3,800$ Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 2 Roof Construction Remove and replace roof: fill holes, provide adequate ventilation MN1305.1507.10.1 to 1305.1507.15.1 Remove existing roof 0.75$ SF 36,391 27,293$ Install new roofing system 7.38$ SF 36,391 268,566$ Mechanical- Electrical Provide additional ventilation to comply with current code for fresh air MN 1346.0403 Section 403.3 Assumes 50% of floor area is non-code compliant Mechanical equipment, ductwork and units 6.75$ SF 18,195 122,816$ Additional electrical service and distribution for 2.00$ SF 18,195 36,390$ mechanical equipment Repair / replace damaged rooftop air conditioning units 15,000.00$ ea 8 120,000$ secure electrical wiring; correct deficiencies in 700.00$ lump 1 700$ junction boxes, add covers Provide GFCI protected receptacles at restrooms, 250.00$ each 12 3,000$ counters and service sinks Total Code Improvements 616,215$ Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 2 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 1 of 11 DSCN0746.JPG DSCN0747.JPG DSCN0748.JPG DSCN0749.JPG DSCN0750.JPG DSCN0751.JPG DSCN0752.JPG DSCN0753.JPG DSCN0754.JPG DSCN0755.JPG DSCN0756.JPG DSCN0757.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 2 of 11 DSCN0758.JPG DSCN0759.JPG DSCN0760.JPG DSCN0761.JPG DSCN0762.JPG DSCN0763.JPG DSCN0764.JPG DSCN0765.JPG DSCN0766.JPG DSCN0767.JPG DSCN0768.JPG DSCN0769.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 3 of 11 DSCN0770.JPG DSCN0771.JPG DSCN0772.JPG DSCN0773.JPG DSCN0774.JPG DSCN0775.JPG DSCN0776.JPG DSCN0777.JPG DSCN0778.JPG DSCN0779.JPG DSCN0780.JPG DSCN0781.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 4 of 11 DSCN0782.JPG DSCN0783.JPG DSCN0784.JPG DSCN0785.JPG DSCN0786.JPG DSCN0787.JPG DSCN0788.JPG DSCN0789.JPG DSCN0790.JPG DSCN0791.JPG DSCN0792.JPG DSCN0793.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 5 of 11 DSCN0794.JPG DSCN0795.JPG DSCN0796.JPG DSCN0797.JPG DSCN0798.JPG DSCN0799.JPG DSCN0800.JPG DSCN0801.JPG DSCN0802.JPG DSCN0803.JPG DSCN0804.JPG DSCN0805.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 6 of 11 DSCN0806.JPG DSCN0807.JPG DSCN0808.JPG DSCN0809.JPG DSCN0810.JPG DSCN0811.JPG DSCN0812.JPG DSCN0813.JPG DSCN0814.JPG DSCN0815.JPG DSCN0816.JPG DSCN0817.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 7 of 11 DSCN0818.JPG DSCN0819.JPG DSCN0820.JPG DSCN0821.JPG DSCN0822.JPG DSCN0823.JPG DSCN0824.JPG DSCN0825.JPG DSCN0826.JPG DSCN0827.JPG DSCN0828.JPG DSCN0829.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 8 of 11 DSCN0830.JPG DSCN0831.JPG DSCN0832.JPG DSCN0833.JPG DSCN0834.JPG DSCN0835.JPG DSCN0836.JPG DSCN0837.JPG DSCN0838.JPG DSCN0839.JPG DSCN0840.JPG DSCN0841.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 9 of 11 DSCN0842.JPG DSCN0843.JPG DSCN0844.JPG DSCN0845.JPG DSCN0846.JPG DSCN0847.JPG DSCN0848.JPG DSCN0849.JPG DSCN0850.JPG DSCN0851.JPG DSCN0852.JPG DSCN0853.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 10 of 11 DSCN0854.JPG DSCN0855.JPG DSCN1212.JPG DSCN1326.JPG DSCN1327.JPG DSCN1328.JPG DSCN1329.JPG DSCN1330.JPG DSCN1331.JPG DSCN1332.JPG DSCN1333.JPG DSCN1334.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 2 - 5970 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 11 of 11 DSCN1335.JPG DSCN1336.JPG DSCN1337.JPG DSCN1338.JPG DSCN1339.JPG DSCN1340.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 3 5980-90 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Centerr, MN Building Type: Store, Retail with Face Brick on Concrete Block / Steel Joists Location:MINNEAPOLIS, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):15 Floor Area (S.F.):35147 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2015 Cost Per Square Foot:$91.82 Building Cost:$3,227,092 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 9.64% $8.85 $ 311,051 A1010 Standard Foundations $1.07 $37,607 A1030 Slab on Grade $5.57 $195,769 A2010 Basement Excavation $0.34 $11,950 A2020 Basement Walls $1.87 $65,725 29.66% $27.23 $ 957,053 B1020 Roof Construction $7.47 $262,548 B2010 Exterior Walls $10.94 $384,508 B2020 Exterior Windows $1.78 $62,562 B2030 Exterior Doors $0.70 $24,603 B3010 Roof Coverings $6.34 $222,832 A Substructure Glazing panel, insulating, 1/2" thick, 2 lites 1/8" float glass, clear Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'- Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 50K, soil bearing capacity Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 B Shell Roofing, asphalt flood coat, gravel, base sheet, 3 plies 15# asphalt Insulation, rigid, roof deck, composite with 2" EPS, 1" perlite Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face Roof, steel joists, beams, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns and Door, aluminum & glass, with transom, black finish, hardware, 3'-0" Estimate Name: Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. Brick wall, composite double wythe, standard face/CMU back-up, 8" Aluminum flush tube frame, for 1/4"glass,1-3/4"x4", 5'x6' opening, Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 5.1 KLF, soil bearing Slab on grade, 4" thick, non industrial, reinforced Excavate and fill, 10,000 SF, 4' deep, sand gravel, or common Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 3 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost B3020 Roof Openings $0.04 $1,406 16.00% $14.69 $ 516,309 C1010 Partitions $1.12 $39,365 C1020 Interior Doors $1.94 $68,185 C3010 Wall Finishes $1.44 $50,612 C3020 Floor Finishes $2.76 $97,006 C3030 Ceiling Finishes $7.43 $261,142 35.61% $32.70 $ 1,149,307 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures $2.95 $103,684 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution $1.61 $56,587 D2040 Rain Water Drainage $1.67 $58,695 D3050 Terminal & Package Units $7.83 $275,201 D4010 Sprinklers $4.54 $159,567 D4020 Standpipes $1.04 $36,553 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution $0.86 $30,226 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring $10.51 $369,395 D5030 Communications and Security $1.69 $59,398 Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 4" diam, 10' high Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 4" diam, for each additional foot add Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, ordinary hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, 1 Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, Carpet, tufted, nylon, roll goods, 12' wide, 36 oz Vinyl, composition tile, maximum Acoustic ceilings, 3/4" fiberglass board, 24" x 48" tile, tee grid, D Services Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung Fire alarm command center, addressable without voice, excl. wire & Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 8 per 1000 SF, .9 watts Miscellaneous power, 1.5 watts Central air conditioning power, 4 watts Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 1.6 watt per SF, 40 Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 25 Lavatory w/trim, vanity top, vitreous china, 20" x 16" Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 22" x 18" Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, Gas fired water heater, commercial, 100< F rise, 500 MBH input, Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, department stores, 10,000 SF, Roof hatch, with curb, 1" fiberglass insulation, 2'-6" x 3'-0", Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung C Interiors Metal partition, 5/8"fire rated gypsum board face, 1/4" sound Door, single leaf, wood frame, 3'-0" x 7'-0" x 1-3/8", birch, solid core 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 3 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost D5090 Other Electrical Systems - none $0.00 $0 0.00% $0.00 $ - E1090 Other Equipment 0 0 0%0 0 0%0 0 100% $83.47 $2,933,720 10.0% $8.35 $293,372 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $91.82 $3,227,092 Generator sets, w/battery, charger, muffler and transfer switch, Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees User Fees Total Building Cost E Equipment & Furnishings F Special Construction G Building Sitework SubTotal Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 3 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 3 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 3 - 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Renovate restrooms for accessibility 2.92$ SF 400 1,168.00$ Proper door hardware needs to be installed for compliance 250.00$ Ea 4 1,000.00$ Structural Elements Exiting Emergency lighting Reinstall emergency lighting for egress compliance 0.21$ SF 35,147 7,380.87$ Flooring Replace flooring for egress compliance 2.77$ SF 35,147 97,357.19$ Rear door Replace exterior landing to be at same level as threshold 1,500.00$ Ea 1 1,500.00$ Fire Protection Exterior Construction Roof Construction Replace roof that has failed. Remove old roof 0.90$ SF 35,147 31,632.30$ Replace with new BUR 7.47$ SF 35,147 262,548.09$ Mechanical- Electrical Mechanical ventilation Remove and reinstall new compliant HVAC system 7.82$ SF 35,147 274,849.54$ Total Code Improvements 677,435.99$ Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 1 Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 3 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 3 - 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 1 of 10 DSCN0856.JPG DSCN0857.JPG DSCN0858.JPG DSCN0859.JPG DSCN0860.JPG DSCN0861.JPG DSCN0862.JPG DSCN0863.JPG DSCN0864.JPG DSCN0865.JPG DSCN0866.JPG DSCN0867.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 3 - 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 2 of 10 DSCN0868.JPG DSCN0869.JPG DSCN0870.JPG DSCN0871.JPG DSCN0872.JPG DSCN0873.JPG DSCN0874.JPG DSCN0875.JPG DSCN0876.JPG DSCN0877.JPG DSCN0878.JPG DSCN0879.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 3 - 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 3 of 10 DSCN0880.JPG DSCN0881.JPG DSCN0882.JPG DSCN0883.JPG DSCN0884.JPG DSCN0885.JPG DSCN0886.JPG DSCN0887.JPG DSCN0888.JPG DSCN0889.JPG DSCN0890.JPG DSCN0891.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 3 - 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 4 of 10 DSCN0892.JPG DSCN0893.JPG DSCN0894.JPG DSCN0895.JPG DSCN0896.JPG DSCN0897.JPG DSCN0898.JPG DSCN0899.JPG DSCN0900.JPG DSCN0901.JPG DSCN0902.JPG DSCN0903.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 3 - 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 5 of 10 DSCN0904.JPG DSCN0905.JPG DSCN0906.JPG DSCN0907.JPG DSCN0908.JPG DSCN0909.JPG DSCN0910.JPG DSCN0911.JPG DSCN0912.JPG DSCN0913.JPG DSCN0914.JPG DSCN0915.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 3 - 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 6 of 10 DSCN0916.JPG DSCN0917.JPG DSCN0918.JPG DSCN0919.JPG DSCN0920.JPG DSCN0921.JPG DSCN0922.JPG DSCN0923.JPG DSCN0924.JPG DSCN0925.JPG DSCN0926.JPG DSCN0927.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 3 - 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 7 of 10 DSCN0928.JPG DSCN0929.JPG DSCN0930.JPG DSCN0931.JPG DSCN0932.JPG DSCN0933.JPG DSCN0934.JPG DSCN0935.JPG DSCN0936.JPG DSCN0937.JPG DSCN0938.JPG DSCN0939.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 3 - 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 8 of 10 DSCN0940.JPG DSCN0941.JPG DSCN0942.JPG DSCN0943.JPG DSCN0944.JPG DSCN0945.JPG DSCN0946.JPG DSCN0947.JPG DSCN0948.JPG DSCN0949.JPG DSCN0950.JPG DSCN0951.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 3 - 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 9 of 10 DSCN0952.JPG DSCN0953.JPG DSCN0954.JPG DSCN0955.JPG DSCN0956.JPG DSCN0957.JPG DSCN0958.JPG DSCN0959.JPG DSCN0960.JPG DSCN0961.JPG DSCN0962.JPG DSCN0963.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 3 - 5980-5990 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 10 of 10 DSCN0964.JPG DSCN0965.JPG DSCN0966.JPG DSCN0967.JPG DSCN0968.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 4 6000-6020 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Building Type: Store, Retail with Face Brick on Concrete Block / Steel Joists Location:MINNEAPOLIS, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):14 Floor Area (S.F.):7873 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2015 Cost Per Square Foot:$115.63 Building Cost:$910,690 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 11.05% $11.61 $91,500 A1010 Standard Foundations $1.99 $15,700 A1030 Slab on Grade $5.56 $43,800 A2010 Basement Excavation $0.34 $2,700 A2020 Basement Walls $3.72 $29,300 37.20% $39.11 $308,000 B1020 Roof Construction $7.49 $59,000 B2010 Exterior Walls $20.26 $159,500 B2020 Exterior Windows $3.30 $26,000 A Substructure Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 5.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 3 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 50K, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 3' - 0" square x 12" deep Slab on grade, 4" thick, non industrial, reinforced Estimate Name: Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. Roof, steel joists, beams, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns and bearing wall, 25'x25' bay, 20" deep, 40 PSF superimposed load, 60 PSF total load, add for column Brick wall, composite double wythe, standard face/CMU back-up, 8" thick, styrofoam core fill Aluminum flush tube frame, for 1/4"glass,1-3/4"x4", 5'x6' opening, no intermediate horizontals Glazing panel, insulating, 1/2" thick, 2 lites 1/8" float glass, clear Excavate and fill, 10,000 SF, 4' deep, sand gravel, or common earth, on site storage Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick B Shell Roof, steel joists, beams, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns and bearing wall, 25'x25' bay, 20" deep, 40 PSF superimposed load, 60 PSF total load Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 4 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost B2030 Exterior Doors $0.70 $5,550 B3010 Roof Coverings $7.24 $57,000 B3020 Roof Openings $0.12 $950 14.91% $15.67 $123,450 C1010 Partitions $1.12 $8,850 C1020 Interior Doors $1.94 $15,300 C3010 Wall Finishes $2.41 $19,000 C3020 Floor Finishes $2.77 $21,800 C3030 Ceiling Finishes $7.43 $58,500 36.83% $38.73 $304,950 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures $3.15 $24,800 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution $5.27 $41,500 D2040 Rain Water Drainage $1.68 $13,200 D3050 Terminal & Package Units $7.81 $61,500 D4010 Sprinklers $4.53 $35,700 Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick Roof hatch, with curb, 1" fiberglass insulation, 2'-6" x 3'-0", galvanized steel, 165 lbs C Interiors Door, aluminum & glass, with transom, black finish, hardware, 3'-0" x 10'-0" opening Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'-0" x 7'-0" opening Roofing, asphalt flood coat, gravel, base sheet, 3 plies 15# asphalt felt, mopped Insulation, rigid, roof deck, composite with 2" EPS, 1" perlite Vinyl, composition tile, maximum Acoustic ceilings, 3/4"mineral fiber, 12" x 12" tile, concealed 2" bar & channel grid, suspended support D Services Water closet, vitreous china, tank type, 2 piece close coupled Metal partition, 5/8"fire rated gypsum board face, 1/4" sound deadening gypsum board, 2-1/2" @ 24", same opposite face, no Door, single leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, flush, 3'-0" x 7'-0" x 1-3/8" 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, primer & 2 coats Gas fired water heater, commercial, 100< F rise, 500 MBH input, 480 GPH Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 4" diam, 10' high Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 4" diam, for each additional foot add Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, department stores, 10,000 SF, 29.17 ton Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung Lavatory w/trim, vanity top, PE on CI, 20" x 18" Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 24" x 20" Water cooler, electric, wall hung, dual height, 14.3 GPH Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, ordinary hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 SF Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 4 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost D4020 Standpipes $1.05 $8,250 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution $2.81 $22,100 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring $10.54 $83,000 D5030 Communications and Security $1.69 $13,300 D5090 Other Electrical Systems $0.20 $1,600 0% $0.00 $0 E1090 Other Equipment $0.00 $0 0% $0.00 $0 0% $0.00 $0 100% $105.12 $827,900 10.00% $10.51 $82,790 0.00% $0.00 $0 0.00% $0.00 $0 $115.63 $910,690 Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 1 phase, 400 A Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 8 per 1000 SF, .9 watts per SF Miscellaneous power, 1.5 watts Central air conditioning power, 4 watts Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, 1 floor Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 400 A Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 400 A E Equipment & Furnishings F Special Construction G Building Sitework SubTotal Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 1.6 watt per SF, 40 FC, 10 fixtures @32watt per 1000 SF Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 25 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire,, conduit Generator sets, w/battery, charger, muffler and transfer switch, gas/gasoline operated, 3 phase, 4 wire, 277/480 V, 15 kW Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees User Fees Total Building Cost Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 3 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 4 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 4 - 6000-6020 Shingle Creek Parkway Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Renovate restrooms for accessibility compliance 3.15$ SF 7,873 24,799.95$ Proper door hardware needs to be installed for compliance 250.00$ Ea 1 250.00$ Install code compliant kick plates on entrance doors 100.00$ Ea 8 800.00$ Modify back door for accessibility compliance 1,500.00$ Lump 1 1,500.00$ Structural Elements Exiting Flooring Replace VCT flooring for egress compliance 2.77$ SF 3,500 9,695.00$ Fire Protection Exterior Construction Tuck point all brick mortar joints to prevent water intrusion 8.00$ SF 1,000 8,000.00$ Roof Construction Replace roof that has failed. Remove old roof 0.90$ SF 7,873 7,085.70$ Replace with new BUR 7.24$ SF 7,873 57,000.52$ Mechanical- Electrical Mechanical ventilation Remove and reinstall new compliant HVAC system 7.82$ SF 7,873 61,566.86$ Total Code Improvements 170,698.03$ Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 1 Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 4 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 4 - 6000-6020 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 1 of 5 DSCN0969.JPG DSCN0970.JPG DSCN0971.JPG DSCN0972.JPG DSCN0973.JPG DSCN0974.JPG DSCN0975.JPG DSCN0976.JPG DSCN0977.JPG DSCN0978.JPG DSCN0979.JPG DSCN0980.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 4 - 6000-6020 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 2 of 5 DSCN0981.JPG DSCN0982.JPG DSCN0983.JPG DSCN0984.JPG DSCN0985.JPG DSCN0986.JPG DSCN0987.JPG DSCN0988.JPG DSCN0989.JPG DSCN0990.JPG DSCN0991.JPG DSCN0992.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 4 - 6000-6020 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 3 of 5 DSCN0993.JPG DSCN0994.JPG DSCN0995.JPG DSCN0996.JPG DSCN0997.JPG DSCN0998.JPG DSCN0999.JPG DSCN1000.JPG DSCN1001.JPG DSCN1002.JPG DSCN1003.JPG DSCN1004.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 4 - 6000-6020 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 4 of 5 DSCN1005.JPG DSCN1006.JPG DSCN1007.JPG DSCN1008.JPG DSCN1009.JPG DSCN1010.JPG DSCN1011.JPG DSCN1012.JPG DSCN1013.JPG DSCN1014.JPG DSCN1015.JPG DSCN1016.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 4 - 6000-6020 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 5 of 5 DSCN1017.JPG DSCN1018.JPG DSCN1019.JPG DSCN1020.JPG DSCN1021.JPG DSCN1022.JPG DSCN1023.JPG DSCN1024.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 5 6030 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Building Type: Store, Retail with Face Brick on Concrete Block / Steel Joists Location:MINNEAPOLIS, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):14 Floor Area (S.F.):30395 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2015 Cost Per Square Foot:$87.90 Building Cost:$2,671,350 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 10.54% $8.42 $255,900 A1010 Standard Foundations $0.93 $28,200 A1030 Slab on Grade $5.56 $169,000 A2010 Basement Excavation $0.34 $10,400 A2020 Basement Walls $1.59 $48,300 30.62% $24.46 $743,650 B1020 Roof Construction $7.47 $227,000 B2010 Exterior Walls $8.65 $263,000 B2020 Exterior Windows $1.41 $42,800 Roof, steel joists, beams, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns and bearing wall, 25'x25' bay, 20" deep, 40 PSF superimposed load, 60 PSF total load, add for column Brick wall, composite double wythe, standard face/CMU back-up, 8" thick, styrofoam core fill Aluminum flush tube frame, for 1/4"glass,1-3/4"x4", 5'x6' opening, no intermediate horizontals Glazing panel, insulating, 1/2" thick, 2 lites 1/8" float glass, clear Excavate and fill, 10,000 SF, 4' deep, sand gravel, or common earth, on site storage Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick B Shell Roof, steel joists, beams, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns and bearing wall, 25'x25' bay, 20" deep, 40 PSF superimposed load, 60 PSF total load A Substructure Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 5.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 3 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 50K, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 3' - 0" square x 12" deep Slab on grade, 4" thick, non industrial, reinforced Estimate Name: Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 5 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost B2030 Exterior Doors $0.70 $21,400 B3010 Roof Coverings $6.20 $188,500 B3020 Roof Openings $0.03 $950 18.11% $14.47 $439,800 C1010 Partitions $1.12 $34,100 C1020 Interior Doors $1.94 $59,000 C3010 Wall Finishes $1.21 $36,700 C3020 Floor Finishes $2.76 $84,000 C3030 Ceiling Finishes $7.44 $226,000 40.73% $32.56 $989,150 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures $2.93 $89,000 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution $1.37 $41,500 D2040 Rain Water Drainage $1.68 $51,000 D3050 Terminal & Package Units $7.83 $238,000 D4010 Sprinklers $4.54 $138,000 Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, ordinary hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 SF Gas fired water heater, commercial, 100< F rise, 500 MBH input, 480 GPH Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 4" diam, 10' high Roof drain, CI, soil,single hub, 4" diam, for each additional foot add Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, department stores, 10,000 SF, 29.17 ton Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung Lavatory w/trim, vanity top, PE on CI, 20" x 18" Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 24" x 20" Water cooler, electric, wall hung, dual height, 14.3 GPH Vinyl, composition tile, maximum Acoustic ceilings, 3/4"mineral fiber, 12" x 12" tile, concealed 2" bar & channel grid, suspended support D Services Water closet, vitreous china, tank type, 2 piece close coupled Metal partition, 5/8"fire rated gypsum board face, 1/4" sound deadening gypsum board, 2-1/2" @ 24", same opposite face, no Door, single leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, flush, 3'-0" x 7'-0" x 1-3/8" 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, primer & 2 coats Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick Roof hatch, with curb, 1" fiberglass insulation, 2'-6" x 3'-0", galvanized steel, 165 lbs C Interiors Door, aluminum & glass, with transom, black finish, hardware, 3'-0" x 10'-0" opening Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'-0" x 7'-0" opening Roofing, asphalt flood coat, gravel, base sheet, 3 plies 15# asphalt felt, mopped Insulation, rigid, roof deck, composite with 2" EPS, 1" perlite Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 5 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost D4020 Standpipes $1.05 $31,800 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution $0.73 $22,100 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring $10.53 $320,000 D5030 Communications and Security $1.69 $51,500 D5090 Other Electrical Systems $0.21 $6,250 0% $0.00 $0 E1090 Other Equipment $0.00 $0 0% $0.00 $0 0% $0.00 $0 100% $79.91 $2,428,500 10.00% $7.99 $242,850 0.00% $0.00 $0 0.00% $0.00 $0 $87.90 $2,671,350 Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees User Fees Total Building Cost E Equipment & Furnishings F Special Construction G Building Sitework SubTotal Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 1.6 watt per SF, 40 FC, 10 fixtures @32watt per 1000 SF Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 25 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire Fire alarm command center, addressable without voice, excl. wire & conduit Generator sets, w/battery, charger, muffler and transfer switch, gas/gasoline operated, 3 phase, 4 wire, 277/480 V, 15 kW Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 1 phase, 400 A Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 8 per 1000 SF, .9 watts per SF Miscellaneous power, 1.5 watts Central air conditioning power, 4 watts Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, 1 floor Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 400 A Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 400 A Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 3 of 3 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 5 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 5 - 6030 Shingle Creek Parkway Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Remodel staff sink to comply with accessibility code 1,500.00$ Ea 1 1,500.00$ Structural Elements Exiting Rear door Replace exterior landing to be at same level as threshold 1,500.00$ Ea 1 1,500.00$ Flooring Replace flooring for egress compliance 2.77$ SF 30,395 84,194.15$ Fire Protection Stand pipe Replace riser valve on fire suppresion system 3,000.00$ Ea 1 3,000.00$ Exterior Construction Roof Construction Replace roof that has failed. Remove old roof 0.90$ SF 30,395 27,355.50$ Replace with new BUR 6.20$ SF 30,395 188,449.00$ Mechanical- Electrical Mechanical ventilation Remove and reinstall new compliant HVAC system 7.83$ SF 30,395 237,992.85$ 543,991.50$ Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 1 Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 5 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 5 - 6030 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 1 of 5 DSCN1025.JPG DSCN1026.JPG DSCN1027.JPG DSCN1028.JPG DSCN1029.JPG DSCN1030.JPG DSCN1031.JPG DSCN1032.JPG DSCN1033.JPG DSCN1034.JPG DSCN1035.JPG DSCN1036.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 5 - 6030 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 2 of 5 DSCN1037.JPG DSCN1038.JPG DSCN1039.JPG DSCN1040.JPG DSCN1041.JPG DSCN1042.JPG DSCN1043.JPG DSCN1044.JPG DSCN1045.JPG DSCN1046.JPG DSCN1047.JPG DSCN1048.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 5 - 6030 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 3 of 5 DSCN1049.JPG DSCN1050.JPG DSCN1051.JPG DSCN1052.JPG DSCN1053.JPG DSCN1054.JPG DSCN1055.JPG DSCN1056.JPG DSCN1057.JPG DSCN1058.JPG DSCN1059.JPG DSCN1060.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 5 - 6030 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 4 of 5 DSCN1061.JPG DSCN1062.JPG DSCN1063.JPG DSCN1064.JPG DSCN1065.JPG DSCN1066.JPG DSCN1067.JPG DSCN1068.JPG DSCN1069.JPG DSCN1070.JPG DSCN1071.JPG DSCN1072.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 5 - 6030 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 5 of 5 DSCN1073.JPG DSCN1074.JPG DSCN1075.JPG DSCN1076.JPG DSCN1078.JPG DSCN1079.JPG DSCN1080.JPG DSCN1081.JPG DSCN1314.JPG DSCN1315.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 7 5801 John Martin Drive Brooklyn Center, MN Building Type: Movie Theater with Face Brick on Conc. Block / Steel Joists Location:MINNEAPOLIS, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):14 Floor Area (S.F.):24534 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2015 Cost Per Square Foot:$131.92 Building Cost:$3,236,500 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 8.08% 9.27 227500 A1010 Standard Foundations 1.16 28400 A1030 Slab on Grade 5.56 136500 A2010 Basement Excavation 0.34 8400 A2020 Basement Walls 2.2 54000 30.59% 35.09 861000 B1010 Floor Construction 1.1 26900 B1020 Roof Construction 10.84 266000 Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 50K, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 3' - 0" square x 12" deep Slab on grade, 4" thick, non industrial, reinforced Excavate and fill, 10,000 SF, 4' deep, sand gravel, or common earth, on site storage Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick B Shell Floor, concrete, slab form, open web bar joist @ 2' OC, on bearing wall, 25' span, 22.5" deep, 100 PSF superimposed load, 145 PSF total load Roof, steel joists, joist girder, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns/bearing wall, 60'x50' bay, 40 PSF superimposed load, 71" deep, 65 PSF total load Roof, steel joists, joist girder, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns/bearing wall, 60'x50' bay, 40 PSF superimposed load, 71" deep, 65 PSF total load, add for column Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 11.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide Estimate Name: Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. ** Area entered is outside the range recommended by RSMeans. A Substructure Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 7 % of Total Cost Per S.F.Cost B2010 Exterior Walls 10.82 265500 B2020 Exterior Windows 4.52 111000 B2030 Exterior Doors 1.31 32200 B3010 Roof Coverings 6.5 159500 22.63% 25.96 637000 C1010 Partitions 4.14 101500 C1020 Interior Doors 1.65 40600 C1030 Fittings 0.31 7700 C2010 Stair Construction 2.87 70500 C3010 Wall Finishes 2.73 67000 C3020 Floor Finishes 6.81 167000 C3030 Ceiling Finishes 7.44 182500 Painting, masonry or concrete, latex, brushwork, primer & 2 coats Carpet, tufted, nylon, roll goods, 12' wide, 36 oz Carpet, padding, add to above, 2.7 density Tile, ceramic natural clay Acoustic ceilings, 3/4"mineral fiber, 12" x 12" tile, concealed 2" bar & channel grid, suspended support 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'-0" x 7'-0" opening Roofing, asphalt flood coat, gravel, base sheet, 3 plies 15# asphalt felt, mopped Insulation, rigid, roof deck, composite with 2" EPS, 1" perlite Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick C Interiors Concrete block (CMU) partition, light weight, hollow, 6" thick, no finish Door, single leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, flush, 3'-0" x 7'-0" x 1-3/8" Toilet partitions, cubicles, ceiling hung, stainless steel Directory boards, outdoor, 36" x 36" Stairs, steel, cement filled metal pan & picket rail, 20 risers, with landing Door, aluminum & glass, with transom, narrow stile, double door, hardware, 6'-0" x 10'-0" opening Brick wall, composite double wythe, standard face/CMU back-up, 8" thick, perlite core fill Aluminum flush tube frame, for 1/4"glass, 1-3/4"x4", 5'x20' opening, three intermediate horizontals Glazing panel, insulating, 1" thick units, 2 lites, 1/4" float glass, clear Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 7 % of Total Cost Per S.F.Cost 30.80% 35.34 867000 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures 9.84 241500 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution 0.22 5300 D2040 Rain Water Drainage 0.63 15400 D3050 Terminal & Package Units 10.17 249500 D4010 Sprinklers 4.24 104000 D4020 Standpipes 0.85 20800 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution 0.86 21100 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring 6.56 161000 D5030 Communications and Security 1.8 44200 Central air conditioning power, 3 watts Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 0.8 watt per SF, 20 FC, 5 fixtures @32 watt per 1000 SF Daylight dimming control system, 10 fixtures per 1000 SF Communication and alarm systems, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire, sound systems, 12 outletsy detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire Fire alarm command center, addressable with voice, excl. wire & conduit Miscellaneous power, to .5 watts Roof drain, DWV PVC, 5" diam, 10' high Roof drain, DWV PVC, 5" diam, for each additional foot add Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, schools and colleges, 10,000 SF, 38.33 ton Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, light hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 SF Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, light hazard, each additional floor, 2000 SF Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, 1 floor Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, additional floors Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 400 A Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 400 A Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 1 phase, 400 A Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 2.5 per 1000 SF, .3 watts per SF Gas fired water heater, residential, 100< F rise, 30 gal tank, 32 GPH D Services Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung Lavatory w/trim, vanity top, PE on CI, 19" x 16" oval Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 22" x 18" Water cooler, electric, wall hung, dual height, 14.3 GPH Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 3 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 7 % of Total Cost Per S.F.Cost D5090 Other Electrical Systems 0.16 3950 0.00%0 0 0%0 0 0%0 0 100% $105.66 $2,592,500.00 15.00% $15.85 $388,839.37 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 $131.92 $2,981,339 User Fees Total Building Cost **** Indicates Assemblies or Components have been customized. F Special Construction G Building Sitework SubTotal Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees Generator sets, w/battery, charger, muffler and transfer switch, gas/gasoline operated, 3 phase, 4 wire, 277/480 V, 7.5 kW E Equipment & Furnishings Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 4 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 7 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Renovate restrooms for accessibility 2.92$ SF 24,534 71,639.28$ Correct stair treads and risers for compliance 5,000.00$ Ea 1 5,000.00$ Extend hand rails on stairs for compliance 500.00$ Ea 4 2,000.00$ Structural Elements Exiting Rear door Replace exterior landing to be at same level as threshold 1,500.00$ Ea 1 1,500.00$ Fire Protection Exterior Construction -$ Tuck point all brick mortar joints 8.00$ SF 2,500 20,000.00$ Roof Construction Replace roof that has failed. Remove old roof 0.90$ SF 24,534 22,080.60$ Replace with new BUR 6.50$ SF 24,534 159,471.00$ Mechanical- Electrical Mechanical ventilation Remove and reinstall new compliant HVAC system 10.17$ SF 24,534 249,510.78$ 531,201.66$ Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 1 Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 7 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 1 of 11 DSCN1082.JPG DSCN1083.JPG DSCN1084.JPG DSCN1085.JPG DSCN1086.JPG DSCN1087.JPG DSCN1088.JPG DSCN1089.JPG DSCN1090.JPG DSCN1091.JPG DSCN1092.JPG DSCN1093.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 2 of 11 DSCN1094.JPG DSCN1095.JPG DSCN1096.JPG DSCN1097.JPG DSCN1098.JPG DSCN1099.JPG DSCN1100.JPG DSCN1101.JPG DSCN1102.JPG DSCN1103.JPG DSCN1104.JPG DSCN1105.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 3 of 11 DSCN1106.JPG DSCN1107.JPG DSCN1108.JPG DSCN1109.JPG DSCN1110.JPG DSCN1111.JPG DSCN1112.JPG DSCN1113.JPG DSCN1114.JPG DSCN1115.JPG DSCN1116.JPG DSCN1117.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 4 of 11 DSCN1118.JPG DSCN1119.JPG DSCN1120.JPG DSCN1121.JPG DSCN1122.JPG DSCN1123.JPG DSCN1124.JPG DSCN1125.JPG DSCN1126.JPG DSCN1127.JPG DSCN1128.JPG DSCN1129.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 5 of 11 DSCN1130.JPG DSCN1131.JPG DSCN1132.JPG DSCN1133.JPG DSCN1134.JPG DSCN1135.JPG DSCN1136.JPG DSCN1137.JPG DSCN1138.JPG DSCN1139.JPG DSCN1140.JPG DSCN1141.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 6 of 11 DSCN1142.JPG DSCN1143.JPG DSCN1144.JPG DSCN1145.JPG DSCN1146.JPG DSCN1147.JPG DSCN1148.JPG DSCN1149.JPG DSCN1150.JPG DSCN1151.JPG DSCN1152.JPG DSCN1153.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 7 of 11 DSCN1154.JPG DSCN1155.JPG DSCN1156.JPG DSCN1157.JPG DSCN1158.JPG DSCN1159.JPG DSCN1160.JPG DSCN1161.JPG DSCN1162.JPG DSCN1163.JPG DSCN1164.JPG DSCN1165.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 8 of 11 DSCN1166.JPG DSCN1167.JPG DSCN1168.JPG DSCN1169.JPG DSCN1170.JPG DSCN1171.JPG DSCN1172.JPG DSCN1173.JPG DSCN1174.JPG DSCN1175.JPG DSCN1176.JPG DSCN1177.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 9 of 11 DSCN1178.JPG DSCN1179.JPG DSCN1180.JPG DSCN1181.JPG DSCN1182.JPG DSCN1183.JPG DSCN1184.JPG DSCN1185.JPG DSCN1186.JPG DSCN1187.JPG DSCN1188.JPG DSCN1189.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 10 of 11 DSCN1190.JPG DSCN1191.JPG DSCN1192.JPG DSCN1193.JPG DSCN1194.JPG DSCN1195.JPG DSCN1196.JPG DSCN1197.JPG DSCN1198.JPG DSCN1199.JPG DSCN1200.JPG DSCN1201.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 7 - 6040 Shingle Creek Parkway Photos Page 11 of 11 DSCN1202.JPG DSCN1203.JPG DSCN1204.JPG DSCN1205.JPG DSCN1206.JPG DSCN1207.JPG DSCN1208.JPG DSCN1209.JPG DSCN1210.JPG DSCN1211.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 8 5801 John Martin Drive Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Building Type: Movie Theater with Painted Concrete Block / Steel Joists Location:MINNEAPOLIS, MN Story Count:2 Story Height (L.F.):20 Floor Area (S.F.):36000 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:Yes Data Release:Year 2015 Cost Per Square Foot:$109.64 Building Cost:$3,947,000 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 5.00% $4.99 $179,400 A1010 Standard Foundations $0.72 $25,800 A1030 Slab on Grade $2.78 $100,000 A2010 Basement Excavation $0.17 $6,200 A2020 Basement Walls $1.32 $47,400 25.91% $25.83 $929,700 B1010 Floor Construction $0.75 $26,900 B1020 Roof Construction $5.42 $195,000 B2010 Exterior Walls $7.28 $262,000 B2020 Exterior Windows $7.71 $277,500 Roof, steel joists, joist girder, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns/bearing wall, 60'x50' bay, 40 PSF superimposed load, 71" deep, 65 PSF total load Roof, steel joists, joist girder, 1.5" 22 ga metal deck, on columns/bearing wall, 60'x50' bay, 40 PSF superimposed load, 71" deep, 65 PSF total load, add for column Concrete block (CMU) wall, regular weight, 75% solid, 8 x 8 x 16, 4500 PSI, reinforced, vertical #5@32", grouted Aluminum flush tube frame, for 1/4"glass, 1-3/4"x4", 5'x20' opening, three intermediate horizontals Glazing panel, insulating, 1" thick units, 2 lites, 1/4" float glass, clear Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 50K, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 3' - 0" square x 12" deep Slab on grade, 4" thick, non industrial, reinforced Excavate and fill, 10,000 SF, 4' deep, sand gravel, or common earth, on site storage Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick B Shell Floor, concrete, slab form, open web bar joist @ 2' OC, on bearing wall, 25' span, 22.5" deep, 100 PSF superimposed load, 145 PSF Estimate Name: Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. A Substructure Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 11.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 1 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 8 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost B2030 Exterior Doors $1.31 $47,300 B3010 Roof Coverings $3.36 $121,000 26.70% $26.61 $958,200 C1010 Partitions $4.12 $148,500 C1020 Interior Doors $1.65 $59,500 C1030 Fittings $0.21 $7,700 C2010 Stair Construction $2.88 $103,500 C3010 Wall Finishes $3.51 $126,500 C3020 Floor Finishes $6.81 $245,000 C3030 Ceiling Finishes $7.43 $267,500 34.74% $34.64 $1,246,600 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures $9.83 $354,000 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution $0.15 $5,300 D2040 Rain Water Drainage $0.43 $15,400 D3050 Terminal & Package Units $10.18 $366,500 Roof drain, DWV PVC, 5" diam, 10' high Roof drain, DWV PVC, 5" diam, for each additional foot add Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, schools and colleges, 10,000 SF, 38.33 ton Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung Lavatory w/trim, vanity top, PE on CI, 19" x 16" oval Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 22" x 18" Water cooler, electric, wall hung, dual height, 14.3 GPH Gas fired water heater, residential, 100< F rise, 30 gal tank, 32 GPH Painting, masonry or concrete, latex, brushwork, primer & 2 coats Carpet, tufted, nylon, roll goods, 12' wide, 36 oz Carpet, padding, add to above, 2.7 density Tile, ceramic natural clay Acoustic ceilings, 3/4"mineral fiber, 12" x 12" tile, concealed 2" bar & channel grid, suspended support D Services Concrete block (CMU) partition, light weight, hollow, 6" thick, no finish Door, single leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, flush, 3'-0" x 7'-0" x 1-3/8" Toilet partitions, cubicles, ceiling hung, stainless steel Directory boards, outdoor, 36" x 36" Stairs, steel, cement filled metal pan & picket rail, 20 risers, with landing 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'-0" x 7'-0" opening Roofing, asphalt flood coat, gravel, base sheet, 3 plies 15# asphalt felt, mopped Insulation, rigid, roof deck, composite with 2" EPS, 1" perlite Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick C Interiors Door, aluminum & glass, with transom, narrow stile, double door, hardware, 6'-0" x 10'-0" opening Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 2 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 8 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost D4010 Sprinklers $4.24 $152,500 D4020 Standpipes $0.85 $30,500 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution $0.59 $21,100 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring $6.57 $236,500 D5030 Communications and Security $1.64 $59,000 D5090 Other Electrical Systems $0.16 $5,800 7.65% $7.63 $274,500 E1020 Institutional Equipment $3.06 $110,000 E1090 Other Equipment $0.00 $0 E2010 Fixed Furnishings $4.57 $164,500 Architectural equipment, movie equipment seating, painted steel, upholstered, economy Generator sets, w/battery, charger, muffler and transfer switch, gas/gasoline operated, 3 phase, 4 wire, 277/480 V, 7.5 kW E Equipment & Furnishings Architectural equipment, movie equipment film transport, including platters & autownd, econ Architectural equipment, movie equipment lamphouses, including rectifiers, xenon, 1000W Architectural equipment, movie equipment, projector mechanisms, 35 mm, economy Architectural equipment, movie equipment projection screens, rigid in wall, acrylic, 1/4" thick Central air conditioning power, 3 watts Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 0.8 watt per SF, 20 FC, 5 fixtures @32 watt per 1000 SF Daylight dimming control system, 10 fixtures per 1000 SF Communication and alarm systems, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire, sound systems, 12 outlets Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 25 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire Fire alarm command center, addressable with voice, excl. wire & conduit Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, additional floors Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 400 A Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 400 A Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 1 phase, 400 A Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 2.5 per 1000 SF, .3 watts per SF Miscellaneous power, to .5 watts Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, light hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 SF Wet pipe sprinkler systems, steel, light hazard, each additional floor, 2000 SF Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 4" diam pipe, 1 floor Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 3 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 8 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 0% $0.00 $0 0% $0.00 $0 100% $99.70 $3,588,400 10.00% $9.97 $358,840 0.00% $0.00 $0 0.00% $0.00 $0 $109.64 $3,947,000 User Fees Total Building Cost F Special Construction G Building Sitework SubTotal Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 150010 Page 4 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Map G Building 8 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Renovate restrooms for accessibility 2.92$ SF 800 2,336.00$ Structural Elements Exiting Flooring Replace flooring for egress compliance 2.77$ SF 10,000 27,700.00$ Fire Protection Exterior Construction Tuck point all CMU mortar joints replace damaged block 8.00$ SF 20,000 160,000.00$ Roof Construction Replace roof that has failed. Remove old roof 0.90$ SF 36,000 32,400.00$ Replace with new BUR 7.47$ SF 36,000 268,920.00$ Mechanical- Electrical Mechanical ventilation Remove and reinstall new compliant HVAC system 7.83$ SF 36,000 281,880.00$ Total Code Improvements 773,236.00$ Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Page 1 of 1 Code Deficiency Cost Report Map G Building 8 Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 1 of 12 DSCN2362.JPG DSCN2363.JPG DSCN2364.JPG DSCN2365.JPG DSCN2366.JPG DSCN2367.JPG DSCN2368.JPG DSCN2369.JPG DSCN2370.JPG DSCN2371.JPG DSCN2372.JPG DSCN2373.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 2 of 12 DSCN2374.JPG DSCN2375.JPG DSCN2376.JPG DSCN2377.JPG DSCN2378.JPG DSCN2379.JPG DSCN2380.JPG DSCN2381.JPG DSCN2382.JPG DSCN2383.JPG DSCN2384.JPG DSCN2385.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 3 of 12 DSCN2386.JPG DSCN2387.JPG DSCN2388.JPG DSCN2389.JPG DSCN2390.JPG DSCN2391.JPG DSCN2392.JPG DSCN2393.JPG DSCN2394.JPG DSCN2395.JPG DSCN2396.JPG DSCN2397.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 4 of 12 DSCN2398.JPG DSCN2399.JPG DSCN2400.JPG DSCN2401.JPG DSCN2402.JPG DSCN2403.JPG DSCN2404.JPG DSCN2405.JPG DSCN2406.JPG DSCN2407.JPG DSCN2408.JPG DSCN2409.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 5 of 12 DSCN2410.JPG DSCN2411.JPG DSCN2412.JPG DSCN2413.JPG DSCN2414.JPG DSCN2415.JPG DSCN2416.JPG DSCN2417.JPG DSCN2418.JPG DSCN2419.JPG DSCN2420.JPG DSCN2421.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 6 of 12 DSCN2422.JPG DSCN2423.JPG DSCN2424.JPG DSCN2425.JPG DSCN2426.JPG DSCN2427.JPG DSCN2428.JPG DSCN2429.JPG DSCN2430.JPG DSCN2431.JPG DSCN2432.JPG DSCN2433.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 7 of 12 DSCN2434.JPG DSCN2435.JPG DSCN2436.JPG DSCN2437.JPG DSCN2438.JPG DSCN2439.JPG DSCN2440.JPG DSCN2441.JPG DSCN2442.JPG DSCN2443.JPG DSCN2444.JPG DSCN2445.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 8 of 12 DSCN2446.JPG DSCN2447.JPG DSCN2448.JPG DSCN2449.JPG DSCN2450.JPG DSCN2451.JPG DSCN2452.JPG DSCN2453.JPG DSCN2454.JPG DSCN2455.JPG DSCN2456.JPG DSCN2457.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 9 of 12 DSCN2458.JPG DSCN2459.JPG DSCN2460.JPG DSCN2461.JPG DSCN2462.JPG DSCN2463.JPG DSCN2464.JPG DSCN2465.JPG DSCN2466.JPG DSCN2467.JPG DSCN2468.JPG DSCN2469.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 10 of 12 DSCN2470.JPG DSCN2471.JPG DSCN2472.JPG DSCN2473.JPG DSCN2474.JPG DSCN2475.JPG DSCN2476.JPG DSCN2477.JPG DSCN2478.JPG DSCN2479.JPG DSCN2480.JPG DSCN2481.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 11 of 12 DSCN2482.JPG DSCN2483.JPG DSCN2484.JPG DSCN2485.JPG DSCN2486.JPG DSCN2487.JPG DSCN2488.JPG DSCN2489.JPG DSCN2490.JPG DSCN2491.JPG DSCN2492.JPG DSCN2493.JPG Brookdale Square Mall Redevelopment TIF District Map G, Building 8 - 5801 John Martin Drive Photos Page 12 of 12 DSCN2494.JPG DSCN2495.JPG DSCN2496.JPG DSCN2497.JPG DSCN2498.JPG DSCN2499.JPG DSCN2500.JPG