Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-07-2024 JDA Agenda Packet Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project JDA MEETING AGENDA Monday, October 7, 2024, 5:30 p.m. at Arden Hills City Hall 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes 4. Public Input 5. Consent Agenda 6. Old Business 7. Public Hearings 8. New Business a. Update on Communications b. Green Energy Presentation c. Update on Development Agreement Discussions d. Review Road Map 9. Administrative Director’s Report 10. Development Director’s Report 11. Commissioner Updates 12. Adjournment Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project AGENDA ITEM 2 MEMORANDUM DATE: October 7, 2024 TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners FROM: Directors Collins and Jagoe SUBJECT: Approval of Agenda The agenda for the October 7, 2024, JDA Meeting must be approved. Action Requested: Approve the agenda for October 7, 2024. Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project AGENDA ITEM 3 MEMORANDUM DATE: October 7, 2024 TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners FROM: Directors Collins and Jagoe SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes The meeting minutes from the August 5 JDA Meeting and September 10 JDA Special Work Session must be approved. Attachment: 8/5/24 JDA Minutes 9/10/24 JDA Minutes Action Requested: Approve the meeting minutes from August 5 and September 10, 2024. Joint Development Authority Monday, August 5, 2024 Arden Hills City Council Chambers Minutes 5:30 pm Roll Call Joint Development Authority: Acting Chair Nicole Frethem, Commissioner Victoria Reinhardt, Commissioner Tom Fabel, Commissioner Tena Monson Chair Jon Wicklund was absent. Also present: Jessica Jagoe (Arden Hills); Ella Mitchell (Ramsey County), Rachel Tierney (Kennedy & Graven) Roll call taken. Approval of Agenda Motion by Commissioner Fabel seconded by Commissioner Reinhardt to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried. Approval of Minutes Motion by Commissioner Frethem seconded by Commissioner Reinhardt to approve the April 1, 2024 JDA meeting minutes as presented. Motion carried. Motion by Commissioner Monson seconded by Commissioner Fabel to approve the July 23, 2024 JDA Special Worksession meeting minutes as presented. Motion carried. Public Input None. Consent Agenda None. Old Business None. New Business a. Update on Communications Ms. Mitchell stated in May, Goff Public worked with Ramsey County to prepare a reactive media statement on the conclusion of the 2024 legislative session and lack of infrastructure bonding bill. Given other developments in the final days of session, Rice Creek Commons was not widely mentioned in related media coverage. Finance & Commerce published an article on June 20 with updates on the infrastructure RFP process, energy and sustainability conversations, and Outlot A titled Ramsey County plans for Rice Creek Commons infrastructure work. Goff Public worked with Ramsey County to prepare a statement on the infrastructure RFP timeline, which was attributed to Larina Vosika DeWalt of Ramsey County. Ms. Mitchell explained Goff Public also worked with Ramsey County to prepare and distribute a summer Rice Creek Commons newsletter. The newsletter was sent to 4,639 subscribers on Monday, July 15. Topics included green energy goals, Outlot A, Kimley-Horn’s selection as lead infrastructure engineering partner, main parcel development, and the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) update process. Based on click data, the most popular topic was Outlot A followed by the green energy goals and Ramsey County’s Climate Equity Action Plan. The newsletter had a 4% click rate (about twice the industry average) and a 34% open rate (in line with the industry average). Since the last communications update, there was one inquiry through the Rice Creek Commons microsite contact portal, which County staff responded to. b. Recommendation from Energy Advisory Committee on Sustainability Certification Commissioner Monson stated the Energy Advisory Committee has worked with consultants Ever-Green Energy and LHB to make a recommendation to the JDA on how to implement the Rice Creek Commons Energy Vision. She commented further on the process for developing this recommendation for pursuing sustainability certification for the site. Ms. Mitchell reviewed the timeline and previous meetings from the Energy Advisory Committee. He explained the goal for Rice Creek Commons was to be walkable and sustainable within itself, achieves ambitious goals without pricing itself out of the market, is a model for communities across the United States, inspires others, demonstrates trying to go as far as possible and is financially viable for both the City and County. Rick Carter, LHB, provided the JDA with a presentation that addressed the Energy Advisory Committee’s energy vision, pathways in support of the energy vision, considerations that would have to be made, along with highlighting recommendations and next steps. He explained the Energy Advisory Committee recommended the JDA pursue LEED for Communities certification for Rice Creek Commons, noting this would be a great marketing tool for this development. He commented on the timelines and fees that would be involved in getting LEED pre-certification. He describes how the Sustainable Design Guidelines would complement LEED for Communities. Commissioner Monson discussed how the Heights development would be a good resource for the JDA. Ms. Mitchell further reviewed the considerations the JDA should keep in mind when determining a recommendation, which included accountability and verification, ambition, flexibility, promotional benefits, staff time and cost. Commissioner Fabel asked what LEED stood for. Mr. Carter reported this stood for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. Commissioner Reinhardt commented on how this development would be around for generations and stated the City and County could not put a dollar amount on how important it was to be LEED certified. She indicated there was a value to that and this certification would push the JDA to be accountable. She requested further information on how the development scored. Ms. Mitchell reviewed the preliminary LEED for Communities Scorecard with the JDA. She explained the scorecard would be refined throughout the pre-certification process. Commissioner Monson stated she believed what the JDA was trying to do with this development was very unique. She was of the opinion the LEED for Communities certification was necessary and would give the development great visibility. She discussed how the guidance categories would push the development and would provide accountability. Acting Chair Frethem asked if the developer has been involved in this process or energy discussions. She inquired if there would be an impact on the development costs. Mr. Carter stated he has had conversations with Alatus about the use of design guidelines and certifications for individual buildings as well as community wide. He explained there was a lot of variability with the LEED for Communities. He did not see this as a big hurdle for the developer. Commissioner Fabel questioned how the developer has reacted to the meetings where LEED for Communities has been discussed. Mr. Carter reported the developer did not seem concerned. He was of the opinion the certification would be a positive for the overall development. Ms. Mitchell explained she met with both Alatus and Ryan Companies to discuss LEED for Communities. She indicated this would be a new experience for both developers. Commissioner Reinhardt noted with Ryan Companies, one of the criteria within the RDI addressed energy, which was a recommendation from the Energy Advisory Committee. Commissioner Monson understood the developers biggest concern within the development was the single family homes. Commissioner Fabel questioned who would be the third party verifier for the scorecard. Mr. Carter reported the US Green Building Council and GBCI created LEED and LEED for Communities. He explained these organizations created the guidelines. Acting Chair Frethem thanked Mr. Carter for his presentation and all of the detailed information on LEED for Communities. She stated she was excited about this possibility for the development, along with the goals that had been laid out. She explained she appreciated the transparency and objectivity within the design goals because these could be communicated clearly to others. She looked forward to reviewing the third party measures that would be in place to quantify the goals for this development. Mr. Carter commented on how the LEED for Communities goals have benefited the Heights development in St. Paul, Minnesota. Motion by Commissioner Monson seconded by Commissioner Reinhardt to direct staff to pursue LEED for Communities certification, with a goal of achieving Gold or Platinum, in addition to sustainable design guidelines for the Rice Creek Commons. Motion carried. Commissioner Reinhardt thanked Commissioner Monson for all of her efforts on the Energy Advisory Committee. Ms. Mitchell reviewed the next steps for this project and reported additional information would be brought back to the JDA in the future. c. Review JDA 6-Month Expense Report Ms. Mitchell reviewed the JDA 6-month expense report in detail with the Commissioners. She explained finances were on track and within budget at this time. Commissioner Monson supported the JDA having a government relations lobbyist to assist with pursuing State bonding stating this would be would be essential going forward. Acting Chair Frethem agreed this this recommendation and she was interested in seeing how this would impact the JDA budget. d. Update on Development Agreement Discussions Ms. Mitchell provided an update on the Development Agreement discussions. She explained Ehlers received a proposal from Alatus for both the City and the County last Wednesday. She reported the City and County had a meeting with Alatus last Thursday and initial questions are addressed. She stated more analysis has to happen but the initial reactions were that the City and County were happy to have seen a proposal and this was something Ehlers believed could be workable. She indicated this would be the beginning of discussions and stated a financial, legal and engineering review of the plans has begun in order to better understand how the horizontal development work. Commissioner Reinhardt stated she appreciated the fact that Alatus had brought a proposal forward and that this project was moving forward and not stagnant. She looked forward to receiving a recommendation from staff after their review of the proposal. Commissioner Monson asked if the JDA would be further discussion the proposal in September. Ms. Mitchell explained the County and City has just received the information late last week and had to better understand the engineering scope of work and how it interfaces with the finances and legal portions of the project. Commissioner Monson indicated it was her hope the City and County would be able to get things moved along in a manner where State bonding could be considered in 2025. Commissioner Reinhardt stated all parties were anxious to get this development completed. She commented on how complex this development was given the fact there were four parties involved, those being the City, County, State and Alatus. Commissioner Monson suggested the JDA discuss when community engagement would be held at their next meeting. e. Review Road Map Ms. Mitchell reviewed the road map in detail with the JDA. Administrative Director’s Report Ms. Mitchell stated she had nothing additional to report. Development Director’s Report Director Jagoe explained Kimley Horn brought forward the draft AUAR document to the City Council at their July worksession meeting. She reported the Kimley Horn received two comments on this document one from MNDOT and the other from the Met Council. She indicated the final AUAR would be presented to the City Council for adoption on August 12. Commissioner Updates Commissioner Fabel commented on the departure of long-time City Administrator David Perrault and stated Jessica Jagoe would be serving as the Interim City Administrator. He thanked City Administrator Perrault for his tremendous service to the City of Arden Hills and wished him all the best in the future. Commissioner Reinhardt thanked City Administrator Perrault for his dedicated service to the City and for working diligently to move this project forward. Commissioner Reinhardt announced the County had hired Ling Becker to serve as the new Ramsey County Manager. Commissioner Reinhardt stated Chair Martinson stepped down last Thursday and has become the next Executive Director for the Recycling and Energy Center for Ramsey and Washington Counties. She explained on Friday she became Chair and Commission Ortega became Vice Chair. The JDA requested an update on the Outlot A project. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 6:44 pm. Approved _____________________________________ _______________________ Nicole Frethem, Acting Chair Date Joint Development Authority Worksession Tuesday, September 10, 2024 Arden Hills City Council Chambers Minutes 5:30 pm Roll Call Joint Development Authority members present: Chair Jon Wicklund, Commissioner Nicole Frethem, Commissioner Tom Fabel, Commissioner Tena Monson Commissioner Victoria Reinhardt was absent Also present: Jessica Jagoe (Arden Hills); Ella Mitchell (Ramsey County), Jenny Boulton (Kennedy & Graven), Commissioner Mary Jo McGuire Roll call taken. Public Input None. Legislative Update Jennifer O’Rourke, Director of Government Relations at Ramsey County, introduced Pierre Willette, Director of Government Relations, and Rachel Sosnowchik, Lobbyist, of Goff Public to provide a recap of the 2024 legislative session and to discuss strategy for the 2025 session. Pierre Willette, Goff Public, introduced himself to the JDA noting he works on behalf Ramsey County, specifically around their bonding priorities which includes Rice Creek Commons. He was of the opinion the 2024 session as very successful even though a bonding bill was not approved. He believed Rice Creek Commons was very well positioned for consideration at the State legislature and had strong support from the authors and other delegates. He indicated the tours of the property were well attended. He discussed what has changed in the bonding world, noting there is fierce competition. He understood it would have been great to receive $25 million in bonding, but he was of the opinion the County was well positioned for consideration. He stated he appreciated the fact that the developer was active at the legislature. Commissioner Fabel asked if there was any prospect for a bonding bill in 2025. Mr. Willette stated there were discussions and he anticipated there were representatives that would want to get this done. Ms. O’Rourke commented after speaking with Senator Pappas she understood Senator Pappas was hopeful an early bonding bill would be considered in 2025. She indicated this would be her top priority in the new year. Commissioner McGuire thanked the Goff Public team for doing a great job on for Ramsey County. She explained she wanted to see this project funded in the coming year and the County had great advocacy working to achieve this. Commissioner Monson asked how Goff and County staff started to make moves in preparation for the coming year. Ms. O’Rourke reported she would be happy to include the JDA and City with updates, noting she could also provide assignments. She discussed how complicated some funding projects were, but she indicated legislators were now very aware of the Rice Creek Commons project. She anticipated Senator Marty and Representative Moller would be the chief authors of a bill for 2025. She stated she did not have a hard time getting co-authors to sign onto the bill in 2024. Commissioner Monson noted the City had spoken to a tournament facility director that was looking for land on TCAAP. She questioned if there was a way to give this project a bump or boost that would be of value. Mr. Willette stated the tournament center would be a great add and he understood cities were competing for these amenities. He stated anything the City and County can do to promote this project would be beneficial. He discussed how well the communications team worked to promote this development. Commissioner Monson asked how well received the energy vision and sustainability goals were within this development. Mr. Willette stated he believed this was really important to a lot of folks. He indicated these aspects certainly give this project a boost or a differentiator. Commissioner Frethem suggested the tournament facility not be brought up at this time because it could confuse the ask. Commissioner McGuire agreed with everything Commissioner Frethem stated. She supported all hands on deck in order to ensure others saw the value of this development. She explained she wanted to be a part of the conversations when it comes to Rice Creek Commons and suggested conversations be held with local business owners, due to the importance of the communities economic base. She commented on how this development would positively impact the economic base for Arden Hills along with the economic base for surrounding communities. Commissioner Monson stated she was looking forward to the next legislative session. Chair Wicklund thanked Ms. O’Rourke, Mr. Willette and Ms. Sosnowchik for attending this meeting and for the information they provided to the JDA. Rice Creek Commons Project Status Update Ms. Mitchell provided an update on the Development Agreement discussions, including an overview of the other agreements that must be drafted alongside the development agreement. She reported the mass grading and the financing gap has been discussed between Alatus, City, and County staff. She questioned how the JDA wanted to handle the agreements going forward. She reviewed the worksheet that had been created and discussed how the agreements being drafted were connected. Commissioner Frethem asked if the agreement connection would require the purchase and sale agreement to have language with contingencies on the other agreements. Jenny Boulton explained there was a document in process that could be approved and signed, but it would state that one of the contingencies to convey the land would be a final agreement on all of the other aspects of the deal. She reported the idea would be to transfer the land for development and this meant the finances, timeline and what the development would look like would have to be addressed before conveying the land. Commissioner Monson wanted to make it clear for the public that the County was working with Alatus on a deal. Ms. Boulton stated this was the idea and this was a step in the process that will involve all of the other aspects. Ms. Mitchell commented the financing solution was part of this and has kicked off the development of the other agreements. Commissioner Fabel commented there was hopefulness in the genuine movement that was taking place. He asked if the numbers have moved closer together for both parties. Ms. Boulton stated there was a structured document that the Ramsey County Attorney was preparing with terms that would be responsive to the LOI that was submitted by Alatus. She indicated there would be some back and forth because the numbers were still in flux. Commissioner Frethem noted the purchase and sale agreement was a legal agreement between Ramsey County and Alatus. She indicated the JDA might not get the details of this negotiation process. She was hopeful that a purchase and sale agreement would be reached by the end of the year. Commissioner McGuire thanked all who were working on this agreement. Chair Wicklund stated he would appreciate seeing this type of document at worksession and regular meetings going forward to assist the JDA with understanding the legal flow of this transaction. Commissioner Monson requested staff run through the worksheet line by line in order to assist her with better understanding the role of the City of Arden Hills. Ms. Mitchell commented further on how all of the agreements were interconnected. Ms. Boulton explained the point of showing this was to allow the JDA to see how interrelated the documents were. She noted the cooperative agreement would be the home for the City’s issues, which included parks, park dedication fees, ongoing maintenance, the use of TIF, etc. Chair Wicklund commented on how important it would be for the City Council to be communicating their concerns or issues to the attorneys so when documents are drafted the concerns of the City of Arden Hills are being considered. Commissioner Monson recommended City staff draft an agenda for a special worksession to allow the City Council to address this matter further. Commissioner Fabel asked where the restrictive covenants would come into this development. Ms. Bolton explained the vertical developers agreement would address this matter. In addition, she noted indicated the declaration of restrictive covenants was related to the conveyance of the property. Road Map Ms. Mitchell reviewed an updated Road Map outlining meetings and tasks that would be completed through the end of 2024. Commissioner Frethem believed it made sense to start creating a Road Map that moves into 2025. Commissioner Monson hoped the JDA could quickly move through what was left in order to identify the big issues to keep the ball rolling in 2025. She suggested there be more discussion surrounding the community engagement efforts regarding the energy goals for this project. She stated if funding was not available for an in person meeting that surveys be considered. Commissioner Fabel expressed concern with the fact the purchase and sale agreement was no longer on the road map. Commissioner Frethem stated the hope was to complete the purchase and sale agreement by the end of the year, but because this was between the County and Alatus it was removed from the JDA Road Map. Chair Wicklund suggested the JDA review the proposed JDA budget for 2025 on October 7, if the was to adopt a budget for 2025 on December 2. Staff noted they could bring this item to the October 7 meeting. Chair Wicklund recommended an annual report be included in Q1 in 2025 within the Road Map. He explained the regular meetings in 2025 for the JDA would be held in January, March, May, July, September, and November and worksession meetings could be held in February, April, June, August, October and December. He noted both meetings are held on the first Monday of the month at 5:30 p.m. Administrative Director’s Report Ms. Mitchell reported work and conversations continue with Alatus and Ryan Companies. She explained the Energy Advisory Committee was hoping to schedule a kickoff LEED for Communities Precertification process in the next couple of weeks. She noted LHB provided her with a first draft of potential sustainability guidelines. Development Director’s Report Director Jagoe explained the conversation with the tournament facility director was not site specific and the City was simply exploring the opportunity on behalf of the region to better understand the need. Commissioner Updates Commissioner McGuire thanked staff for all of their assistance to onboard her and get her up to speed on the status of the Rice Creek Commons development. She stated she was looking forward to being a part of discussions going forward. Chair Wicklund thanked staff for all of their efforts. He asked that for the October meeting that staff have a conversation with Goff in order to draft a recommended strategy for communication going forward. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 6:33 pm. Approved _____________________________________ _______________________ Jon Wicklund, Chair Date Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project AGENDA ITEM 4 MEMORANDUM DATE: October 7, 2024 TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners FROM: Directors Collins and Jagoe SUBJECT: Public Input The public is invited to provide input. Comments will be limited to three minutes per person. Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project AGENDA ITEM 8a MEMORANDUM DATE: October 7, 2024 TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners FROM: Allison Winters and Sara Swenson, Goff Public SUBJECT: Update on Communications Goff Public has been working with Ramsey County to develop content for a fall 2024 newsletter to be sent via email to the Rice Creek Commons subscriber list in October. The newsletter will share updates on several topics including green energy and sustainability. Goff Public has also been discussing communications opportunities with county staff to prepare for future development updates. There have been no recent media inquiries, and no media coverage has run since the July update. There have been no recent inquiries through the Rice Creek Commons microsite contact portal. Attachment: None Action Requested: None Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project AGENDA ITEM 8b MEMORANDUM DATE: October 7, 2024 TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners FROM: Michael Ahern and Ryan Johnson, Ever-Green Energy SUBJECT: Green Energy Presentation Ever-Green Energy has analyzed the Rice Creek Commons development plan to understand the energy needs of the site and options for renewable energy sources to meet those needs, in alignment with the JDA Green Energy Vision. Their presentation outlines potential thermal energy solutions for the development. Attachment: Rice Creek Commons Green Energy Presentation Action Requested: None ever-greenenergy.com Rice Creek Commons Green Energy Presentation ever-greenenergy.com Green Energy Vision Rice Creek Commons will be a vibrant and unique, climate-forward development that aligns with the goals outlined in the State of Minnesota’s Climate Action Framework: carbon neutrality, clean energy, climate resiliency, equity and innovation. Rice Creek Commons will attract investment and partnership that will create sustainable benefits for the community. GUIDING PRINCIPLES •Develop a resilient community for energy and other utilities using clean energy technologies, reducing consumption, and reusing local resources onsite. •Implement infrastructure solutions that are flexible and scalable over 50 years, including developing the site to be adaptable to future technological needs. •Deliver a model of efficient energy and water usage that minimizes Rice Creek Commons’ impact on the environment. •Create an economically competitive and attractive environment for developers and businesses to create a vibrant community with multi-modal transportation options. ever-greenenergy.com Green Energy Strategies Fulfilling the green energy vision requires both demand-and supply-side strategies Pursuing LEED for Communities •Goal of Platinum Certification Demand-side strategies: reduce energy needs/consumption •Building energy efficiency •Sustainability Design Guidelines Supply-side strategies: carbon free energy •Community district energy system for heating and cooling using the ground as a thermal energy solution •Eliminate fossil fuels •On-site electrical generation •Solar photovoltaic (PV) •Purchasing renewable electricity from Xcel •Renewable Connect •Others ever-greenenergy.com Rice Creek Commons Development Conceptual Development: •5,000,000 square feet of buildings •Phased over 4 years, starting in 2027 and ending in 2030 •5 Zones •640 buildings •Single family, townhomes, multi- family, senior, civic, retail, commercial, light industrial ever-greenenergy.com Energy Efficiency Strategies for Buildings Baseline •Meets current MN energy code •Natural gas and electricity High-Performance Buildings •All electric •High-performance envelopes, lighting, and equipment •62% reduction in energy use from baseline Energy Advisory Committee (EAC) is currently reviewing Sustainability Design Guidelines that will guide building performance standards and renewable energy requirements Annual Energy Use Estimates for RCC Buildings (Community-Wide) ever-greenenergy.com Energy Uses in Development For a code-baseline building: •Natural gas is the main source for heating •Heating and cooling makes up about three- quarters of total building energy use. For high-performance all-electric buildings •Nearly half of the energy used is for heating and cooling. 46% 54% Estimated Energy Use Breakdown for High-Performance Buildings Heating and Cooling Other ever-greenenergy.com Community District Energy System Thermal energy network providing shared source for heating and cooling buildings (does not provide electricity) Three major components: •Distribution •Tepid water loop, distributing ~55°F water year-round •Building connections •Through water source heat pumps and/or variable refrigerant flow systems (VRF) •Thermal energy solution – multiple options available •Ground water remediation system (TGRS) •Geothermal wellfields •Closed-loop ground heat exchangers •Aquifer thermal energy storage •Other Inflation Reduction Act = 40-50% reduction in costs Several scenarios modeled ever-greenenergy.com RCC Thermal Energy Solution Options Groundwater remediation system (TGRS) •13% of total site cooling load and 30% of total site heating load •Lowest cost and requires the least amount of land area •Assumes current location but can also work if relocated Closed-loop ground heat exchangers •Second lowest cost and land area Geothermal wellfield •Highest cost and land area Closed-loop ground heat exchanger Source: Darcy Solutions Geothermal well Source: Oberlin College Technology Type TGRS Closed Loop HE Geothermal Cost per Ton of Cooling $/Ton $2,420 $5,000 $15,000 Cost per MMBtu/hr of Heating $/MMBtu/hr $200,000 $830,000 $1,250,000 ever-greenenergy.com Scenario 1: Community District Energy System – All of RCC Serves the entire development Thermal energy solution: •Groundwater remediation system (TGRS) •Closed-loop ground heat exchangers Using the groundwater remediation system (TGRS) could reduce the cost for the source by more than $7 million •Does not take into account time and resources to get approval to use TGRS Capital cost premium of $46M with the TGRS and $53M without the TGRS (incorporating IRA rebate) ever-greenenergy.com Scenario 2: Community District Energy System – Town Center Town Center is 53% of total site load Thermal energy solution •Groundwater remediation system (TGRS) •25% of Town Center cooling energy, 58% of Town Center heating energy •Closed-loop ground heat exchangers Considerations •73% reduction in community district energy system capital costs from Scenario 1 •Remainder of the site would be all-electric Capital cost premium of $15M with the TGRS and $22M without the TGRS (incorporating IRA rebate) ever-greenenergy.com Scenario 3: Decentralized Electric No community district energy system – each building has its own electric heating and cooling equipment All-electric options: •On-site geothermal ground source with heat pumps or VRF •Individual wells, increased land area •Additional equipment required for redundancy •Most expensive capital cost •Air source heat pumps or variable refrigerant flow (VRF) systems •Cold weather/climate packages •Higher capacity and potentially larger equipment •Electric strip heat peaking and backup heat •100% electric resistance Two scenarios modeled •Scenario 3a: Cold climate heat pumps/VRF •Scenario 3b: 100% electric resistance ever-greenenergy.com Thermal Energy Solution GHG Reduction Xcel grid is expected to be carbon free by 2040 By RCC going all electric, emissions from heating and cooling systems reduce by >90% •Community district energy system by up to 98% Could achieve carbon free heating and cooling before 2040 with: •On-site solar PV, and/or •Renewable energy purchase through Xcel Energy or others 364,400 7,100 12,000 17,000 24,300 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 Business as Usual Scenario 1: Community Energy - All of RCC Scenario 2: Community Energy - Portion of RCC Scenario 3a: Full Site Electric (Air-Source Heat Pump) Scenario 3b: Full Site Electric (Electric Resistance) 30-Year Cumulative GHG Emissions (Metric Tons) ever-greenenergy.com Thermal Energy Solution Cost Analysis 30-Year life cycle cost analysis (2027-2057) Analysis does not include additional cost to build high-performance buildings and in-building equipment costs. •Need to engage developers to understand in-building capital costs between scenarios. Comparison is to business as usual of natural gas-fired heating equipment and electric cooling $97 $71 $84 $88 $148 $0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 $140 $160 Business as Usual - Natural Gas & Electric Scenario 1: Community Energy - All of RCC Scenario 2: Community Energy - Portion of RCC Scenario 3a: Full Site Electric (Air-Source Heat Pump) Scenario 3b: Full Site Electric (Electric Resistance) Life Cycle Operational Cost (MM$) ever-greenenergy.com Summary All electric, carbon-free heating and cooling is feasible at RCC A community district energy system would: •Allow the use of heating and cooling equipment familiar to developers, operators, and contractors •Require less in-building equipment •Share heating and cooling energy between buildings, improving efficiency •Enable higher equipment efficiencies •Eliminate cold weather equipment packages •Higher equipment costs •Increased complexity •Eliminate air source condenser units •Frees up roof space for Solar PV ever-greenenergy.com Next Steps JDA to consider adopting a policy for carbon free site Staff and consultants to coordinate with developers to incorporate in-building costs into life cycle cost analysis for scenarios EAC, Staff, and consultants to discuss Sustainability Design Guidelines with developers and finalize for JDA approval JDA to determine the preferred organizational structure and financing strategy if pursuing a community district energy system Upcoming LEED for Communities kickoff meeting with EAC Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project AGENDA ITEM 8c MEMORANDUM DATE: October 7, 2024 TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners FROM: Director Jagoe and Ella Mitchell, Ramsey County SUBJECT: Update on Development Agreement Discussions Staff will provide a verbal update on the Development Agreement discussions. Attachment: None Action Requested: None Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project AGENDA ITEM 8d MEMORANDUM DATE: October 7, 2024 TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners FROM: Ella Mitchell, Ramsey County SUBJECT: Review Road Map Staff will review scheduled JDA meetings and work sessions, including 2025 dates. Attachment: 2024-2025 JDA Road Map Action Requested: None Month Date Meeting/Action or Deadline Topics or Notes Jan 2 JDA Meeting JDA Schedule, Development Agreement Schedule, Infrastructure and Traffic Updates 2 JDA Advisory Committee Prep for February JDA 5 JDA Meeting 2023 JDA Annual Report, Development Agreement Progress Report 15 Mar 31 Term Sheet Goal: Financial Sources Identified Apr 1 JDA Meeting Development Agreement Progress Report 1 2 Energy Advisory Committee Review initial green energy analysis Jun 3 Energy Advisory Committee Discuss sustainability implementation pathways 23 JDA Work Session Development Agreement Progress Report 24 Energy Advisory Committee Decide on recommendation for sustainability certification Aug 5 JDA Meeting Development Agreement Progress Report, EAC Sustainability Certification Recommendation, JDA 6-month Expense Report 1 Deadline: Coordinate JDA Budget with City and County budget processes 10 JDA Work Session Development Agreement Progression Report, Legislative Update Potential Community Engagement Green Energy and Sustainability 7 JDA Meeting Green Energy Presentation Potential Community Engagement Spine Road Infrastructure 4 JDA Work Session 15 Deadline: Report back on City/County approval of JDA budget Dec 2 JDA Meeting Adopt 2025 JDA budget Rice Creek Commons 2024 Roadmap Oct Feb Deadline: JDA Annual Report due to City and County Deadline: Draft 2025 JDA Budget May Jul Nov Sept Month Date Meeting/Action or Deadline Topics or Notes Jan 6 JDA Meeting Organizational Items 3 JDA Work Session 2024 JDA Annual Report 15 Mar 3 JDA Meeting Apr 7 JDA Work Session 1 5 JDA Meeting Jun 2 JDA Work Session Jul 7 JDA Meeting Aug 4 JDA Work Session 1 Deadline: Coordinate JDA Budget with City and County budget processes _JDA Meeting [date to be determined] Oct 6 JDA Work Session 3 JDA Meeting 15 Deadline: Report back on City/County approval of JDA budget Dec 1 JDA Meeting Adopt 2026 JDA budget Rice Creek Commons 2025 Roadmap Feb Deadline: JDA Annual Report due to City and County Nov May Deadline: Draft 2026 JDA Budget Sept Key JDA Meeting JDA Work Session Advisory Committee Meeting Deadline Other Meeting Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project AGENDA ITEM 9 MEMORANDUM DATE: October 7, 2024 TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners FROM: Ella Mitchell, Ramsey County SUBJECT: Administrative Director’s Report A verbal update will be provided by staff. Attachments: None Action Requested: None Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project Joint Development Authority TCAAP Redevelopment Project AGENDA ITEM 10 MEMORANDUM DATE: October 7, 2024 TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners FROM: Director Jagoe SUBJECT: Development Director’s Report A verbal update will be provided by Director Jagoe. Attachments: None Action Requested: None