Plan Commission recommends creation of TID 10 to support Orchard View redevelopment

The Franklin Plan Commission voted on Feb. 19 to recommend that the Common Council establish Tax Incremental District No. 10 (TID 10) and approve its project plan, advancing a proposal intended to fund cleanup and redevelopment of about 30 acres near S. 76th Street and W. Rawson Avenue known as the Orchard View/Century Mall area.

The project sponsor, Land by Label, proposes roughly 292 residential units with a small amount of commercial space. Consultants from Ehlers and SB Friedman described the mechanics and financial case for the district: Ehlers’ Arianna Schmidt explained that tax increment financing (TIF) freezes current parcel values at creation and captures only later incremental value for reinvestment in the district; SB Friedman’s Joe Krivicki said the firm’s gap analysis shows the project would achieve a below‑market leveraged internal rate of return without assistance and concluded, "this project would not proceed, but for, the public assistance as requested."

Why it matters: under the plan presented, 90% of the tax increment generated by the primary redevelopment (the developer’s project) would be returned to the developer as a development incentive, capped at $15,000,000 and paid on a pay‑as‑you‑go basis. The consultants estimated roughly $42 million of added value from the proposed development and projected about $17 million in total tax increment over the district’s life under current assumptions; the district would have a maximum legal life of 27 years as a blighted TID.

What residents said: more than a dozen members of the public spoke during a lengthy hearing. Residents raised concerns that TIFs are being used to subsidize projects where the developer paid high land prices, that the redevelopment is too residential, and that diverting increment for up to 27 years could strain city services and school funding. Andrew Pelkey, who opposed the request, argued it was “a bad value” for taxpayers and urged the city to consider acquiring and developing public space by competitive bid instead. Several speakers pressed the panel on whether the site truly met statutory ‘‘blighted’’ criteria; the developer and consultants said the blight determination is based on current site conditions (aging building systems, historic unregulated fill and unstable soils) and that statutory guidance allows local judgment on those conditions.

Developer response and safeguards: developer Ian Martin told the commission the shopping center has struggled for a decade, described excavation and soil remediation work already performed (including roughly $200,000 in removals and additional deep foundation work anticipated) and said the purchase price under the current contract is $5 million. Martin noted previously negotiated development agreements that obligate certain commercial deliverables and provide remedies (including a city repurchase clause) if commercial commitments are not met. Consultants and the developer emphasized the pay‑as‑you‑go nature of the incentive: no tax increment is paid unless the development is built and generates increment.

Commission action and next steps: after discussion and a brief procedural re‑vote to clarify an abstention, the commission recorded a final result of 4 ayes, 1 abstention and two members absent and voted to recommend the TID creation and project plan. The recommendation will proceed to the Common Council, which is scheduled to consider creation on March 17; if Council approves, the joint review board will reconvene to formally consider the but‑for finding.

The commission packet and supplemental materials (including the consultant reports and a city‑attorney project‑plan opinion provided at the meeting) were placed on the public record for follow‑up. The council’s March 17 meeting is the next procedural step for the district’s creation.