03-01-99 agendaLCYs
•
CITY OF .RICHFIELD
MONDAY, MARCH 1, 1999
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
I. 7:00-7:15 P.M. DISCUSSION OF 1.999 CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE PROJECTS
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 5
II. 7:15- 7:45 P.M. UPDATE OF RICHFIELD'S MUNICIPAL STATE AID
ACCOUNT
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 6
III. 7:45-8:15 P.M. DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF AIRPORT RELATED
ISSUES
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 7
IV. 8:15-8:30 P.M. DISCUSSION OF CITY MANAGER RECRUITMENT
PROCESS
8:30 P.M. 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.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
• Study Session Letter No. ~
Agenda March 1, 1999
Issue Statement:
Status of airport related issues.
Background:
Recent developments regarding airport issues including the following:
Legislative Initiatives
As a-part of the agreement between the Richfield City Council and the Metropolitan
Airports Commission (MAC), Richfield is committed to develop legislation in partnership
with the MAC, Metropolitan Council, City of Minneapolis, and City of Bloomington. The
purpose of this legislation is to address the impacts that the new North/South Runway
will .have on communities surrounding the airport.
This legislation [Attachment A] is being introduced on March 1, the bill is being
sponsored in the Senate by Senators Dave Johnson (DFL-Richfield/Bloomington) and
Carol Flynn (DFL-Minneapolis) and in the House by Representatives Peg Larson (R-
Lakeland), Jim Rhodes (R-St. Louis Park), Dan Larsen (DFL-Richfield), and Tom
Workman (R-Chanhassen). The City's lobbying efforts are being coordinated by John
Choi of Kennedy-and Graven.
• This le islation would create an Airport Impact Zone within the City of Richfield that
9
would cover the area east of Bloomington Avenue to TH77, from north to south this area
would stretch from Hwy. 62 to 1-494. Within this area Richfield would be allowed to
establish six separate TIF areas.
The legislation also includes a section that will allow Minneapolis, Bloomington, and
Richfield to take the information and plan from the Low Frequency Noise Policy
Committee (LFNPC) and develop appropriate mitigation in the impacted areas
(impacted areas will be determined by the LFNPC). To receive additional funds for
these areas the cities will have to develop a mitigation plan subject to approval by the
Met Council
Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee (LFNPC)
The Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee was established under section B of the
Richfield/MAC agreement. To date they have met twice.
The. first meeting was held on February 11, 1999 at the MAC offices. At this meeting
the purpose of the group was determined to: [Attachment B]
- provide a definition of the low frequency noise impact on communities from a new
runway and create a map to show impacted areas; and
- develop options and alternatives that Richfield, Minneapolis and Bloomington can
• use to mitigate for this adverse environmental impact.
The group's second meeting was held on February 17. Expert Panel. members Andrew
Harris (MAC) and Sandy Fidell (Richfield) described the characteristics of low frequency
noise, and then discussed the work plan they expect to follow. The neutral, third
member of the Expert Panel will be Louis Sutherland who has an extensive background
in noise policy issues.
The next meeting of the LFNPC will be on March 3, 1999. At this meeting the
Metropolitan Airports Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) will be joining as a technical
advisor.
MASAC
At the February 23 meeting of MASAC two Minneapolis representatives contended that
spending $30,000 to $50,000 per ANOMS site was wasteful, since the information
gathered was not used in any way to protect communities. They expressed the
sentiment that, "What good is a bunch of data about noise if we don't do anything about
the problem." MASAC members were assured that this information would be used in
MAC's Part 150 Update. A comprehensive discussion of the Part 150 update ensued,
showing the steps involved in changing the program. A copy of this presentation wilt be
forwarded to Council at a later date.
At the conclusion of the meeting Council Member and MASAC member Kristal Stokes
questioned the process of determining members who should be involved as technical
advisors for the LFNPC. Chairman Mertensotto stated that time was running out and he
picked two representatives. Council Member Stokes stated that the MASAC
representative be designated and approved by the general membership of the
organization. It was also requested that one of the members represent community
interests. At that, the MASAC meeting was adjourned before Richfield's motion for a
vote of the LFNPC membership was acted upon. MASAC members Kristal Stokes and
Dawn Weitzel have since written a letter requesting that a vote on the representatives
take place at the regular meeting on March 30, 1999 and that MASAC receives regular
reports thereafter. '[Attachment C]
It is anticipated that MASAC Chair Charles Mertensotto will name Richfield to the
MASAC Operations Committee. This is a follow up to a January request by the City. At
a February 12 MASAC Operations Committee meeting Chairman Mertensotto
mentioned that Richfield's request for this seat was dependent upon Richfield
supporting MASAC's request to be included as a technical advisor on the LFNPC, an
action that the Richfield City Council supported.
Also, in consultation with Dr. Sanford Fidell City staff has identified two possible sites for
Richfield's new ANOMS site. [Attachment D]
77th Street Crossing at TH77
Richfield has requested that the MAC donate this land as their contribution to the TH77
and 77th .Street improvement. The MAC staff has put the proposed interchange and
garage site on the agenda for the March 9 MAC Planning and Environment Committee
meeting.
South Parallel Runway Reconstruction
Starting in April the MAC will begin reconstruction of the South Parallel Runway. This
will mean a change in flight patterns over the City with the increased usage of the 4-22
Runway. In order to inform residents of this change the MAC has mailed a letter
[Attachment E] to Richfield residents in the south-eastern portion of the City. They also
will be holding an open house for the public on Thursday, March 4 from 5 to 8 p.m. at
the MAC's general offices. -Even though the reconstruction will cause flight delays (as
presented last year) 50 new flights will be added this summer. [Attachment F]
Richfield Airport Strategy Group (RASG~
The next RASG meeting will be held on Friday, March 5. After this date, they will be
moved to the first Thursday of the month and will. be held at 3 p.m. in the Council
Chambers.
Recommended Motion:
Discuss current ..airport issues
Basis of Recommendation:
1. It is important forthe Council to provide direction to staff regarding airport concerns.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Defer discussion to another date.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This matter will be discussed at the Study Session of March 1, 1999.
Respectf y submitted,
James rosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
•
Attachment A SJB/DJK Draft
. 2/19/99
A bill for an act
relating to state and local government and the impact of expansion of the
Twin Cities International Airport: authorizing the establishment of airport
impact zones and tax increment financing districts in the cities of
Bloomington, Minneapolis and Richfield, creating an airport impact fund in
the state. treasury: and authorizing certain related activities °by the~~ Twin
Cities Metropolitan Council
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
Section 1. [FINDINGS.] The legislature fords that providing areawide and local
financial assistance for the redevelopment of property in the cities of Bloomington,
Minneapolis and Richfield adjacent to the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in
order to mitigate the impacts of airport expansion is a public purpose of state, metropolitan
and local government in Minnesota.
Sec. 2. [BLOOMINGTON, MINNEAPOLIS AND RICHFIELD: AIRPORT
IMPACT ZONES.] Subdivision 1. Each of the cities of Bloomington, Minneapolis and
Richfield may designate one or more airport impact zones within their respective
boundaries. An airport impact zone is a discrete geographic area that meets criteria for such
a zone established by the Metropolitan Council. The criteria established by the Metropolitan
Council for airport on impact zone must (i) be based upon airport impacts found by the
Council after study to be present in the airport tax increment financing district established in
the city of Richfield pursuant to section 5, and (ii) be such that any area within any of the
cities with airport impacts substantially similar to those described in clause (i) would qualify
for designation as an airport impact zone. A city or authority wishing to establish an airport
impact zone must prepare and submit to the Metropolitan Council for approval a plan
identifying the geographic boundaries of the proposed zone and the airport mitigation
measures to be undertaken in the zone.
Subd. 2. [AIRPORT IMPACT TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT.] A city named in
subdivision 1 may establish an airport impact tax increment district and project subject to
the provisions of section 5 within an approved airport impact zone- provided, however, that
(i) the boundaries of the district, (ii) the tax increment financing plan for the district and (iii)
the number of authorized phases of the district must first°be approved by the Metropolitan
Council.
Subd. 3. [RICHFIELD: SPECIAL RULE.] The city of Richfield need:not.designate ..
an airport impact zone for the airport impact district established pursuant to section 5
Subd: 4. [OBLIGATIONS: AIRPORT IMPACT DISTRICTS: BLOOMINGTON,
MINNEAPOLIS AND RICHFIELD.] Each of the cities of Bloomington, Minneapolis and
Richfield may issue and sell general obligations pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section
469.178 and chapter 475 to finance the costs of approved airport mitigation measures in an
approved. airport impact tax increment district and may pledge to the payment of principal
of, interest on, and redemption premium, if any, revenues in and to be received by the
airport impact fund established under section 3, provided that:
(a) the obligations must mature no later than 35 years from the date of issue of the
original obligations;
•
DJK-157877 2
RC125-171
(b) each city may issue no more than $30,000,000 aggregate net principal amount of
obligations (after deducting costs of issuance, discount and capitalized interest) secured by
revenues in the airport impact fund; and
- (c) any pledge of revenues from the airport impact fund to obligations issued by any
city under this act is a parity lien with the pledge of such revenues to obligations issued by
any other city under this act.
Sec. 3. [AIRPORT IMPACT FUND.] Subdivision 1 [FUND .CREATED:
SOURCES.]. There is created.:in aneatate treasury a.special-fund designated asahe airport
impact fund to be maintained by the .department of .revenue.: Into he airport impact°fund
there are to be deposited each year commencing in the fiscal year ending in 2000 and ending.. _
in the fiscal year ending-in 2035, all revenues derived-from--sales taxes imposed- and -
collected pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 297A upon sales and uses. occurring on .
property owned by the Metropolitan Airports Commission at the Twin Cities International
Airport.
Subd. 2. [USES OF FUND.] Monies in the airport impact fund may be expended
only for the following purposes:
•
DJK-157877 3
RC125-171
(a) for the payment of principal of interest on and redemption premium, if any, on
obligations issued by the city of Bloomington, the city of Minneapolis, the city of Richfield
or any of those cities, pursuant to section 2.
(b) for the payment of principal of interest on,-and redemption premium, if any, on
obligations issued by the city of Richfield pursuant to section 6. ~- ~-
(c) for the payment of the costs of approved airport mitigation measures conducted
by the city of Bloomington, the city of Minneapolis, the city of Richfield or any of them.
For purposes of this section, "approved airport mitigation measures" means those steps
taken by a city- to mitigate the .impacts of airport expansion that are included in a
Metropolitan;Council plan for airport impact mitigation: the term does not' include those
airport mitigation measures conducted in an airport impact tax increment financing district ......
created in the city of Richfield pursuant to section 5.
Subd. 3. [PAYMENTS FROM FUND.] The chief administrative officer of a city
issuing obligations or conducting approved airport mitigation measures pursuant to this act
must, prior to June 1 in each year commencing in the year 2000, certify to the commissioner
of revenue:
(a) the aggregate amount of obligations issued by the city pursuant to this act
secured in whole or in part with revenues from the airport impact fund;
•
DJK-157877 4.
RC125-171
(b) the amount of principal of and interest on the obligations described in clause (a)
payable in the ensuing calendar year;
(c) the amount of net tax increment received or to be received by the city or the
authority in the current calendar year, where the term "net tax increment" means the tax
increment attributable to the district in which the activities financed by the 'obligations
described in clause (a) are located, less the amount of principal and interest payable in the
ensuing .calendar year on .obligations issued by the city pursuant'to this act and secured in
whole or in part by tax increments from that district but not secured by revenues from the
airport impact fund.
(d) the amount by whick the required payments. of principal -and interest on the
obligations described in clause (a) exceeds the net tax increment received; and
(e) the amount of expenditures- made by the city or .the authority -for approved -
airport mitigation measures in the previous calendar year.
The commissioner must then issue a warrant to the city in the amounts certified payable to
the financial officer of the city under clauses (d) and (e), subject to the provisions of
subdivision 4. The amounts received by the city representing principal and interest on
obligations must be deposited in the debt service fund from which the obligations are
payable. The amount representing the costs of approved airport mitigation measures maybe
DJK-157877 5
RC 125-171
expended by the city or authority only in accordance with the approved airport mitigation
• plan.
Subd. 4. [PRIORITY OF PAYMENTS.] Payments from the airport impact fund
under subdivision 3 are to be made in the following order of priority:
FIRST, pro rata based upon the aggregate principal of obligations outstanding to the
cities of Bloomington, Minneapolis and Richfield for the payment of principal of, interest on
and redemption premium, if any, on obligations issued pursuant to sections 2 and 6; and
SECOND, pro rata based upon.the aggregate amount of mitigation certifications in- -
each fiscal year to the cites of Bloomington, Minneapolis and Richfield for the costs of
.approved airport mitigation measures...:.....
Subd.. 5. [TERMINATION OF FUND.] The airport impact fund terminates on the
later of
(a) the date on which all obligations issued by either the city of Bloomington, the
city of Minneapolis or the city of Richfield pursuant to Section 2 are paid or defeased; or
(b) the date on which all obligations of the city of Richfield issued pursuant to
section 6 are paid or defeased.
(c) the date on which all monies payable from the airport impact fund for approved
airport mitigation measures have been paid.
DJK-157877
RC125-171
Upon termination. of -the .fund all monies remaining in the fund are to be .deposited in the
general fund of the state and no further payments may be made into or from the fund.
Subd. 6. [TERMINATION: INACTION.] If by January 1, 2006, (i) no obligations
are issued by the cities of Bloomington, Minneapolis or Richfield, or (ii) no approved airport
mitigation measures undertaken by any of those citiespursuant to this act° the airport impact
fund is terminated, any monies in the fund are to be deposited in the state general fund and
no further payments may be made into or from the° fund. "`
Subd. 7. [INTEREST EARNINGS ON AIRPORT IMPACT FUND.] The
investment earnings of monies in -the airport impact fund are to be deposited as received in -
•
the general fund of the state..
Sec. 4. [METROPOLITAN COUNCIL PLEDGE.] The governing body of the
•
Metropolitan Council may by resolution pledge the full faith and credit and taxing power of
the Metropolitan Council to the payment of principal and interest on general obligations
issued by the city of Bloomington, the city of Minneapolis or the City of Richfield or their
respective authorities under section 469.178 and this act secured in whole or in part by tax
increment from the district. The pledge must be made in accordance with chapter 475,
provided that no election is required and net debt limitations do not apply. Taxes levied by
the Metropolitan Council by reason of the pledge (i) do not affect the amount or rate of taxes
DJK-157877
RC125-171
7
that may be levied by Council for other purposes, (ii) must be spread against all taxable
property in the metropolitan area, and (iii) are not subj ect to limitation as to rate or amount.
Sec. 5. [AUTHORIZATION: CITY OF RICHFIELD.] Subdivision 1. [AIRPORT
IMPACT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT.] The city of Richfield may
establish an airport impact tax increment financingdistrict consisting of the real property
described as follows:
[insert legal description here]
- The. city or its housing and redevelopment authoritymay bethe.-"authority" for the purposes
of Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.1.74 to 469.179:
Subd. 2. [SPECIAL RULES.] A district established: pursuant: to subdivision 1 is
deemed a redevelopment district and project and is -subject to Minnesota Statutes,
sections 469.174 to 469.179, except as otherwise provided in this subdivision.
(a) For the purposes of section 469.1763, subdivision 2, the "in-district
percentage" is 100 percent, except to the extent otherwise provided in paragraph (d) of
this subdivision. Section 469.1763, subdivision 3 does not apply to the district.
(b) The tax increment fmancing plan for the district may identify up to six
phases, each consisting of a contiguous or noncontiguous geographic area within the
DJK-157877 g
RC125-171
district. Tax increment may not be paid. to the authority from any phase after 25 years
• from date of receipt by the authority of the first tax increment from that phase.
(c) Sections 469.176, subdivision 4j and 469.177, subdivision 1a do not apply to
the district.
(d) The provisions of section 273.1399 do not apply to the district if either (i) the
authority elects the exemption under section 273.1399, subdivision 6(d); or (ii) at least 15
percent of the revenue generated from tax increment from the district in any year is
deposited in the housing replacement account of the. authority. and expended according to the.: _ _ .
tax increment financing. plan.. The authority. must identify in-the tax increment fmancing
plan the housing replacement activities to. be assisted by the: housing replacement account.
Housing replacement activities may. include rehabilitation, ,acquisition, demolition;
relocation assistance, and financing of new or existing single family or multifamily housing
that replaces housing units eliminated by redevelopment within the district. Housing
replacement activities listed in the plan need not be located with the district or project area.
(e) For the purposes of chapters 124 and 124A, the total pupil units attributable to
students whose principal residence is within the tax increment financing district in any fiscal
year is the greater of (i) the actual number of those pupil units in that fiscal year , or (ii) the
actual number of those pupil units in the fiscal year ending in 1999.
DJK-157877 9
RC 125-171
Sec. 6. [CITY OF RICHFIELD: BONDS, SECURITY.] Subdivision 1.
• [GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS.] The city of Richfield ma issue and sell its eneral
Y g
obligations pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 469.178 and chapter 475 to finance the
costs of land and structure acquisition, demolition, relocation and site clearance and
improvement within the airport impact tax increment district established pursuant to Section
5. _ __ _ _ __. _ _ ....
Subd. 2. [AIRPORT IMPACT FUND REVENUES). The city of Richfield may
pledge to the payment of obligations issued under this section the revenues to be received
and-funds in the airport impact fund, subject to the limitations set forth. in Section 2.. _
Sec. 7. [OBLIGATION DEFINED.] For purposes of this act the term "obligation"
has the. meaning given by Minnesota. Statutes,. section:475.5.1, .subdivision-3. The term
includes obligations issued to refund prior obligations issued pursuant to this act.
Section 8. [EFFECTIVE DATE]. This act is effective as to any of the cities of
Bloomington, Minneapolis and Richfield upon approval by the governing bodies of the
respective cities and compliance with Minnesota Statutes, section 645.021; and with regard
to Section 2, subdivision 2 and Section 5, upon compliance with Minnesota Statutes, section
469.1782, subdivision 2.
DJK-157877 1 0
RC125-171
Attachment B
Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee
~' Thursday,. February 11,1999
MASAC Room _
MAC General Offices
MINUTES
The Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee meeting was called..to order at 11:15 a.m. The
fogowing were in attendance:
Members: Mike Sandahl, Richfield;-. John Himle, MAC; Mark BemharcJson,
Bloomington; Jan Del Calzo, Minneapolis
Technical Support: Nacho Diaz, Metropolitan Council;. Glen .Orcutt, Federal Aviation
Administration
Expert Panel: Andrew Hams, HMMH
Others: N. Finney, T.W. Anderson, J. Unruh, R. Fuhrmann, MAC; C. Lane,
Bloomington; M. Salmen, B. Johnson, MASAC; E. Groschen, Met
;Council; S. Dibble. Minneapolis; D. Brauer, D. Weitzel, J.. Dean, ~ Richfield;.
... . B. Williams, R. V1Glliams, D. Pemberton, A~ Duffe, W. Duffee, . J. Enger,
Richfield CARE; D. Saunders, 8MAAC .. .
1. ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES ~ _ :. . ~ ~ _ , _ .
John Himle welcomed. members to the initial .:meeting of Attie Low Frequency Noise Policy
Committee (LFNPC). Following introductions, Mr. Himle and Mike .Sandahl ~ provided
background information on the agreement between the Metropolitan Airports. Commission and
the City of Richfield and the role of the LFNPC. Mr. Sandahl indicated that the role of the
LFNPC is to provide a better definition of low frequency noise impacts and where they occur
and what should be done with individual impacts. He stated that the Committee should identify
a range of mitigation measures with the individual communities determining what should be
done in their respective communities.
a. Determination of Chair
The Committee agreed that Mr. Sandahl and Mr. Himle altemate as Chair of the Committee.
b. Establish Meeting Dates and Times
The Committee agreed to meet twice a month on Wednesdays at 3:00 p.m.; the next meeting
will be held on February 17. The Committee also discussed allowing alternates to serve on the
Committee. Mr. Himle suggested that either the representative or the altemate have the
authority to make decisions on behalf of whomever they are representing if the Committee is
voting on any issue.
Mr. Sandahl also discussed a final report by the Committee indicating that it should include a
map of the impacted area and a list of alternative mitigation methods.
f
Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee
February 11, 1999
Page 2
ff
c. MASAC Participation Regues
The Committee discussed a request from MASAC regarding representation on the LFNPC. Mr.
Himle suggested that it would be more appropriate for them to serve as a technical
representative. Mr. Sandahl stated that he agrees with Mr. Himle and the intent was not to
exclude anyone from participating in this process and that MASAC should serve in the same
capacity as FAA, Met Council and MPCA.
IT WAS MOVED BY BERNHARDSON THAT MASAC BE ADDED TO THE LOW FREQUENCY
NOISE POLICY COMMITTEE AS TECHNICAL SUPPORT. DEL CALZO SECONDED THE
MOTION.
John Dean, Attorney for Richfield, addressed the Committee and stated -that any motion passed
regarding representation on the LFNPC must refer the matter back to the parties who signed the
original agreement for their approval. Mr. Sandahl suggested that these are open meetings and
there is nothing preventing MASAC from sitting at the table and participating in the meetings.
He suggested that the Committee proceed in that way until the matter can be discussed by
MAC and the City of Richfield.
Jari Del tralzo indicated agreement with Mr. Himle and: stated .that, th~ .responsibility has been ~ :-- ~~
-passed to this body to make recommendations.with a final.report{recommendation taken to the •:-+ : ~~ ..';
respective bodies for final approval. She indicated -support for MASAC .participation as ~~ ~ . ~ .
Technical Support to the Committee. ~ .- - .
Mr. Bemhardson stated that since this Committee was derived out of the_ agreement between .:
the two parties, he made the motion under the premise that both. the designated representatives
were in agreement, therefore the matter did not need to be referred back to the City or MAC. ~ ~ -
He indicated that if there is concern he would make the motion contingent on either party having .
thirty days to object.
IT WAS MOVED BY BERNHARDSON, SECONDED BY DEL CALZO, TO AMEND THE
MOTION AS FOLLOWS: ~
THAT THE LOW FREQUENCY NOISE POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMEND TO THE CITY
OF RICHFIELD AND THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION THAT MASAC BE
ADDED AS TECHNICAL SUPPORT, SIMILAR TO MET COUNCIL, FAA, AND MPCA, AND
CONSIDER FORMALIZING THIS ACTION AT A FUTURE MEETING. THE MOTION
CARRIED.
d. Expert Panel
Mr. Himle indicated that there has been some disagreement regarding the role of the Expert
Panel and requested that Andrew Hams, HMMH, provide the Committee with an update on this
issue.
Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee
February 11, 1999
Page 3
Mr. Hams. stated that there have been ongoing discussions with Mr. Fidel) regarding the role of
the Expert Panel and they are seeking clamcation regarding the role of the panel." ~He, indicated
that the agreement between MAC and Richfield is not explicit regarding the scope and nature of
the expert panel's work One interpretation of the agreement is that the scope and nature. of the
panel's work is to be .determined solely by discussions with the• expert panel arid. ahe LFNPC.
Another interpretation 'of the agreement is that the expert panel may exerase`independent
technical judgment about the scope and nature of information that it believes the' Policy
Committee should consider.
Mr. Sandahl stated that he feels that the Policy Committee is charged with scoping the project
for the expert panel and the panel could then determine how to .proceed with the project. Mr.
Himle indicated agreement that the Policy Committee define the work parameters for the expert
panel.
Mr. Dean stated that the expert panel has more expertise than the Policy Committee regarding
what issues should be looked at and Richfield is concerned that their ability to property inform
the Committee on those issues could be precluded if the expert panel does not set the agenda..
Mr. Bemhardson stated that the expert panel is providing assistance to the Policy Committee
and suggested that the Policy Committee provide the expert panel .with a broad scope and ~: -:
direction with the expert panel defining the work program and returning to the Policy Committee ~~::_ :~ ~ -~..;~:.
for approval to proceed. ~ .. .. ~ .
Mr. Himle suggested a motion clarifying the role of the Policy Committee to define the scope of
the study and requested that a proposal outlining what the expert panel feels should be defined
in the scope of work be presented at the next meeting.
Mr. Himle suggested the following process:
1. The expert panel make a proposal to the Policy Committee related to what should be
studied and how to implement the study
2. The Policy Committee would define a scope of the study
3. The expert. panel would conduct the studies, develop findings and recommendations
and,
4. Report back to the Policy Committee to consider the findings, conclusions- and
recommendations; what the Policy Committee decides in the end will be the final report
of the LFNPC.
Mr. Sandahl added the following:
5. The expert panel report back to the Policy Committee frequently
6. The expert panel give a briefing on low frequency noise at the next meeting
7. Incorporate the process that was discussed into the charge to the expert panel.
IT WAS MOVED BY BERNHARDSON, SECONDED BY SANDAHL, THAT THE POLICY
COMMITTEE DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A FORMAL CHARGE TO THE EXPERT PANEL
FOR APPROVAL AT THE NEXT MEETING. THE MOTION CARRIED.
~~
Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee
February 11, 1999 j
Page 4
Discussion followed regarding completion of work of the LFNPC within 100 days of the approval
of the Richfield-MAC agreement. ~ -
.. .....
IT WAS MOVED- BY SANDAHL, SECONDED BY BERNHARDSON, TNAT THE DEADLINE r1'(`~
FOR .COMPLETION OF THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE BE CHANGED TO 100 DAYS `" ~a,,~
FROM FEBRUARY 11, 1999, RATHER THAN FROM THE DAY ~-THE AGREEMENT WAS
SIGNED. THE MOTION CARRIED. ~ ~ :
IT WAS MOVED BY BERNHARDSON, SECONDED BY DEL CALZO, TO ADJOURN THE
MEETING. THE MOTION CARRIED. ~~
The meeting was adjourned at 12:20 p.m.
Attachment C
February 24, 1999
Mayor Charles Mertensotto
CITY MANAGER Chair
JAMES D. PROSSER .Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abate Council
6040-28th Avenue South
MAYOa Minneapolis, MN 55450
MARTIN J. KIRSCH
cmr couNCl~ Dear Mr. Mertensotto:
SUSAN ROSENBERG
suznNNE M. sAN~Alil. The Richfield City Council approved an amendment to the Richfield-MAC agreement to
KRISTAL STOKES include MASAC as a technical assistant to the Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee.
Russ susA~ However, as I reported, the Council agreed to this amendment with .some reservation.
Specific concern was expressed that the MASAC representative to the Low Frequency Noise
Policy Committee was not approved by the general MASAC representatives. It is clearly the
expectation of the Richfield City Council that the MASAC representative be designated and
approved by the general membership of this organization.
This issue has not been resolved. The MASAC meeting of February 23 was adjoumed
before our motion for a vote at the next meeting was acted upon. Instead, after the meeting
was adjoumed, you suggested that this request be made in writing. This letter is in response
to your suggestion. In addition, we are also requesting that MASAC, as an entire voting
body, officially designate two members to attend meetings as part of the technical advisor
group to the-Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee. At least one of these members should
represent community interests and that person should be the primary representative of
MASAC. We request that the vote on these representatives take place at the regular
meeting on March 30, 1999 and that MASAC receives regular reports thereafter. Thank you
for your consideration.
Sincerely,
~~
Krv- ~v ~~ ~~`~ u~~
Kristal Stokes Dawn Weitrel
MASAC Representative MASAC Representative
DMW:ds
•
ThL~ Urbun Honretou•n
6700 PORTiAND AVENUE, RIC'~'S~$`C~~,mZul'9NN~~~RPPO~~u4m3EMPLQVEFi 861 g700 FAX: 812.861.9749
Attachment D
February 19, 1999
Mr. Roy Fuhrmann
MASAC Technical Advisor
Aviation Noise Program Manager
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Subject: ANOMS 28 Location Site
Dear Roy:
City Manager's Office
This letter is to inform you that the City of Richfield has chosen two preferred locations for the
new ANOMS site 28.
The City's first choice is to locate the site on the 1600 block of 67th Street in East Richfield.
It is the City's intention that the ANOMS poll would be located within the City's right-of--way,
near existing telephone and electrical polls. We believe this site, with its low ambient noise
levels, is ideal for capturing aircraft noise.
The City's second choice, is to locate ANOMS site 28 on the property of Mount Calvary
• Lutheran Church, 6544 16th Avenue South, 612-866-5405. If the first site is inadequate, the
City will be pleased to work as the liaison between MASAC and the church.
If you require any further assistance or information please contact Mark Hinds at 612-861-
9708.
Prosser
JDP:mjh
The Urba~~ Ho~netotirn
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 612.861.9700 FAX: 612.861.9749
M~'TR~POLY'TAN AYR~'~RTS ~-MMISSI0111~'
~ ~~. ~~
~~~4'P~' tT~ Mituieapolis-Saint Faul YnterAationa~. Airport
a~ 6040 - Seth Ave~aue South • Minaeapntie, MN 65480•x7499
D * ~ Fhorae (B!Z) 72~-81.00 • Fax (812) 726.6298
t
ea ~ w
e~, s' Attachment E
i~y* Op
4gr.q-~~
February l9, 1999
Dear Neighbor:
On April 1, 1999, the Metropolitan Airports Cortamission (MAC) will begin reconstruction of the
southeast portion o£Runway 12R/301r, also known as the south parallel runway at Minneapolis-St.
Pau! rntemational Airport (MSF). The project is expected to be complete in September.
..., ..
Last summer as you°ll recall, MAC rebuilt the northwest 3,400 feat oFRiuaway 12R/30L. The
project to repair and replace the runway is being done in phases to minimize delays for air travel4~rs
and the impact to the airport's neighbgrs.
Runway 12R/30L was ori$i~a~ly.~onstructed in the I950s. Over time, the runway materials
deteriorated due to age and us~~ by heavier aircraft, Tn order to aoeommodate the aircraft in use
today, the southeastern 3,440, feet of runway VvlA be demolished and replaced with 20 inches of
concrete -twice as much concrete as currently in place.
The runway reconstruction project will result in a temporary increase in aircraft using Runway 22,
also known as the crosswind runway. Aircraft will take ofF to the south, so residents in
Bloomington, South Richi~eld, Burnsville ar~d Sagan will experienoa mire aircraft than normal over
their communities.
'UUliile the north paxailel runway will also experience an increase in air traffic, the most significant
increase will occur to the southwest of the airport on Runway 22, During normal operations,
approximately 10 jets a day depart to the south on Runway 22. MAC forecasts that between
195-250 jets and 50-80 prop aircraft wi11 depart.each day from Runway 22 during the reconstruction
project. - ..... -
The Commission wilt hold aui open hou9e to provide information to area residents on
Thursday, NlarGh 4 from S to 8 p.m. - - --~ --
Minneapalis. MAC staff and cons•
expected air traffic impact.
Ynformation about the p~
in April on the noise F
As a result of the "
MSP is underr
terminal ar'
thro~g}~
7" ;
` METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
~~PP+iS 54jtiTQ Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport
F2 t '° 6040 - 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799
~ o Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612) 726-5296
~t
A ~ t ~,
° ~' Attachment F
°, 9~41RP0 RtyG -
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Wendy Burt
Wednesday, February 10, 1999 612-726-5335
Jennifer Bagdade
612-726-8170
SOUTH PARALLEL RUNWAY RECONSTRUCTION
TO IMPACT AIR TRAFFIC APRIL -SEPTEMBER
On April 1, 1999, the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) will begin
reconstruction of the southeast portion of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport's
(MSP) 10,000-foot-long south parallel runway.
"This is a much needed project that will enhance the safety and efficiency of
MSP when it is complete," said Nigel Finney, deputy executive director of planning and
environment at the MAC. "Extensive planning and coordination has taken place with the
Federal Aviation Administration and the airlines to ensure that the airport's capacity is
maintained and that operations run smoothly during this construction project."
Runway 12R/30L, also known as the south parallel runway, was originally
constructed in the 1950s. Over time, the runway materials deteriorated due to age and
use by larger aircraft. In order to accommodate the aircraft in use today, the southeastern
3,400 feet of runway will be demolished and replaced with 20-inch thick concrete, more
than double the existing pavement.
The project to reconstruct the runway is being done in phases to minimize delays
for air travelers. The northwestern 6,200 feet will remain in service during the
construction. In 1998, MAC rebuilt the northwestern 3,400 feet of the same runway.
The project is expected to be completed in September. The total project cost is
approximately $21 million.
The runway reconstruction project will result in a temporary increase in
departures using Runway 22, also known as the crosswind runway. Flights will take off
to the south, so residents in Bloomington, South Richfield, Burnsville and Eagan will
experience more aircraft than normal over their communities.
(more)
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer.
Reliever Airports: A1Ri.AKF • ANOKA COUNTY/BLAINE • CRYSTAL • FLYING CLOUD • LAKE ELMO • SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN
Runway reconstruction, page two
"We recognize that this reconstruction project will result in a significant increase
in flights over some communities," Finney added. "This is an important project and the
impacts will be temporary."
While the north parallel runway will also experience an increase in air traffic, the
most significant increase will occur on Runway 22. During normal operations,
approximately 10 jets a day depart to the south on Runway 22. MAC forecasts that
between 195-250 jets and 50-80 prop aircraft will depart each day from Runway 22
during the reconstruction project.
The Commission will hold an open house to provide information to interested
area residents on Thursday, March 4 from 5 to 8 p.m. at MAC's general offices, 6040
28~' Avenue South, Minneapolis. MAC staff and consultants will be available to speak
with residents in more detail about the project and expected air traffic impact.
The Commission will also provide information to residents about the progress of
construction on its noise complaint line at 612-726-9411 and its website,
www.mspairport.com.
. The runway reconstruction is part of MSP 2010, a comprehensive development
plan to accommodate the region's air travel demand through the year 2010. MSP 2010
includes airfield, terminal and parking improvements.
•
•
`''>=
~r
•
` 4~ s
~r
2~ „~-
- Y~
_ ~_
~NEix OP `~~\
,.~
a
o ~
W
;W
N LL
Z
W
'- ~ J
Q
U
l ;n
~
T
•
•
council
2/25/99
Date Address General Issue Specific Issue Raised
2/8/99 7114 17th Ave. Housing Issue Question about what the timeline is for the
buyouts.
2/9/99 Agreement Questions about what's going on with the
LFNPC.
2/10/99 13th Ave & 68th General What's going on?
Update
2/10/99 7444 Bloomington Ave Housing Issue Wondering what's going to happen to his
house.
2/16/99 6926 18th Ave Housing Issue Question about when and if his house is
going to be bought out.
2/16/99 7201 Bloomington Ave. Housing Issue Question about whether her home is going to
be bought out.
2/1 7/99 681 0 Elliot & 7114 10th Housing Issue Question about what's going to happen with
Ave & 7208 Chicago her houses? She felt the City had been
2/17/99 7638 Columbus Ave Housing Issue Is planning on doing some improvement to
his home...wondering what's going to
Page 1
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
i Study Session Letter No. 6
Agenda March 1, 1999
Issue Statement:
Update of Richfield's Municipal State Aid Account.
Background:
Each year the City evaluates its fund balance in its Municipal State Aid (MSA) Account
as part of the preparation of its. capital improvement program. In the past year the City
secured federal funds to replace the Lyndale Avenue bridge and build the-77th Street
underpass. These major road projects coupled with numerous redevelopment
proposals currently under consideration have placed increased demands on the City's
MSA account. The study session will allow the Council to review these demands.
The attached budget and map show the transportation improvements being considered
that will place demands on the City's MSA Account as the new capital improvement
program for 2000-2005 is developed. The demand for transportation improvements will.
exceed the MSA funding available: Options for the Planning Commission and the
Community Services Commission to consider are:
1. Delay projects until there is money in the fund to pay for them
2. Sell .bonds against future MSA allotments of up to three years at $700,000 per year
to pay for the construction projects.
3. Fund from other City sources, i.e., use general obligation bonds or revenue bonds to
pay for transportation improvements.
4. Require private developers to pay a portion of transportation improvements that
benefit them using special assessment districts. This can be considered for the
replacement of the Lyndale Avenue and Penn Avenue bridges over I-494.
5. Seek alternate funding sources; i.e., pursue state and federal grants to reduce the
City's share of project costs.
An ambitious program is deliberately proposed, recognizing some economic
development proposals may not be implemented.
Recommended Motion:
There is no action requested. This is for discussion purposes only.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Major transportation projects have advanced to the point of implementation.
However, there is no agreement yet on the City's share of project costs. The City's
share may increase as a result of negotiations.
2. Actual costs in the past have consistently exceeded initial estimates. The. proposed
capital improvement program contains conservative cost estimates that anticipate
increased costs
3. Several major redevelopment projects and the Airport Mitigation Plan depend on
significant investments in transportation improvements.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
There is no decision being requested. This issue is for Council discussion only.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
City anager
JDP:ds
Attachments
•
1999
•
•
MSA FUNDBEGINNWGBP!-P.NCE R2,2P7500 SE9?.200 (51.2429001, 1S3.5R2.900) ($4,377,900) ($4,440.?00) (35,353,4001
TOTAL COST TO 1999 2000 2001. 2002 2003 2005 BEYOND 2005
PROJECT MSA PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT 2004 PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT
COST FUND COST COST COST COST COST COST COST COST
W: _. OJ~OT S
MOVE SIGNAL
1 67THMICOLLET AV. $160,000 $120,000 $120,000
NEW SIGNAL
2 @64TH/PORTLAND AV . $136,000 $112,500 $112,500
76TH ST PED/BIKE
3 BRIDGE $850,000 $1,162,000 $1,162,000
REPLACE LYNDALE
AVE. BRIDGE OVER I
4 494 $8,374,000 $343,450 $130,750 $212,700
PHASE III 77TH ST
5 RO $14,869,000 $743,450 $132,050 .$611,400
66TH ST. (d35W
6 RECONSTRUCTION $3,000,000 $426,000 $426,000
RECONSTRUCT
7 77TH/PENN AV. $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000
RECONSTRUCTION OF
76TH ST: PENN AV. TO
8 35W $1,800,000 $1,800,000 $700,000 $1,100,000
9 76TH ST EAST $2,255,000 $2,255,000 $400,OOD $200,000 $400,000 $1,200,000
66TH ST/PORTLAND
10 RECONSTRUCTION $4,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,400,000 $100,000
SOO LINE RR
CROSSINGS @76TH
11 ST & 65TH ST. $350,000 $350,000 $350,000
REPLACE SIGNAL
EQUIPMENT ALONG
12 LYNDALE AVE. $272,000 $272,000 $32,000 $240,000
REPLACE PENN AVE.
13 BRIDGE OVER 1-494 $5,000,000 $333,000 $333,000
66TH STlfH 77
14 1NTERCHANGE $11,500,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000
LYNDALE
CROSSTOWN TO 64TH
15 ST. $1,500,000. $1,500,000 $1,500,000
EXTEND 62
NOISEWAIL PENN
16 AVE. TO XERXES AVE. $450,000 $225,000 $225,000
EXTEND 62
NOISEWALL 35W TO
17 PENN AVE. $450,000 $225,000 $225,000
77TH ST. RAMPS TO
18 TH 77 $1,500,000 $37,500 $30,000 $7,500
TOTALS $61,824,000 $16,388,900 $2,408,300 $2,556,100 $3,050,000 $1,500,000 $763,000 $1,607,500 $500,000 $1,790,000
ANNUAL MSA F UNDS $719,000 $715,000 $710,000 $705,000 $700,000 $695,000 $690,000
MSA FUND ENDING BALANCE $598,200 ($1,242,900) ($3.582,900) ($4.377.900) ($4.440.900) ($5,353.400) 1$5,163,400)
C F _C.:NU~L PRGJE~TS
RESURFACE
19 BITUMINOUS STREETS $16,000,000 $3,200,000 $3,200,000
NEW NS COLLECTOR
20 66TH TO 77TH STS.
OVERLAY
BLOOMINGTON AV.
21 66TH TO 76TH $200,000 $200,000 $200,000
SKYWAYS TO URBAN
22 VILLAGE $3,200,000 $0 $1,600,000 $1,600,000
Page 1
i
N
Y
Q
~o Z ~ V
~ J
Z~ s
~g ~
~~ we}C
~~ ~ ~~ ~ z
~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~O ~WWZ
a W
anvar~ -.-~°0 Q DD ~ anvav~ ~ o~Z w o
Z ~o0 0000 ~ooo
,~C~C3C~C~C~Cf C1~C~
~~~ 0~~00~~ ~
°o z ~oooooa~o .D
Q oo ~ c~oc~o oc~oc~ i
w X000000000 ~
0 0~~0 ~~0 1
~~0~00~
~ ~aC~C~e~ d z r- anvarruaoa
anvairunoa
O ~ ~~
D ~L~CIBD ~ ~' ~
~~~~00 ~8e~0 ~ ~ ~
D A
~ o ~oo ~
3nv~+ ~ 3nvtvnoon+
~ 04 ~~ ~~~0~ ~zoc
U ~ zLL ~~ ZZ~ 0 Owo
~ ~ DD ~~ ~~
~ o ~ °~ ~ ~--7 °°
O anvana~u~ w LJ1 ~-vaNa+~~
3 n
a ® ~ DD I
wv, ~ ~~ Q ~~ z~
~' ~ D z ~ C~L~~ ~' > a ~
c~ ~ OD a3 ~ ~w ww
Z° ~ oo ~°~ 0 0 ~~ ~~
~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0000 - ~-v Naa
0 ~-vNaa ~^ eeEl ~~
Z ~~ ~®eee o°~ W
C7Q0®888 ~~~0 0- ~
~~C3 ®eee ~C~~C~Ot~ e° ~
ooh®eee ~ooq ~
U ooh®eee~~~ ~
~~' ®eee^ oo ~v
o~
a
~ ~ ~ ~Z
~ ~ ~ ~a
.~
~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. S
Agenda March 1, 1999
Issue Statement:
Discussion of 1999 construction and maintenance projects.
Background:
Richfield staff annually awards contracts for constructing, reconstructing, upgrading and
maintaining Richfield's infrastructure. This year's projects will be discussed at the City
Council Study Session of March 1, 1999. The list of projects scheduled for 1999 includes:
A) Reconstruct parking lots. Three parking lots are proposed for major reconstruction
this year. They are:
1. The parking lot at the Lyndale Liquor Store was scheduled for reconstruction last
year but was rescheduled to this year because of monetary considerations. The
"saw toothed" curb south of the store will be replaced along with all of the pavement
and spot repairs.
2. The lower parking lot at City Hall will be resurfaced. Most of the existing curb will
be retained but all of the pavement will be replaced. The pedestrian ramp at the
south door (entrance to Public Works) will be removed in order to add an additional
parking spot. Anew ramp and handicap entrance were provided at the middle door.
3. The parking lot and front driveway at Fire Station No. 2 will be replaced. The rear
parking lot (Oliver Avenue side) will be completely replaced along with the entire
concrete driveway on the Penn Avenue side of the station.
B) 69th and Penn storm water holding pond. For several years a flooding problem has
existed in the area around 70th Street and Russell Avenue. This project is the first step
in providing increased flood protection to that area. The second phase, reconstructing a
portion of 70th Street, is scheduled for construction next year.
C) 76th Street pedestrian bridge over I-35W. This is a two-year project which was
originally scheduled for construction in 2002 but is being proposed for construction in the
next two years in order to coincide with the Minnesota Department of Transportation's
(MnDOT) construction along I-35W. It is MnDOT's wish to have their contractor
construct the center pier of the bridge with Richfield's contractor finishing everything
else.
D) Wood Lake dredging. This project was begun in January 1997 and, because of warm
winters the past two years, was extended through the 1997/1998 winter season to the
current season. Finally the area experienced the type of weather necessary for the
project to proceed. By the time of the March Study Session, the dredging should be
. complete. Staff would still like to raise the elevation of some of the paths within the
nature center.
E) Street maintenance projects. Each year Richfield has awarded three contracts for
street maintenance. These contracts are for:
1. Replace broken, settled and misaligned concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk.
2. Rout and seal cracks in blacktopped streets.
3. Sealcoat blacktopped streets.
F) Install traffic control signals. Two sets of traffic signals are proposed for this year's
construction season:
1. Signal at 64th Street and Portland Avenue. Council awarded a contract for this work
at its February 22, 1999 meeting.
2. Signal at 67th Street and Nicollet Avenue. This project will be performed in
conjunction with a project combining the driveways of the Academy of Holy Angels
and Blessed Trinity Elementary School (formerly St. Peter's).
G) I-35W/66th Street Gateway project.
This project is in conjunction with MnDOT's project to add an HOV lane to I-35W from
76th Street to just north of the 66th Street bridge and includes replacing the existing
.bridge. Richfield's portion of this project includes: under bridge lighting, storm sewer
improvements, signal lights and aesthetic improvements.
H) Projects being prepared for work in year 2000. Two additional projects will be
progressing through design and right-of--way acquisition stages with the intent of
constructing them next year. They are:
1. 77th Street Phase III, underpass.
2. Richfield Lake Area storm water pond.
Recommended Motion:
This Study Session Letter is for discussion purposes and no City Council action is
necessary at this time. All projects will be returned to the Council for award of contract.
Basis of Recommendation:
All projects are included in the 1999 operating budget or the 1999 Capital Improvement
Budget.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Staff requests that Council consider this item at the Study Session of March 1, 1999.
Respe ly submitted,
James .Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds