03-08-05 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2005
SPECIAL CONCURRENT CITY COUNCIL/
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY/
PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSESSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE
5:30 P.M.
Call to order
Roll call
1. Discussion of airport issues by Metropolitan Airports Commission
Notes:
Adjournment (not later than 6:20 p.m.)
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
.COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE
6:30 P.M.
AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
Call to order
Roll call
Open forum (15 minutes maximum)
Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for
others, Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda.
Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting,
Notes:
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of minutes of (1) Special City Council Worksession of January 17, 2005; (2)
Special Concurrent City Council/HRA/Planning Commission Worksession of February 22,
2005; and (3) Regular City Council Meeting of February 22, 2005
PRESENTATIONS
1. Presentation of Certificate of Recognition to Academy of Holy Angels Stars girls hockey
team and coach for winning the 2005 Class A girls hockey championship title
2. Recognition of Richfield City Clerk Nancy Gibbs for receiving title of Certified Municipal
Clerk by International Institute of Municipal Clerks
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
3. Council discussion
• Hats Off To Hometown Hits
- "The Perfect Show"
Notes:
AGENDA APPROVAL
4. Council approval of agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
5. Consent Calendar contains several separate items, which are acted upon by the City
Council in one motion. Once the Consent Calendar has been approved, the individual
items and recommended actions have also been approved. No further Council action is
necessary. However, any Council Member may request that an item be removed from
the Consent Calendar and placed on the regular agenda for Council discussion and
action. All items listed on the Consent Calendar are recommended for approval.
A. Consideration of approval of first reading of transitory ordinance authorizing sale of
6758 Portland Avenue and schedule public hearing and second reading for April 12,
2005 S.R. No. 46
Notes:
6. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar
Notes:
PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. Public hearing regarding resolution authorizing use of funds from Urban Hennepin
County Community Development Block Grant Program for 2005
Staff Report No. 47
Notes:
8. Public hearing and second reading of transitory ordinance providing expenditure of
funds from Special Revenue Fund for certain capital improvements
Staff Report No. 48
Notes:
RESOLUTIONS
9. Consideration of resolution supporting tax increment financing legislation for area in
Richfield included in 87dB low frequency noise contour
Staff Report No. 49
Notes:
10. Consideration of resolution approving 2005-2006 labor agreement between City of
Richfield and Richfield Police Officers and Detectives Law Enforcement Labor
Services Local 123
Staff Report No. 50
Notes:
OTHER BUSINESS
11. Consideration of contract with Herfort Norby Golf Architects in amount of $3,500 for
preliminary design and consulting services for development of new golf practice
facility at Veterans Memorial Park
Staff Report No. 51
Notes:
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
12. City Manager's report
Notes:
13. Claims and payrolls
Open forum (additional 15 minutes if more time needed after first Open Forum and by
majority vote of the City Council)
Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for
others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the
agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Cquncil must have registered prior to the
meeting.
Notes:
Adjournment
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE
IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Call to order
Roll call
Discussion regarding matters of City Council protocol and procedure
Notes:
Adjournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be
made at least 96 hours in advance to the Administrative Services Director at 612-861-9702.
AGENDA SECTION: Other Business
AGENDA ITEM # 11
REPORT # 51
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 8, 2005
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO.
REPORT PREPARED BY:
AND/oR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO #9
TIM TOPITZHOFER, RECREATION
SERVICES DIRECTOR
NAniG TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of contract in the amount of $3,500 with Herfort Norby Golf Architects for
preliminary design and consulting services relating to the development of a new golf practice
facilit at Veterans Memorial Park.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the attached contract in the amount of $3,500
with Herfort Norby Golf Architects for preliminary design and
consulting services relating to the development of a new golf practice
facility at Veterans Memorial Park.
II. BACKGROUND
At the request of City Council, a taskforce of citizens was formed on March 9, 2004, to
study the feasibility of developing a golf practice facility. Under the leadership of Russ
Susag, Chair, the Golf Practice Facility Taskforce has toured various practice facilities and
reviewed potential sites in Richfield.
0125 recycling
The Taskforce is considering Veterans Memorial Park as a potential site for a golf practice
facility based on available space and proximity to freeway access. The northwest corner
of the park is suggested because of the close proximity to existing support buildings and
parking lots.
To further determine the feasibility of this project and if Veterans Park is an appropriate
site, the services of a golf architect are required. Specifically, .the Taskforce is
recommending a consultant to assist with the preparation of a preliminary plan to develop
a practice facility such as a driving range. Given space constraints and the desire to
eliminate or minimize the use of netting, the Taskforce is most interested in a restricted-
flight facility.
The Taskforce was introduced to Kevin Norby of Herfort Norby Golf Course Architects
when touring arestricted-flight facility in St. Anthony. Mr. Norby designed the new driving
at Gross National Gold Course. Kevin is offering to prepare two preliminary concept
sketch plans indicating possible alternatives for the orientation and function of a restricted-
flight practice tee and driving range. Mr. Norby wilt also prepare an estimate of
construction costs. The fee for these services is $3,500.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• City Council approval is required for all City contracts.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• It is important to understand that the intention of the Golf Practice
Facility Taskforce at this time is to look into the development of a
restricted-flight facility at Veterans Park on a preliminary basis.
Further consideration, including marketing feasibility study and public
meetings, will follow to render a sound recommendation on this
matter.
C. FINANCIAL
• The fee for architect services is $3,500 and would be funded through
the Recreation Services operating budget under professional services.
D. LEGAL
• The City Attorney has reviewed and made applicable changes to the
attached contract.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S)
• None
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Contract with Herfort Norby Golf Course Architects
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• Russ Susag, Chair, and members of the Golf Practice Facility Taskforce.
J
Contract between the City of Richfield and Herfort Norby Golf Course Architects, LLC
February 24, 2005
~~
Agreement dated March 9, 2005 between the City of Richfield (Owner) and Herfort Norby Golf Course
Architects, LLC. (Golf Course Architect) for design and consulting services relating to the development of a
new practice facility at Veterans Park located east of Portland Avenue in Richfield, Minnesota. This proposal is
based upon a fixed fee for the scope of work defined below.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Herfort Norby Golf Course Architects, LLC. shall provide the following additional services:
1. Perform a visual site analysis of the project area and prepare a base sheet at approximately 1 "=50'
showing existing on-site and off-site elements which may impact the proposed developments. This shall
include visiting the site to become generally familiar with existing topography and vegetation, as well as
information provide by the' Owner and Owner's consultants.
2. Prepare up to two (2) preliminary concept sketch plans for discussion with the Owner. These preliminary
concept sketches are intended to indicate possible alternatives for the orientation and function of a
restricted-flight practice tee and driving range including vehicular parking and storage building.
3. Following review of the concept plans by the Owner, the Golf Course Architect shall make the requested
revisions to one of the sketch concepts and shall prepare a hand drafted site plan suitable for presentation
and further discussion with the Recreation Services Director, City Planning staff and Golf Course
Committee.
-'. In addition, the Golf Course Architect shall prepare a "ballpark" estimate of construction costs and assist
the City's feasibility consultant by providing copies and/or reductions of the site plan for use in their work.
5. This proposal shall include up to four (4)out-of--office meetings with the Owner or project consultants for
the purpose of gathering information or attaining project approval.
COST OF SERVICES
Herfort Norby Golf Course Architects, LLC. shall be compensated on a fixed fee basis. The total fee for the
above referenced scope of services shall be three thousand five hundred dollars ($3,500.00).
TERMS OF PAYMENT
Golf Course architectural services shall be provided on a fixed fee basis for the described work relating to the
design and construction of a new practice facility. Requests for payment shall be made as follows:
1. $2,500.00 upon completion of the preliminary sketch concept(s).
2. $1,000.00 upon completion of the drafted site plan.
All direct project expenses for travel, long-distance telephone, postage, shipping, printing and reproductions
shall be billed to the Owner at cost in addition to the above described fee. Mileage is billed at the rate of 40.5
cents per mile.
Payments shall be due thirty (30) days from the invoice date. Any unpaid balance, after 30 days, shall be
subject to a 1.25% (15% annually) monthly service charge.
CITY OF RICHFIELD/HERFORT NORBY CONTRACT-PAGE 2
7WNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES
.'he Owner shall
1. Provide information, surveys, reports and professional recommendations, including but not limited to,
boundary survey, topographic survey, existing irrigation system as-built drawings, soil data, existing
vegetation and wetlands data for use by the Golf Course Architect. The Golf Course Architect is entitled to
rely on the accuracy and completeness of these items. Topographic mapping shall be provided as a digital
file which is compatible with AutoCadd R14 software and scaleable to 1 "=100' with a 2' contour interval.
2. Review and approve the preliminary sketch concept plan after marking any required revisions.
3. Make all decisions required by the Golf Course Architect in a timely manner.
4. Surveying and/or staking of road right-of--ways, utilities, property lines, etc. as required for accurate design
and construction.
OPTIONAL SERVICES
Services or items not included in the above-referenced Scope of Services may be provided upon the
agreement by the Owner and Golf Course Architect. The fee for any additional services shall be determined
by the Golf Course Architect and the Owner at such time. Such services may include:
1. Full color rendering of plan for presentation or financing purposes.
2. Preparation of grading plans or construction documents.
TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this agreement upon seven (7) days written notice without cause.
Upon termination by the Golf Course Architect, the Golf Course Architect shall be entitled only to compensation
`~r those deliverables that have been delivered to Owner, plus direct project expenses incurred, according to
'~e Terms of: Payment set forth above. Upon termination by the Owner, the Golf Course Architect shall be
entitled to compensation for those deliverables that have been delivered to Owner, plus direct project
expenses incurred, according to the Terms of Payment set forth above and, as to deliverables that have not
been completed and delivered, the Golf Course Architect shall be entitled to compensation based upon the
percentage of work completed for the uncompleted deliverable.
MEDIATION
Any claim, dispute or other matter in question arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be subject to
mediation as a condition .precedent to arbitration or the institution of legal or equitable proceedings. The
parties shall share the mediator's fee and any filing fees equally. The mediation shall be held in Hennepin
County, unless another location is mutually agreed upon. Agreements reached in mediation shall be
enforceable as settlement agreements in any court having jurisdiction thereof.
Claims, disputes and other matters in question between the parties that are not resolved by mediation shall be
decided by arbitration which, unless the parties mutually agree otherwise, shall be in accordance with the
Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association currently in effect. The demand
for arbitration shall be filed in writing with the other party to this Agreement and with the American Arbitration
Association.
CITY OF RICHFIELD/HERFORT NORBY CONTRACT-PAGE 3
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
The Golf Course Architect shall have no responsibility for addressing subsurface, environmental, off-site
drainage; storm water run-off, pipe sizing, wetland mitigation, utilities design, bridges or any other related items
that may impact the Project or that the State of Minnesota requires to be performed by a registered engineer or
other licensed design professional.
If requested, the Golf Course Architect shall issue drawings and specifications prepared by others with its
Construction Documents to form a single bid set as a convenience to contractors during the bidding process.
This binding in of documents prepared by others does not imply that the Golf Course Architect has any
responsibility for the quality, adequacy or accuracy of such documents. Herfort Norby shall not be responsible
for the Owner's or the Owner's Consultant's information incorporated or bound into any of the Golf Course
Architect's drawings, specifications or other documents.
Drawings, specifications and all other documents, including those in electronic form, prepared by the Architect
and the Architect's consultants are Instruments of Professional Service for use solely with respect to this
project. All instruments of professional service prepared by Golf Course Owner, including, but not limited to,
drawings and specifications, shall be jointly owned by the Owner and the Golf Course Architect and shall not
be used (1) on other projects; (2) for additions to this Project; or (3) for completion of this Project, without
written consent from both the Golf Course Architect and the Owner.
This Agreement shall be governed by Minnesota State Law.
It is agreed that the Golf Course Architect is an independent contractor, and not an employee of the Owner and
that any persons whom the Golf Course Architect provides for services under this Agreement are employees of
the Golf Course Architect and are not employees of the Owner.
~n the performance of work under this Agreement, the Golf Course Architect agrees not to discriminate against
any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, marital status, age, color, sex, handicap,
national origin or ancestry, income level or source of income, arrest record or conviction record, less than
honorable discharge, physical appearance, sexual orientation or political beliefs.
The Golf Course Architect of record shall be Kevin Norby.
This Agreement is the entire and integrated Agreement between the Owner and the Golf Course Architect, and
supersedes all prior negotiation, statements or agreement, either written or oral. This Agreement may be
amended only by written instruments signed by both the Owner and the Golf Course Architect.
Pursuant to Minn. Stat. section 13.05, subdivision 11, the Golf Course Architect acknowledges that all of the
data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained or disseminated by the Golf Course Architect in
performing this contract is subject to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes chapter 13 and that the Golf
Course Architect must comply with the requirements of that chapter. The Golf Course Architect agrees to
promptly inform Owner of any requests made to the Golf Course Architect for access to data and to coordinate
with Owner regarding responses to such requests.
CITY OF RICHFIELD/HERFORT NORBY CONTRACT-PAGE 4
SCHEDULE
The Golf Course Architect's services shall be performed as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill
and care and the orderly progress of the work. The Architect shall submit for the Owner's approval a schedule
for the performance of the Architect's services.
Submitted by: Agreed:
Herfort Norby Golf Course Architects, LLC. City of Richfield
Eden Prairie, MN Richfield, Minnesota
By
Its
Date
By
Its
Date
AGENDA SECTION: RESOLUTION
AGENDA ITEM # 10
REPORT # SO
STAFF REPORT
r
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 8, 2005
REPORT PREPARED BY: PAM DMYTRENKO,
ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MGR
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution approving the contract with the Police Officers and Detectives
LELS Local 123 for the contract eriod Janua 1, 2005 throu h December 31, 2006.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Adopt the resolution approving the provisions of the 2005-
2006 labor agreement with the Police Officers and Detectives LELS
Local 123 bargaining unit and authorize the City Manager to execute
the agreement.
II. BACKGROUND
City staff has completed labor negotiations with the Police Officers and Detectives
LELS Local 123 (Union). The provisions of the contract agreement for 2005-2006
cover all employees in this Union. There are thirty-one employees represented in
this unit.
The tentatively approved settlement includes the following significant monetary
changes:
1. Wages
A 3% across-the-board wage increase, effective January 1, 2005.
A 3% across-the-board wage increase, effective January 1, 2006 and an additional
.5% across-the-board wage increase effective July 1, 2006.
0308PoliceContract
2. Health Insurance
A maximum $70 increase to the Employer health insurance contribution for contract
year 2005 which provides full coverage to single Employee, $605 per month for
Employee plus spouse or Employee plus child(ren) coverage, and $650 per month
for Employee plus family.
Reopener for 2006 for health insurance only.
Effective January 1, 2006, the Employer would contribute an additional $3 towards
the employee single dental insurance premium for a total monthly contribution of
$30.
3. Vacation Leave
The annual vacation leave accrual was increased by 8 hours to 184 hours per year
for employees after completion of 24 years of service, effective in 2005.
Effective January 1, 2006, the annual sell back cap will be increased 4 hours to a
total of 40 hours.
4. College Incentive
An increase to the college incentive pay of 10 cents/credit to $1.85 per quarter
college credit, effective January 1, 2006. This results in a total maximum monthly
payment of $333.
5. Clothing Allowance
An increase of $25 in the clothing allowance to $675 for 2005 and an additional $25
increase to $700 in 2006.
6. Pay for Juvenile Investigator/School Liaison Officer and Special
Investigative Unit
Effective 2005, officers assigned to the Special Investigative Unit will receive
compensation, in addition to their salary, of $175.13 per month.
The special compensation pay for both Juvenile Investigator/School Liaison Officers
and officers assigned to the Special Investigative Unit will increase by 3% to $180
per month, effective January 1, 2006. Up to a total of 4 officers would qualify for
this additional compensation.
7. Pay for Problem Oriented Policing (P.O.P.)/Crime Prevention/Detective
Trainee
Effective January 1, 2006, increase the pay rate for these positions by $15 to $90
per month. This increase would currently affect two officers.
8. Field Training Officer (F.T.O.) pay
Effective January 1, 2005, increase the FTO pay rate by 25 cents to $1.30 per hour.
This pay is only utilized when new officers are hired.
9. Longevity
The longevity provision was removed from the contract, effective January 1, 2005.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The City has met and negotiated in good faith with the Union and its
representatives and is bound under the Public Employer's Labor
Relations Act to meet and bargain over the terms and conditions of
employment.
• The 2005-2006 proposed settlement is the fourth union contract
settled for 2005 and is identical in wages and health insurance
provisions to non-union City employees, Local 49, Police Supervisors
and 911 Dispatchers. The contract provisions are also well within the
range for other comparable bargaining groups in similar metro cities.
• This contract reflects the first settlement for 2006.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• In order to allow the City's accounting personnel to modify payroll
records in a timely manner for 2005 wages and benefits, it is
recommended that the City Council act on March 8, 2005 to adopt the
attached resolution providing for contract changes, effective January
1, 2005.
C. FINANCIAL
• 3% wage increase for 2005 and 3% increase effective 1/1/2006 and
an additional .5% effective 7/1/2006.
• A maximum $70 increase in Employer monthly contribution towards
health insurance coverage.
• $25 increase in the annual clothing allowance for both years.
• $.10 increase in per quarter college credit effective 1/1/2006.
• 3% increase in compensation pay for Juvenile Investigator/School
Liaison officers and officers assigned to the Special Investigative Unit
effective 1 /1 /2006.
• $15/month increase in pay rate for P.O.P./Crime Prevention/Detective
Trainees effective 1/1/2006.
• $.05/hour increase to FTO pay effective 1/1/2005.
D. LEGAL
• If the terms of this agreement are not approved, further negotiation
and/or mediation will be necessary.
TERNATIVE
• uo not approve the terms of this agreement and prepare for further
negotiation and/or mediation.
• Defer discussion to another date.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Keso~ution.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES .EXPECTED AT MEETING
• ivone.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF RICHFIELD AND-
LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES (EELS), LOCAL 123
BARGAINING UNIT FOR THE YEARS 2005-2006
WHEREAS, the City Manager and the Richfield Police Officers .and Detectives
EELS Local 123 have reached an understanding concerning conditions of employment for
years 2005-2006; and
WHEREAS, it would be inappropriate to penalize EELS Local 123 members who
have negotiated in good faith; and
WHEREAS, the City Ordinance requires that contracts between the City and the
exclusive representative of the employees in an appropriate bargaining unit shall be
completed by Council resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve
the Labor Agreement between the City of Richfield and EELS Local 123 Bargaining Unit for
years 2005-2006, under the provisions of the Labor Agreement to be implemented,
effective January 1, 2005 and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
March, 2005.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REPORT #
~~' STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 8, 2005
RESOLUTION
49
REPORT PREPARED BY: STEVEN L. DEVICH, CITY MANAGER
TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution supporting redevelopment tax increment financing legislation for
certain low fre uenc noise im acted areas in Richfield.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution supporting H.F. 1247 and
S.F. 1419, which provides for redevelopment tax increment financing
legislation for certain low frequency noise impacted areas in
Richfield.
II. BACKGROUND
In 1996, the Minnesota Legislature and the Metropolitan Airports Commission
(MAC) decided to expand the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport with the
inclusion of a new "North-South" Runway. The City of Richfield had concerns from
the beginning of the project that the new runway, which is being constructed as
close as 1200 feet away from existing homes, will have negative affects on housing
in the immediate proximity.
In 2000, the City of Richfield and the MAC undertook a joint study of low frequency
noise (LFN) to determine the impacts of the new North-South Runway on
neighboring communities.
The study, concluded that Richfield would receive the worst impacts of the LFN and
identified three levels of impact (70dB, 78 dB and 87 dB). The 87 dB contour was
0308TI F
determined to be incompatible with residential use and the City established a policy
to remove all of the residents from the 87 dB area as funds became available.
In 2000, there were 225 single family homes and 235 apartment units in the 87 dB
area. Total cost to acquire all property was then estimated at $63 million. Since
2000, the City of Richfield (with the assistance of the State of Minnesota and the
MAC) has purchased 52 single-family homes, 5 apartment buildings (72 units) and
26 commercial properties. The revised cost to purchase the remaining 173 single-
family homes, 14 apartment buildings (163 units) and 5 commercial properties is
estimated at $44-$54 million.
The FAA has refused to formally recognize LFN as an airport impact, to establish a
program to mitigate its effects or to allow the use of Part 150 funds to mitigate LFN
impacts.
A pending agreement with Hennepin County will provide an additional $2 million to
acquire two businesses and one apartment building north of 66th Street. In
addition, the anticipated redevelopment agreement for the Cedar Point project
(Super Target and Home Depot) provides for the developer to acquire 33 of the
remaining homes in the redevelopment area. However, there still remains $33-$43
million in site assembly costs in the entire redevelopment area.
Legislation introduced last week (H.F .1247 -Representatives Larson and Thissen `
are chief authors) would provide a legislative directive identifying the area impacted
at the 87 dB level as a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District based
upon the unique impacts that it endures. It also eliminates the five-year rule for
spending proceeds for the district. A companion bill is expected to be introduced in
the Minnesota Senate (S.F. 1419 -Senators Ranum, Pogemiller, Larson and
Belanger are chief authors) the week of February 28, 2005.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The City has established a policy of acquiring residential properties in
the,87 dB area as funds become available.
• The proposed redevelopment TIF legislation would give the City of
Richfield the option of using TIF for the area impacted by LFN at the
87 dB level.
• Passage of this legislation brings the decision to use TIF to the local
level where it can be decided by the City Council.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• With the introduction of the redevelopment TIF bill for Richfield, timely
action by the City Council to indicate support is important.
• The timing of this bill with respect to the composition and general
direction of the current Legislature may be very important. This may
be the best time in recent history for potential favorable consideration
of such a bill for Richfield.
C. FINANCIAL
• The one time financial assistance that the City of Richfield has
received from a number of sources for the portion of the 87 dB area
north of 66th Street is not likely for the area south of 66th Street. This
Redevelopment TIF District proposal may be one of the only financial
tools available to the City for future acquisition of affected properties.
D. LEGAL
• There is no direct legal issue impacting this decision.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• Remain silent on support of the bill
• Defer action on this matter to a future Council meeting.
V. .ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution
• Description of TIF legislation
• Copy of Redevelopment TIF District legislation
• Map indicating area impacted by proposed legislation
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
LEGISLATION FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
WHEREAS, in 1996 the Minnesota Legislature and the Metropolitan Airport
Commission (MAC) decided to expand the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport with
the inclusion of a new "north-south" runway; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has concerns that the new runway which is being
constructed as close as 1200 feet away from existing homes will have negative affects on
housing in the immediate proximity; and
WHEREAS, in 2000 the City of Richfield and the MAC undertook a joint study of low
frequency noise (LFN) to determine the impacts of the new North/South Runway on
neighboring communities; and
WHEREAS, said study concluded that Richfield would receive the worst impacts of
the LFN and the highest level of impact, 87dB was determined to be incompatible with
residential use; and
WHEREAS, the FAA has refused to recognize LFN as an airport impact, to
establish a program to mitigate its effects or allow the use of "Part 150" funds to mitigate
LFN impacts; and
WHEREAS, 173 single family homes, 14 apartment buildings (163 units) and 5
commercial properties with a combined estimated value of $44-$54 million remain in the
87 dB area within Richfield; and
WHEREAS, City of Richfield is now seeking special legislation that would identify
this 87 dB area within Richfield as a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District to
provide the City of Richfield with a financial tool to assist the City in the redevelopment of
said area if the choose to do so.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Richfield declares its support for H.F. 1247 and S.F. 1419 establishing a Redevelopment
Tax Increment Financing District for the area in Richfield included within the 87dB LFN
noise contour and urges its passage by the Minnesota legislature.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
March, 2005.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
02/18/05 [REVISOR ] JMR/SA 05-2677
1 A bill for an act
2 relating to the city of Richfield; authorizing the
3 creation of a redevelopment tax increment financing
4 district.
5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.:
6 Section 1. [CITY OF RICHFIELD; TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
7 DISTRICT.]
8 Subdivision 1. [AUTHORIZATION.] The city of Richfield may
9 create a tax increment financin district consistin of an area
10 lying west of Trunk Highway 77 extendina• to 16th Avenue
11 between Crosstown Highway 62 and 66th Street; to 17th Avenue
12 between 66th and 69th Streets; and to 18th Avenue between 69th
13 and 72nd Streets. The city or its housin and redevelo ment
14 authority may be the authority for the purposes of Minnesota
15 Statutes, sections 469.174 to 469.179.
16 Subd. 2. [DISTRICT IS REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.] The
17 redevelopment tax increment district created pursuant to
18 subdivision 1 is deemed to be a redevelo ment district and is
19 subject to Minnesota Statutes, sections 469 174 to 469 179,
20 except that:
21 (1) expenditures for activities as defined in Minnesota
22 Statutes, section 469.1763, subdivision .l, ara ra h (b ,
23 anywhere in the district are deemed to be the costs of
24 correcting conditions that allow''the desi nation of
25 redevelopment districts pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section
Section 1 1
02/18/05 [REVISOR ] JMR/SA 05-2677
1 469.174, subdivision T0; and
2 (2) the five-year rule under Minnesota Statutes; section
3 469.1763,_subdivision 3, does not apply
4 [EFFECTIVE DATE.] Section l is effective upon local
5 approval by the city of Richfield in compliance with Minnesota
6 Statutes, section 645.021.
2
City of Richfield
Low Frequency Noise Abatement
Tax Increment Financing Legislation Proposal
Runway Location
In 1996 the Minnesota State Legislature and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC)
decided on an airport expansion plan at the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport that
included a new "north-south" runway. In order to provide the necessary land for the new
runway, the MAC had to acquire 428 housing units in the New Ford Town and Rich Acres
neighborhoods of Richfield.
The MAC acquisitions, however, only provided for the purchase of those homes and businesses
for which the real estate was needed for the new runway. The City of Richfield had concerns
that the runway, which was being constructed as close as 1,200 feet away from existing homes in
Richfield, would have negative affects on housing in the immediate proximity.
Low Frequency Noise (LFN)
In 2000, the City of Richfield and MAC undertook a joint study of low frequency noise (LFN) to
determine the impacts of the new North/South Runway on neighboring communities. This study
was done in conjunction and pursuant to the terms of a settlement of legal claims involving the
expansion of the MSP Airport and its impacts.
The study, conducted by a 3-member expert panel, concluded that Richfield would receive the
worst impacts of LFN and identified three levels of impacts (70dB, 78 dB, 87dB). The 87 dB
contour was determined to be incompatible with residential use and the City of Richfield
established a policy to remove all of the residents from that area as funding became available.
The results of the study were released in a report in August 2000. The Low Frequency Noise
Policy Committee Report was submitted to the FAA for its review and consideration in September
2000. The FAA has refused to formally recognize LFN as an airport impact, to establish a
program to mitigate its effects or to allow the use of "Part 150" funds to mitigate LFN impacts.
In 2000, there were 225 single family homes and 235 apartment units in the 87 dB area. Total
cost to acquire all property was then estimated at $63 million. Since 2000, the City of Richfield
(with the assistance of the State of Minnesota and the MAC) has purchased 52 single family
homes, 5 apartment buildings (72 units) and 26 commercial properties. The revised cost to
purchase the remaining 173 single family homes, 14 apartment buildings (163 units) and 5
commercial properties is estimated at $44 - $54 million.
Past Legislative Actions
The State Legislature has made several efforts to help Richfield mitigate the impacts of LFN:
• The 1999 Legislature created a Governor's Task Force to identify appropriate funding
sources for noise mitigation projects in impacted communities. One of the Task Force's
recommendations was to use an auto rental sales tax increase to assist cities in funding
their mitigation projects.
• During the 2001 legislative session, bill SF888 was introduced to use an auto rental sales
tax increase to create a funding pool.. Richfield would have received the first $30 million
generated because it was most affected by both overflight noise and low frequency noise,
and because it had the most definitive mitigation plan established.
• Instead of eneacting SF888, the 2000 Legislature appropriated $5 million to Richfield to use
towards noise mitigation. Richfield used these funds to acquire 26 homes and relocate their
occupants out of the 87 dB area. While the $5 million grant was greatly appreciated, it
represented only about 7% of the costs for acquiring all of the affected properties.
Other Potential Fundin
In 2002, the City of Richfield and the MAC signed an Agreement providing Richfield with $10
million in funds for purchasing properties that would be affected by capital improvement
projects being constructed by MAC and MnDOT. U.S. Congressman Martin Sabo was
instrumental in securing these funds. This money was used to purchase 21 single family homes
and 5 apartment buildings that would have been directly affected by roadway projects necessary
to accommodate airport improvements.
Richfield is continuing its efforts to identify funding sources to acquire the remaining 173 single
family homes,' 14 apartment buildings (163 units) and 5 commercial properties in the affected
area. The City anticipates the completion of two agreements within the next few months which
will provide additional funding.
The first of these agreements would have Hennepin County providing $2 million to acquire two
businesses and one apartment building north of 66th Street. The second agreement would result
in the redevelopment of a nine acre site with a retail development (including a SuperTarget and
Home Depot). As part of this agreement, the City would agree to use the Hennepin County grant
funds to purchase and clear properties in the development area and then sell the cleared land in
the area (assembled and cleared with a variety of funding sources) to the developer. The
developer would then be responsible for the acquisition of 33 homes in the development area.
The agreement plans for the City to abate the taxes on the development site to offset the
developer's cost in acquiring the remaining homes.
Remaining Financial Need
While the City views these additional means of funding property acquisitions as a positive step,
there is still much to be accomplished in the area. Assuming that the Hennepin Couny funds are
provided and that the retail development project occurs as planned, there will still be $33 to $43
million in remaining site assembly costs in the area.
The City of Richfield is seeking continued assistance from state and regional sources to address a
problem that is created by the operations of the MSP airport; which has a regional and statewide
benefit. While Richfield would gladly accept this assistance in the form of monetary.
contributions by such state and regional sources, we believe that the assistance can be provided
through policy decisions. The policy decision we are seeking is a legislative directive
identifying this area as a Tax Increment Financing district based upon the unique impacts that it
endures. This TIF policy for the area would result in new development which benefits from the
proximity to the airport. That new development, through its property taxes, would support the
costs of assembling the affected properties.
Area Impacted by Proposed Legislation
Z
o
Z o ~o
g g ~~ ~ z
L O Q Q O S J t .L.-~ L L L L L L L Q '+/r
~n d O D_ U U w ° ~ sN- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~
[0 U
8 7 db
n ~ ~ y
Z o' ~
~ O
O F- r ~ r t
O o
~
Q Q
~ ~
O =
U W
U
1000 0 1000 2000 Feet
L L Z L L L
V
~n
O
co
~
~ ~
H Q
~ ~
z W
_ U
O
O
J
m
63rd
76th Q'~
y~
77th
78th
LEGEND
Low Frequency Noise
87db zone
~~
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REPORT #
~~' STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 8, 2005
PUBLIC HEARINGS
8
48
Related to:
CITY COUNCIi, GOAL(S) No. N/A
AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO N/A
REPORT PREPARED BY:
CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing and second reading of transitory ordinance providing funding for certain capital
im rovements from the S ecial Revenue Fund.
~~ I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: ~~
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve
second reading of the transitory ordinance providing for the
expenditure of funds from the Special Revenue Fund for certain
ital improvements.
II. BACKGROUND
• At the December 14, 2004 City Council meeting, the City Council authorized
$500,000 of Special Revenue Funds for improvements to City recreation capital
improvements in 2005.
• Finally, the 2005 Capital Improvement Budget provides for expenditure for all types
of funds contained in the budget document including, municipal state aid, user fees,
federal grants and state grants, however, authorization by ordinance is not required
for expenditures other than Special Revenues.
03082005Tra nsitoryOrd
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• City Charter Section 7.12, Subd. 2 requires that Special Revenue Funds
for capital improvements must be authorized by ordinance.
This process provides for public input through a public hearing.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Under Section 3.09 of the City Charter, a transitory ordinance becomes
effective 30 days after publication of the second hearing notice. The
ordinance requirements must be completed early enough in 2005 so that
capital projects can be initiated on a timely basis, completed and funds
expended. This needs to be completed promptly so payments can be made
for projects authorized.
C. FINANCIAL
• While the total 2005 Capital Improvements Budget (CIB) includes total
budgeted expenditures of $11,520,000 the portion of CIB concerning
proposed funding from the Special Revenue fund is $500,000 as shown
below:
Park Maintenance 100,000
Ice Arena Second Sheet Loan Repayment 50,000
Ice Arena Ceiling Beams 70,000
Outdoor Pool Renovation Loan Repayment 214,000
Mini-Golf Carpet Replacement 12,000
Wood Lake Prairie Restoration 11,000
Lincoln Field & Other Ball Field Improvements 43,000
A transitory ordinance is necessary to finalize these appropriations
pursuant to City Charter.
The source of Special Revenue funds are municipal liquor profits.
D. LEGAL
• First reading of the ordinance was approved at the February 8, 2005 City
Council meeting and a notice of public hearing was published on
February 24, 2005.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• The City Council could postpone the second reading of the transitory ordinance to a
future City Council meeting.
• The City Council could decide to authorize none or only a portion of the expenditures
identified from the special revenue in the CIB.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• An ordinance providing for the expenditure of money from the Special Revenue
Fund for certain capital improvements.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
None.
BILL NO.
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM
THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1: It is found and determined to be necessary and expedient for the City to expend
money from the Special Revenue Fund for the making of capital improvements listed in
Section 2 hereof, for which the City would be authorized to issue general obligation bonds.
Section 2: The capital improvements and amounts of expenditures for such improvements
which are authorized to be paid from the Special Revenue Fund under Section 7.12,
Subdivision 2 of the City Charter, are as follows:
Park Maintenance 100,000
Ice Arena Second Sheet Loan Repayment 50,000
Ice Arena Ceiling Beams 70,000
Outdoor Pool Renovation Loan Repayment 214,000
Mini-Golf Course Carpet Replacement 12,000
Wood Lake Prairie Restoration 11,000
Lincoln Field & Other Ball Field Improvements 43,000
Section 3: The expenditures herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such contracts as
are authorized from time to time by Council action.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 8th day of March 2005.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearings
AGENDA ITEM # 7
REPORT # 47
J STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 8, 2005
REPORT PREPARED BY:
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
BRUCE NORDQUIST, HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing and consideration of resolution regarding the use of funds from the Community
Develo ment Block Grant allocation for 2005.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close a public hearing and by motion: Approve the
attached resolution authorizing the use of funds for the 2005 Urban
Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program and
authorizing signature of a Subrecipient Agreement with Hennepin
County and anv reauired third party agreements.
II. BACKGROUND
The City Council is scheduled to conduct a public hearing on March 8 to authorize
Richfield's use of the 2005 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) allocation
of $208,460, as proposed. As in past years, Richfield proposes the funds go toward
home rehabilitation and public service. CDBG funds come from the federal
government to Hennepin County. Hennepin County then distributes the funds to
local communities.
030805 CDBG
The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) administers home
rehabilitation loan program for low-income homeowners. Often times, because it is
a deferred loan that requires no monthly payment, homeowners on limited incomes
can make necessary repairs and improvements without an additional financial
burden. The loan is satisfied in the future when the home is sold.
Richfield supports four public service agencies through the CDBG allocation:
Household and Outside Maintenance for Elderly (H.O.M.E.), Greater Minneapolis
Day Care Association (GMDCA), Community Action for Suburban Hennepin
(CASH), and HOME Line:
• H.O.M.E. is a homemaker, maintenance and chore services program for
residents who are 60 years old or more, or who have a disability, with the goal of
keeping people in their homes longer to avoid the high costs of nursing home
care. Clients are asked to pay for services based on a sliding fee scale.
• GMDCA provides funds to help cover day care costs of lower income families
who are working, in school, or who are experiencing ashort-term emergency
need. Co-payments are determined on a sliding scale basis.
• CASH provides homebuyer workshops, individual homebuyer counseling,
foreclosure prevention services and counseling, and reverse mortgage services.
Services are available to residents of any income level, but CASH estimates that
two-thirds of the Richfield households served are below 50 percent of the
median income.
• HOME Line provides support to renters by offering free call-in or walk-in service,
providing information and advice on tenant/landlord law and on court
procedures. Staff also helps solve problems such as maintenance/repair related
issues or instances of management abuses. A Renter Education Program for
high school students is a program presenting the basics of renting for young
people soon to be entering the rental market for the first time. This program has
been successful at Richfield High School and Academy of Holy Angels.
Third party agreements with each of these agencies are prepared annually. The
Richfield Community Development Department and Richfield Community Human
Services Planning Council (RCHSPC) work collaboratively to address public service
needs. RCHSPC makes recommendations to the City Council regarding public service
funding for CDBG funds. This year's recommendation by RCHSPC is below. The
recommendation for public service funding with the prescribed county guideline of a
maximum of 15 percent would provide a total allocation of $31,260.
The chart below summarizes the recommended funding:
Project Allocation
j Total
Per Pro
ect Recommendation
1. Public Service:
a. HOME Line $ 16,565
b. GMDCA $ 10,315
c. CASH $ 2,190
d. H.O.M.E $ 2,190 $ 31,260
Rehab of Owner-Occupied Property: $177,200 $177,200
TOTAL CDBG ALLOCATION $208,460 $208,460
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• Allocation of federal CDBG funds is an annual activity.
• Hennepin County has an allocation system, which is unique in providing
an annual funding source that can be planned for. Twenty-eight years
of programming have yielded over 480 rehabilitation. loans and over 40
new homes.
• CDBG is under attack at the federal level and program elimination is
proposed. Senator Norm Coleman and others are defending the
program aggressively because it consistently makes a difference in
local communities. It has in Richfield.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• A public hearing on this matter has been scheduled for March 8, 2005.
• This year, funds are not contributed to property
acquisition/redevelopment for first time buyer housing. The high
demand for housing rehabilitation (more than 20 waiting) combined
with the funding reduction of $33,096 in CDBG from 2004 to 2005
necessitates the dropping of this project. Two homes with prior year
funding are underway in 2005 at 6805-12th Avenue (rehabilitation with
Habitat) and 6329-14th Avenue (new construction with Greater
Metropolitan Housing Corporation). Staff is seeking outside funding to
continue the New Home Program effort.
• Hennepin County allows 15 percent of available funds to go to public
service. The $31,260 available this year for public service was
distributed on a percentage basis as in the past, based on
recommendations of the Richfield Community Service Planning
Council.
C. FINANCIAL
• The total Urban Hennepin County CDBG Program allocation for
Richfield in 2005 is $33,096 less than 2004. When combined with an
$85,000 reduction in 2004, the $118,096 two year loss is beginning to
significantly reduce Richfield's ability to meet needs with this funding
source.
D. LEGAL
• Notice of public hearing was published February 24, 2005 in the Sun
Current.
~ IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) ~
• Modify the amount of funds
achieves funding guidelines.
• Fund other eligible projects,
funding.
each project in a way that still
which have not been identified by staff for
V . ATTACHMENTS ~
• Resolution
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• N/A
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING USE OF FUNDS FOR THE
2005 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE OF SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT
WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY AND ANY REQUIRED THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota through execution of a Joint Cooperation
Agreement with Hennepin County, is cooperating in the Urban Hennepin County Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield developed a proposal for the use of CDBG funds
made available to it, and held a public hearing on March 8, 2005 to obtain the views of
citizens on local- and Urban Hennepin County housing and community development needs
and priorities for the City's proposed use of $208,400 from the 2005 Urban Hennepin County
Community Development Block Grant.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Richfield, Minnesota
approves the following projects for CDBG and authorizes submittal of the proposal to
Hennepin County for review and inclusion in the 2005 Urban Hennepin County Community
Development Block Grant Program.
Project Allocation .Total
Per Project Recommendation
1. Public Service:
a. H.O.M.E. $ 16,565
b. GMDCA $ 10,315
c. CASH $ 2,190
d. HOME Line $ 2,190 $ 31,260
2. Rehab of Owner-Occupied Property: $177,200 $177,200
TOTAL CDBG ALLOCATION $208,460
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Council hereby authorize and
direct the execution of the Subrecipient Agreement with Hennepin County and any required
Third Party Agreements on behalf of the City to implement the 2005 CDBG Program.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of March,
2005.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
AGENDA ITEM # 5A
REPORT # 46
J STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MARCH 8, 2005
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO.
REPORT PREPARED BY:
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
SIGNATURE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
First reading of a Transitory Ordinance authorizing the sale of 6758 Portland Avenue to the
Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority and schedule a public hearing and second
readin for A ril 12, 2005.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Conduct a first reading of the attached Transitory
Ordinance authorizing the sale of 6758 Portland Avenue to the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority and schedule a public hearing
and second reading for April 12, 2005.
II. BACKGROUND
In 1996 the City of Richfield purchased the property from the estate of the deceased
owner. A representative of the estate contacted City Hall about the availability of
the property. At that time, the thought was that the parking lot and/or City Hall might
be expanded. Although the plans were not firm, it seemed prudent to purchase this
property from a willing seller. The purchase was accomplished for $85,000. Since
~'
AND/oR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) No
BRUCE PALMBORG, COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
030805 6738 Portland Ave
purchase it has been rented and currently the rent is $1,100 per month. A recent
appraisal by an independent fee appraiser set the value at $200,000. (The owner-
- occupant of the house immediately adjacent to the City Hall parking lot has agreed
to give the City a right of first refusal at the time they are ready to sell but the timing
of that potential transaction is not set within a schedule.)
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) is better equipped
to handle the operation and maintenance issues. If at some point a
determination is made that the home should return to private
ownership, it could be incorporated into the New Home Program to
provide an affordable housing opportunity.
• The HRA, historically, manages commercial and residential properties
for the long term.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• The sale to the HRA would provide revenue to the City's general fund.
A portion of these revenues could be used to pay for the badly needed
updating of the City's Zoning Ordinance and to help defray the cost of
updating the Comprehensive Plan which by Sate law must be
completed by mid-2007.
C. FINANCIAL
• Revenue would, be provided to the City.
D. LEGAL
• Upon completion of the first reading by the City Council, the HRA will
be presented with the proposal to purchase at their March meeting.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Delay first reading.
• Reject the sale concept.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Transitory ordinance
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• NA
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE, TRANSFEROR
OTHER DISPOSITION AND CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN CITY OWNED REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN,
STATE OF MINNESOTA at 6758 PORTLAND AVENUE
The City of Richfield Does Ordain:
Section 1.
The following described real properties located in the City of Richfield, County of
Hennepin, State of Minnesota, are hereby authorized to be sold, transferred or otherwise
disposed of and conveyed by the City as herein provided:
6758 Portland Avenue:
The north 50 feet of the south 80 feet of the east 168 feet of the northeast quarter of
the southeast quarter of Section 27, Township 28, Range 25
Section 2.
The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to take all action as is required to sell,
transfer, or otherwise dispose of and convey the real property described in the foregoing
Section 1, including, by way of illustration and not limitation, the execution of all
documents, purchase agreements, deeds of conveyance, and other instruments
connected with such sale, transfer or disposition and conveyance.
Passed this day of 2005 by the Richfield City Council.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk