Rochester EDA Meeting Approves TIF District for Lowertown Apartments - September 23, 2025
Rochester EDA Meeting Approves TIF District for Lowertown Apartments - September 23, 2025
The Rochester Economic Development Authority (EDA) met on September 23, 2025, to consider a public hearing and vote on establishing a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district for a proposed mixed-income apartment development in the Lowertown neighborhood. The meeting also included approval of the consent agenda and adjournment.
Consent Calendar
- Approved the minutes of the August 11, 2025, EDA meeting (motion by Councilmember Keene, seconded by Palmer, all in favor).
Public Comments & Testimony
- Benjamin Zastro, president of the Lower Town Neighborhood Association, expressed strong support for the project, noting it would redevelop a troubled area and bring positive externalities such as customers for local businesses and new residents near the Silver Lake pool.
- Dirk Erickson, developer with Stack Development, presented the project and answered questions.
- Mary Barnett, architect with Urban Marks Architecture, described the design focus on healthy living, variety of unit types, and amenities.
Discussion Items
- Staff presentation by Mr. Svenby: Detailed the proposed Development District No. 86 and TIF District No. 86-1 for a 133-unit apartment building (66 units restricted to 120% of area median income) and 10 townhouses. The project is a redevelopment of a blighted site. Estimated property value increase from $1.3 million to $27.4 million. TIF structure: 5% admin fee, 5% to affordable housing pool, 90% rebated to developer via pay-as-you-go note, approximately $3.9 million principal over 20 years.
- Councilmember Keene asked about the assessment ratio (70-75% of construction cost) and gave architect opportunity to speak.
- Councilmember Wall asked about public perception of TIF as a property tax increase; staff explained that existing taxes continue to be distributed, and the increment is rebated, with full tax base captured after decertification.
- Councilmember Keene expressed initial concern about the 10% subsidy for workforce housing (up to 120% AMI) but supported due to blight redevelopment and density along North Broadway.
- Councilmember Doring asked about rent difference between income-restricted (120% AMI) and market rate. Staff estimated rent at 120% AMI would be about $2,600/month (30% of income), while market rate could be $1,900-$2,800/month.
Key Outcomes
- Motion to adopt resolution establishing TIF District No. 86-1 and authorizing the development assistance agreement with Rochester Lowertown Apartments, LLC, moved by Councilmember Palmer, seconded by Keene, passed unanimously.
- The EDA meeting adjourned to return to the city council meeting.
Meeting Transcript
And moving to our uh EDA meeting, uh, I will call the meeting to order. We have no organizational business on our consent agenda. Uh we have the minutes from uh the August 11th meeting. Is there a motion to adopt the consent agenda? I'll move approval. Second, move uh by council member Keene, seconded by Councilmember Palmer. All in favor, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Uh moving on to our public hearings. We have one public hearing, which is establishing development district number 86 and tax increment financing district number 86 one and entering into a development assistant agreement with Rochester Lower Town Apartments LLC. Uh, Mr. Svenby. And again, I guess I get to bookmark the public hearings this evening. So what we have before you this evening is the establishment of a tax increment financing district and asking for the EDA council approval to enter into a development assistance agreement for the lower town project. So here's the slide before you kind of show some pictures of the the block. Um there we go. Um the slide before you show the bottom is a rendering of the potential project to be located on the site with the pictures above showing what the block used to look like before the homes were removed in 2024. The project details on the developer is Rochester Lower Town Apartments LLC, located between 8th and 9th Street Northeast, west of First Avenue Northeast. The development is a five-story 133 unit apartment building with 66 of the units restricted to individuals at below the income area media income of 120 percent. Um amenities include below grade and surface grade parking, fitness room, club rooms, and roof deck rooftop deck. Um the building on the east side along first avenue does have some walk-up units, as you can see in the rendering in the upper right hand corner. The timeline for the project would um would begin construction by June of 2026 and completed by December 30th of 2027. This is um this is a redevelopment TIFF district, so it's not a housing TIFF district. Um the city uses three house three TIFF districts. So the city typically uses one is a redevelopment district, the other one is a housing TIFF district, and the other one is the economic development district. This one is being done as a redevelopment district since the properties on the site were blighted. And last year the EDA adopted a blight study for the for the site itself. The area shown on the slide, the area in red is the approximate location of the um TIFF district boundary. That's where the apartment building would fall. And then just to the north of that red line, the developer is proposing to build 10 units of townhouses on that area. The current estimated property value within that TIFF district is about 1.3 million dollars. And um, upon completion of the project, the county assessor's office has estimated that the project will have a market value of about 24 point 27.4 million dollars. So it's important to note out that when the TIFP district is created, the taxes that the property is generating today still collected and um distributed to the school, the county, and the school, the city, the school, and the county, and then the increment that the project generates based off the project being built there, that difference is collected and um generally goes back to the developer. Um in this case, the city would collect 5% to cover administration expenses of the district. 90% would go to the developer, and 5% would go into our pool TIFF bucket that we would pool the increment over the life of the district, and that the city could use those dollars for affordable housing measures within the community. The last time the city used pooled increment through this would be for the restoration Glen project, um, which is off of Midwhead Road. This would be as a um as a TIFF note would be a pay as you go TIF note. Basically, the burdens is on the developer to pay the taxes, and basically those taxes gets rebated back to the developer, minus the current valuation that's existing there now for taxes, and then minus the 5% and 5% for admin and the 5% for the affordable housing. Um based on the development assistance agreement for the project. Um staff is proposing that the uh the amount of assistance is just about 3.9 million dollars in principle. Um it's estimated that it would take about 20 years to pay back that TIFF note. Um that is in principle, and so include principal and interest over that 20-year life of the TIFF district. Some of the projects of our benefits of the project, um, it would be a kind of a mixed income housing project where um six to six of the units would be um restricted to individuals earning at or below 120% of the AMI. Um, it advances multiple goals. Um, it's we redeveloping a bladder property. Um, is council members correctly and those pictures of what the block used to look like, a number of homes were were boarded up and with number of complaints about this properties. Um it's increasing density in the lower town neighborhood, especially along a primary transit network along um North Broadway, it's strengthening neighborhood safety, and then the tax base is growing. Um granted that the taxes would be captured during the life of the TIFS district, but once that this district is decertified, um the city is capturing all that um increase in tax base, not just for the city, but also for the county and the school district. As previously mentioned, half the or sixty six of the units would be restricted to a 120% AMI.
openpublica.com