Edina HRA debates using Spark funds to expand parking for Starling restaurant

The Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority on May 14 discussed a staff proposal to use the city's Spark economic program to help finance a parking expansion at the Starling restaurant at 4925 Eden Avenue, a project staff said could help the business hire and retain employees but must be completed by Dec. 31 to qualify for Spark funding.

Economic development manager Bill Nuendorf told commissioners the two-acre site is part of the Mesa Green Apartments and has a 28-stall surface lot that meets code but "doesn't meet the market." He said engineering and stormwater work needed to expand parking along the westerly landscaping buffer, plus retaining-wall and grading work, bring the construction estimate to "about $750,000. That's a pretty massive expense for a parking lot." The discussion was informational; no formal funding decision was taken.

Why it matters: the Spark fund is intended for projects that create jobs and permanent site improvements. Nuendorf said a successful expansion could allow the restaurant owner to increase service and staffing, improving sales and worker retention. Commissioners noted that Spark funds must be expended this year and asked whether the proposed timing and entitlement process make the project realistic.

Staff proposed a blended financing approach. Nuendorf outlined an initial, rough structure in which the business owner would cover engineering and a portion of the cost (penciled at about $200,000), the property owner would contribute another roughly $200,000 and the HRA would provide a combination of a forgivable portion and a repayable loan from Spark funds to fill the remaining gap. Nuendorf cautioned the figures are preliminary and subject to further refinement in engineering and permitting.

Owner's experience and options: the restaurant owner, identified only in the meeting as Mr. Frederick of Jester Concepts, described multiple unsuccessful attempts to address parking pressure, including valet service that neighbors rejected and negotiations to lease nearby spaces that the owner said had stalled because landlords sought about $1,000 per stall per month. "We have tried valet. The residents did not like that," Frederick said, and he added that off-site parking proved too distant for many customers. He and his contractor told the commission they could meet the calendar if entitlement and permitting proceed quickly.

Questions and concerns: commissioners raised several issues. Some members said the project fits Spark's job-creation purpose and pointed to prior HRA Spark investments in local restaurants and accessibility improvements. Others said they were uneasy about the large sum for added pavement, potential environmental impacts, the limited hours when the restaurant would free spaces for public use, and trade-offs with other local needs such as park facilities and maintenance backlogs. Several commissioners asked staff for more detail on final costs, timeline risks, and possible environmental mitigation (trees, islands, solar canopies).

Timing and risk: staff confirmed Spark money must be paid to contractors and projects completed by Dec. 31. Nuendorf warned that if the project does not finish by the deadline "the owner is at risk" because Spark funds cannot be disbursed for work completed after the cutoff. Nuendorf said the city currently has just over $1 million available in the Spark fund and that the Mesa Green/Starling project would compete with a small number of other proposed uses for those dollars.

What happens next: commissioners provided general direction but no formal approval; staff was asked to continue refining the engineering, financing options and environmental mitigations and return with a more detailed package in a few months. The HRA emphasized that both regulatory (site-plan entitlement, permits, planning commission/city council review) and financial conditions must be met for the project to move forward.

The HRA took no vote on Spark funding at the May 14 meeting. The commission adjourned without a decision, and staff said it would return with additional analyses if the owner and property owner remain willing to commit their portions of the financing.