7235 France Avenue, Macy’s Site Subdivide/Re-Plat

I am ok with the project, however I feel the project should be able to stand on its own feet without tif. I do not feel that will ever be the case. I am mostly against the tunnel under France way to expensive for the city to handle by themselves. Maybe we get the developers to help out more with the tunnel as well. I realize they also paying ino the park dedication fee fund.

There needs to be a plan for the tunnel or bridge over France Avenue. Construction continues on 7200 France across the road but it is hard to see how or where the proposed crossing will fit with the progress of that project so far. This seems like a backward way to proceed - both projects do not have anything explicit about an adjacent France crossing in their plans yet significant alterations to the landscape will likely need to be made. France Ave. is a county highway - does Edina have Hennepin County's blessing on whatever is to be built?

To the Planning Commission:

The proposal for the subdivision of the property by Enclave should not approved because basic prerequisites have not been met. Since this is a TIF project and extensive public money is involved, Edina does not get to make up its own rules. At present, the proposal appears to ignore both county regulations and federal ADA laws for the following reasons.

1. Has the city submitted the proposed plat/subdivision to the county engineer?

Per Hennepin County and state regulations…
“Cities are required to submit plats for projects that abut county roads for county review and comment. Minnesota State Statutes MS 505.021, 505.03 and 462.358 make these stipulations and specify what items of information must be submitted and what time schedules apply.’’
and
“…plats must be submitted to the county engineer for review within five days of receipt by the city for written comments and findings. The county engineer has 30 days to provide written comments on the plat. The city may not take final action on the preliminary plat until comments have been received or 30 days have elapsed.”
Documentation from the county was missing from the packet.
That documentation is necessary before this plan proceeds any further.

2. Who, exactly, has been consulted on the ADA route and tunnel proposal?
Does it meet DOJ standards, since it appears to run through private spaces and shows multiple impediments to free movement?
Where is the documentation for that?
Edina already has had one costly failure with the non-compliant Grandview Bridge.
Proper vetting and communication appear to be lacking in this presentation as well.

3. Hard as it is to believe, the plans also violate multiple clauses of the city’s own code as well as LMC recommendations:
Section 32-72 states:
“All public ways are shown and labeled on the plat’’
At present, they are not.
Where is the east-west promenade?
Section 32-131, clauses (1), (3), (4), pertain to equity, public safety and compliance with State law.
The current plan does not meet the city’s own criteria for equitable access.

Additionally, the LMC guidelines for subdivisions state:
Developers who seek to subdivide larger tracts of land into smaller parcels
for development and/or sale must follow the city’s subdivision ordinance.
Subdivision regulations specify the standards of the city related to size,
location, grading, and improvement of: lots, structures and public areas, trails, walkways and parks.

Until the required documentation and vetting are complete, this subdivision should not be approved.

My name is Addison Scufsa. I live at 6800 York Ave S in apartment 122. I think most things looks good and can appreciate something being done here. I have a few comments on what I saw in the submittal. One, I would prefer to minimize the diversion of the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail during construction. Two, how would this development work with increased pedestrian access across France Ave? The current crossing is subpar and the Regional Trail suffers from not having a tunnel or elevated crossing over France. Three, can we encourage additional vegetation or trees along the Promenade trail to the East of the parcel? Lastly, has Edina considered the long term effects of splitting a larger parcel along France for what could be a larger development? Not saying I am opposed to the split, but that is one of the larger parcels along York or France that is underdeveloped.

Hello, my name is David Chall. I live at 7220 York Avenue South in apartment 426, in Edina. I am calling about the 7235 France Avenue project. I don't have any disputes on the development being proposed right now, but I have a comment on the lights in the parking lot. They have gotten dimmed since Dayton’s has moved out of that building and makes it a very dark quarter on the promenade for anyone in the evening, and there's lots of people parking and possible transactions going on in the parking lot all night long. And I think that those lights should be restored until the developer figures out what they're going to do with the property, which seems to be dragging on now for a much longer extended time than originally planned. That's all I have for this. Thank you. Bye bye. (Voicemail received 10/22/25 at 8:09 AM. Transcribed by City Staff)

The site plan diagram is unreadable. Does the diagram have room for the proposed tunnel under France Ave including the ADA ramp coming out of the tunnel?