08-04-97 agenda0 CITY OF RICHFIELD
MONDAY, AUGUST 4, 1997
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1. 7:00-7:30 P.M. ANNUAL MEETING WITH HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
SPECIAL HRA STUDY SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL
7:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
AGENDA
1. 7:30-8:15 P.M. DISCUSSION OF SELECTING SITE FOR STORMWATER
STORAGE POND NEAR RICHFIELD LAKE
HRA LETTER NO. 47
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 31
ADJOURNMENT OF SPECIAL HRA STUDY SESSION
CONTINUATION OF REGULAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11. 8:15-9:00 P.M. DISCUSSION OF PROGRESS TO DATE REGARDING
CONCEPT PLANS FOR NEW CITY MAINTENANCE
FACILITY
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 32
III. 9:00-9:30 P.M. DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF AIRPORT RELATED ITEMS
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 33
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 861-9702.
i CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 33
Agenda August 5, 1997
Issue Statement:
Status of airport related issues.
Background:
Recent developments regarding airport issues include the following:
• Runway 4-22
In June, Northwest Airlines indicated to the Metropolitan Airports Commission an
interest in providing additional service between the Twin Cities and Asia. In order for
the fights to Hong Kong to occur, NWA stated that 12,000 feet of runway on 4-22 would
be necessary to make the service viable. In addition, it was requested that a temporary
extension also be built on the south parallel runway.
Nigel Finney spoke with Richfield's City Council on July 7 to discuss changes to 4-22.
Mr. Finney relayed the fact that the runway would be used for 747-400 aircraft (an
aircraft that is able to hold a greater number of people). Three runway extension
alternatives will be examined. He also explained that first an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) would need to be conducted, then the FAA would make
the determination if an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is needed or if there is a
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
At the July 8 Planning and Environment meeting, Mr. Finney reported to the
commission that: Eagan was not opposed to the extensions, Bloomington had identified
issues and conditions that would need to be satisfied before extension of 4-22,
Minneapolis emphatically stated that the temporary extension be destroyed, and
Richfield generally felt that operationally the extension was "OK." A North-East
Bloomington resident (16th Avenue) responded to the extension by stating that a
"positive action" (either sound insulation or acquisition) would need to take place in his
neighborhood if changes were made to 4-22. A motion was then made for an
Environmental Assessment Worksheet to be completed. Any changes to MAC's
Capital Improvement Program in relation to 4-22 extension have been deferred. Himle
concluded this topic on the agenda by stating, "There are some of us who are anxious
to proceed with this issue."
Mayor Kirsch (in a letter to Finney on July 14) emphasized the fact that Council looked
forward to seeing the EAW results for the proposed 4-22 runway expansion and the
differing impacts each of the three proposals for expansion will create on surrounding
communities. Mayor Kirsch also reiterated the fact that Richfield neither supports nor
opposes the additional extension to runway 4-22. In addition there are numerous
concerns and questions that need to be answered before any decisions can be made.
• 4-22 Litigation
Steve Pflaum was recently sent a letter by the Eighth Circuit requiring all parties of the
litigation to submit written status reports by August 4, 1997. The Eighth Circuit never
directly responded to the City's suggestion to take the steps to encourage the
respondents to agree to a tolling agreement. Steve also mentioned that this order is
• "intriguing" in the sense that "unlike the prior orders that directed Richfield to submit a
status report, this order requires all parties to submit reports."
• . Proposed North-South Runway
A joint meeting of the MAC, Met Council and Richfield staff and consultants was held
on July 15. Panel members included:
• City of Richfield.-- Jim Prosser, Walt Gillfillan, Sandy Fidell
* MAC -- Nigel Finney, Andy Harris (HMMH), Roy Madgwick (HNTB)
• Met Council -- Curt Johnson, Facilitator
* Neutral Panelists -- Mary Griffin (San Mateo County), Jim Buntin (Brown &
Buntin), Greg Ingraham (Ingraham & Voss)
After a bus tour of Richfield, conducted by Planning Commission Chair Dan Linnihan,
presentations by the MAC and City of Richfield ensued. There was a clear consensus
among the panelists that low frequency noise is a community impact that needs to be
addressed in depth. While it was easy to say that the issue needs to be addressed, it
was not easy to pinpoint how low frequency impacts would be addressed. There is still
uncertainty how Richfield residents will be impacted by the proposed north-south
runway. Various mitigation strategies (i.e. barrier sound walls and redevelopment) were
also discussed. The meeting ended with the understanding that low frequency noise
issues must be addressed by the Metropolitan Airports Commission. A follow-up letter
was sent to the Met Council outlining issues which remained to be addressed in the
final EIS. [See Attachment]
On July 8, comments were presented to commissioners at the P&E public hearing on
Bloomington property acquisition. Some of the properties to be acquired are: the
Amoco station, VFW, Excel Inn, NSP substation, Super America, Sheraton Hotel,
Double Tree Hotel, Metro Office Park, Met Center property, Kelly Lounsbury property,
and Middle Marker property. A statement by the City of Richfield included issues in
relation to acquisition before a complete EIS has been approved. There were very few
public comments made at this hearing.
Steve Pflaum has submitted a Data Practices Act Request for numerous documents
and data in the possession of, or under the control of MAC, or any of its consultants.
The City believes this information to be relevant in addressing concerns regarding the
proposed north-south runway.
•
• Drop-Piece
A drop piece on various airport issues and contact telephone number cards will be
distributed to Council Members at the August 5 Study Session. It was at the request of
Council Members that the drop-piece be available for distribution to residents in
southeast Richfield for the August 5 National Night Out.
• NViJt Annuai ivieeima ana Aviation Noise symposium
The National Organization to Insure a Sound-controlled Environment had its annual
conference on July 23-26 in Eagan. In addition to being a y m interesting three days of
airport impact discussion, many members in attendance (most of which were from other
states) questioned the decision made by the MN legislature for MSP to expand on such
a limited parcel of property. Richfield's issues played center stage for many
discussions (specifically 4-22 litigation, and the north-south runway's potential of low
frequency noise impacts). Many questions were asked about 4-22 being used for noise
spreading. Bridgeton, Missouri (pop. 20,000+) also has this problem and spends
$500,000 a year on litigation and consultants. In addition, quite a few interesting
observations were made by other communities in relation to low frequency noise
impacts. Unfortunately, there was no one present who could shed light on potential
"side effects." Many NOISE members want up-dates on Richfield's progress with this
issue.
New Ford Town and Rich Acres Acquisition
The most recent status report for acquisition and relocation is as follows:
1. Phase V: As of July 25, 10 appraisals have been ordered for Phase V business
owners and multi-family dwellings located on 66th Street East. Also, there have
been eight appraisals ordered for Phase V land owners. The appraisal process is
anticipated to be completed during the month of August.
2. Auction 8 Update: The removal deadline for 32 homes was July 11. As of Monday,
July 21, 29 of the 32 had been successfully removed from the project. There are
still three houses on site to be removed, which are accruing fines at $100 per day.
There were three houses from the auction that sold, but did not close. Two of these
houses were demolished and the other house was placed on the 9th Auction and
sold for $8,500.
3. Auction 9: MAC, WDSCO and Kloster Industrial Auctioneers conducted the 9th
Public House Auction on Thursday, July 17 at the American Legion. Out of 16
houses available for auction, 13 sold. The highest bid for a house this auction was
$17,000, the lowest bid was $100. The Ninth Auction generated a total of $84,800
with the average price calculation being $6,523.
• Recommended Motion:
Discuss current airport issues.
Basis of Recommendation:
It is important for the Council to provide direction to staff regarding airport concerns.
Alternative Recommendation:
Defer discussion to another date.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This matter will be discussed at the Study Session of August 5, 1997.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame . Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
0
J
6700 Portland Avenue • Richfield, Minnesota 55423-2599
City Manager Mayor
James D. Prosser Martin J. Kirsch
July 22, 1997
Mr. Curt Johnson
Chair, Met Council
Mears Park Centre
230 East Fifth Street
St. Pau1,.MN 55101-1634
Dear Curt:
Council
Susan Rosenberg Kristal Stokes
Michael Sandahl Russ Susag
On behalf of the City of Richfield, please accept our thanks for initiating and moderating the July
15 panel to discuss the north/south runway low frequency noise impacts on Richfield. Several
observations and conclusions from the panel discussions are noteworthy, including the
following:
• We believe that a consensus emerged from the panel that low frequency noise is problem that
extends beyond the question of structural damage and must be addressed in depth so MAC,
Met Council and Richfield can gain a better understanding of abatement and mitigation
options. Because the MAC is sponsoring a proposal to construct the north/south runway, it is
incumbent upon the MAC to include in the north/south Final EIS a full disclosure of low
frequency noise exposure and impacts and to assure adequate abatement or mitigation. The
City of Richfield is prepared to assist MAC in developing details for that effort.
• While it is clear that the initial strategy of redeveloping residential property along west Cedar
Avenue will not serve to attenuate the low frequency noise, it is possible that redeveloping
this area might be useful as part of a strategy to stabilize the area. We remain interested'in
pursuing this option. More detailed information and a specific commitment from the MAC
regarding its precise role is necessary.
• A more complex but equally important challenge is the need to address strategies for
providing higher density replacement housing in the areas outside of the noise impacted
zones. Restoring housing units lost because of the New Ford Town/Rich Acres buyout and
potential Cedar Avenue losses are an important concern to Richfield city and schools. Our
city and schools infrastructure has been developed to support a minimum number of housing
units. Loss of population and tax base require abatement or mitigation.
The Urban Hometown
Telephone (612) 861-9700 9 Fax (612) 861-9749
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Mr. Curt Johnson
July 22, 1997
Page 2
We did not discuss the replacement of recreation assets at the July 15 meeting. That issue is
currently being addressed, thanks in no small part, to the Met Council's effort. It is important
to remember however, that it is again, MAC's responsibility to address the loss of recreation
assets in their Final EIS. Maintaining recreation assets is key to the support of community
health and vitality.
• The panel, likewise, did not discuss Richfield's continuing concern over the lack of detailed
information regarding the ground traffic impact of the changes proposed by MAC for the
66th Street and Cedar Avenue area. Our traffic engineers indicate the need for additional
data to determine whether the proposed design adequately addresses the traffic volumes and
movements, to better understand the impact on local traffic, businesses and residents.
Commercial redevelopment, replacement housing and recreation assets were discussed at the
July 24, 1996 meeting with MAC Chair Sandy Grieve, Executive Director Jeff Hamiel, Jim
Solem and Richfield officials. Other than during that discussion, MAC has not participated in an
active way in addressing these issues, with the exception of a minor contribution to the recreation
asset discussion. The City of Richfield remains concerned that MAC clearly understand its
responsibility to address these issues in the Final EIS. I would appreciate any suggestions you
may have in that regard.
The City of Richfield, wishes to avoid pursuing a legal challenge to the Final EIS, and has a
strong preference for participating in a cooperative effort rather than facing an adversarial
relationship with MAC after the Record of Decision is issued. We realize this is important for
the Met Council as well. The Livable Communities Act, the Met Council Regional Blueprint
and the City of Richfield Comprehensive Plan provide clear direction for the resolution of these
issues of concern. The proposed north/south runway provides an excellent, albeit challenging,
opportunity for all of us to develop a creative response to the impacts that will be generated by
this project.
•
JDP:cak
•
cu
U
c
Q
?E
O
U
O
Q
On
oj
T
7
n
N O N
a)
0
o
C
L
a 0
=
cn . a) c :3 a
)
a) CU
- - C
CU CU (U w cu
m?aci
?.
LQ-aT
x o
°c` U) U)
a) •N 3Lo
em
c E a) >
E
E Y
cu
c rn (D
(D
? 0
a)
a) c
cu
(
u
cu
L E
- .
cu c = 0
o
m Q-O O L.
3
a o
3
c) $? ° cu °
E L c
u c 3
m
An
E S a
a) cn
a)
?'
a) ,.
a c
C
C ° D )
E -o
m
a) O
c
j a) O a)
n N
` a) c
o () a) m .
a) c
3 a
C cn
c0 O c cu D
'f0 L N N Q A
N c C a)
E E
a)
x N
L
L N Q
O
O Q Q
c xx a) o c cu E C C C X N X CU C
Q W Q C 03 W (uL Q QU o a Q W -°U U W L Q
cu C Y
to
CD :3 = -Cu
E tm (D
°
r-
0
?
3 a) v)
Q
) to
L
0
F- -0 CD
cm A
W L
++ N
(n
Es
(?
C E a
° o .y '
E a)
cu
-0 fu a)
0
L L 0 v- °
cu
)
0. a
w
a)
?
CU
3
N c
°)
cu
N (n m
O c o
cu
cn
' L 0
? C Y o N
? Q
L L
a)
E L .
N O C 3 `)
° ? O m a) C
4- °-' )
a
o 3 ?• 3 a) o
Q co U -Z aoi
L >
m
r•
LL (
Ca c
C) c
c 'r N .
U ,O Q N? -C (D L= O N
_
CL N Q a) N L p O ~ N cu
O
3 N
a) M 2 L a) cn +
L > 3
c C N c M `N CD co "_ N `o a) 0
a)
fl cn co ,t)
a) _ 3
L- c c Q c N
cu _
ax) N o E 2 ? u) c ` c .3
° ?) rn `D
-0 m 0
?' o'
° cu
0 a) a)
=3
o C L
N ?
Y rn
O 3 a) )
O
C Y
-
L+ S a) L O a) L
c U 3
L > O "-
Cl) to
.?.. Co
O C L
° .Q C
a) .Q ()
.
Z a) •a) 'O
c L L
? r
-+
a) to
N ?
cu
as a)
°
Co `
°? L `
a)
(D o_
°
c
a
E
u a)
a)
L= m
E 3 o a) a) .
c`
a) E
0 o c
c
u
L Q
. L
D O
Cl) T c° m 3 cu 3 o-a.N ? N c
N c a (n ( L
` ° c
-a (a °
°
a) _
C
(1) L C
f°
3
a)
c a) E 3 U C U C C (`p N U C a) a) L a) L N L a) Cl. y L
0 E
' O o cu fu •T a) 2 X a3 -E W
L L a) a) 3-o
V U
cu co (A T FL E 0- 2 cu a) 0. 3 ° rn F- F- V) o c
c
3
.Q
L
0
aj a) U)
Q L
N
>
N C L LO >
°a L p -0
V
.a
N
> (L)
U
L ai
>
Q .? ti C Q C +
+ Q
C
R E N
p
`- N O Cl)
d - 03
E
Cid I-
) m
? C
c C
N
E L a
- r O
N
CA L
04
to
Z 0 a)
Z Y ? ? M=3 3 I- cNo
75 _5 '5 3 75 75 75 -5 5
N Il- 00 co 4'
r+
(0
N M Un Cfl I- oO rn O
r
a)
rn
M
CL
•
N
U
c
CU
Q
O
U
• E
tf
O
Q
Q
E
cn
c
o O
w Q-
E U o
o
cn
(D ?
(n Co c
c
c
3 3
c vi
C
c
N =
L M M= c
0 c
a) .
C C L
E n? E E 3
U
to p -p
O E E
Q Q
0
a.
Q o U U w? Q
X (D
O cn m c?-
.p .. ,
=3
vi a a)
E
t c C O
L
C O ? ? Y
ca rn
a) p
N
L )
C n O
3 L
- - CA
3 c
a
N
r C
C
o co r
U a) C'.
-0
T (D
N Q
N a)
N
m M
D
c C-• a) 0
- c
Q
cu of
c
a E o ?, c s=
V a
0
p
N a)
:3
> 3
L
N
c
p
CD
N
+ O
N
? O
CL Ca ? c j
3:
O a)
0
N c w 3
a) O Y
c -
a)
:3
0
c a)
Ca A (D
0
'p O E
O
U
)
C c Q -
3
a a) a
L ?
L
V
O a)
CD U O (0
U )
-_ 7
p 7
» > O O
Q E U c=
U
u ) m
ai
Q
c
U C
C ?
U'
00
M O
C
M
C M
CO
O
O
Q >
w 00
T Q
? 00
r .
(Q m C T
N L ca C)
a) U
T LU CO f-
5
-7 ? 7 7
cn co r N
T T T N N
r
T N
T M
r
T ll)
T
N
a)
c0
d
June, 1997
MASAC
Abbreviated
Technical Advisor's Report
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Operations and Complaint Summary
June 1997
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
Runway_ Arrival % Use' Departure % Use
04 N/A N/A N/A N/A
22 N/A N/A N/A N/A
11 N/A N/A N/A N/A
29 N/A N/A N/A N/A
MSP JuneFleet Mix Percentage
Stage
_ Scheduled _
1996 _ Scheduled
-=1997 ANOMS
Count 1996 ANOMS_
Count 1997
Stage 2 51.9% 42.0% 50.3% N/A
Stage 3 48.1% 58.0% 49.7% N/A
Airport June Complaint Summary
•
.Airport __ 1996 - = 1997
MSP 2001 2442
Airlake 0 0
Anoka 2 6
Crystal 0 2
Flying Cloud 9 4
Lake Elmo 1 1
St. Paul 6 9
Misc. 3 11
t;
-?? ?-.TOTAL ' _ > < . _ 2022
- 2475 .
June Average Daily Operations Summary - FAA Airport Traffic Record
NOMW
1996
. I
1997
I
Air Carrier 877 885
Commuter 341 324
G.A. 157 176
Military 8 16
I TOTAL (I 1383 II 1401 '
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs- Page 1
i
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport Complaint Summary
June 1997
Complaint Summary by City
- - City ;Arrival ° Departure - Total Percentage
Apple
Bloomington 4 19 22 0.9%
'Burnsville 2 7 9-
Fagan 30 146 176 7_3%
Fdina 2 20 22 1-0%
Triver Grove Heights 6 6 T2 639 '261%
MendotaHeights 5 253 258 10-6%
Minnesl2ofis 307 690 997
Minnetonka 10 1 11 0.5%
Plymouth '2 0 2
Richfield 2 123 125 5.2%
.Shoreview
South St Paul 0 2 2___ 0.1%
St
Louis Park 16 7 21 1 0%
-
Sunfish Lake 1 16 17 0-7%
West St Paul 0 2 2 0.1%
vj .Total ` a _ 1980;':M 2424 . -100%
Time of Day Nature of Complaint
m
R Ttal NaofComplamt Total
- 05:59
00:00 61 Excessive Noise 2260
06:00 - 06:59 43 Earl /Late 148
07:00 - 11:59 572 Low Flying 12
12:00 - 15:59 355 Structural Disturbance 3
16:00 - 19:59 436 Helicopter 0
20:00 - 21:59 453 Ground Noise 14
22:00 - 22:59 420 Engine Run-up 4
23:00 - 23:59 102 Fre uenc 1
Total 2442 Total 2442
Page 2 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Available Time for Runway Use
Tower Log Reports June 1997
All Hours
2%
25% 1%
47%
vz
3%
4%
7%
/16
49%
69%
Nightt4Hou
11
29
•
04
5%
5%
V 77%
ss%
%
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 3
t
try
0
U
r.
0
a
C) C)
O V O V1 O
M M N N
SiNivrid loa AO HaffW at
Y
a
? i
1
r ?
rG6
? f r
? s
2
J
OG El
?
v? ?? k Kai
S\oi
v 1A
"tea s
7
O
Off ?
,
y _
.D ^? . 'LC
^'
a : E
CO
:, rn
d
c Z
C
-0
_ - -spy as.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 32
Agenda August 4, 1997
Issue Statement:
Discussion of progress to date regarding concept plans for the new City maintenance
facility.
Background:
After considering a number of possible sites, on January 27, 1997 the City Council
selected a site at Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield, to the south of the Water Plant
on Portland Avenue, as the site for the new facility. On April 14, 1997 the City Council
authorized the firm of Short Elliot Hendrickson (SEH) to do concept work on the new
facility preparatory to working or construction drawings. This concept work is scheduled
to be complete in September. As noted in the project status report, SEH has been
meeting with City staff, reviewing environmental factors and working toward completion
of the work called for in the April 14 agreement. Meetings with the Portland Avenue
neighbors, the Planning Commission, the Community Services Commission to go over
the concept plan are planned for this month.
Recommended Motion:
No formal action is required at this time. Council is asked to provide some direction to
staff and the consultant toward completion of the programmatic/schematic development
• of a new City maintenance facility.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. A site and a consultant have been selected for construction of a new City
maintenance facility.
2. Staff and the consultant are seeking direction to provide an efficient, economical
facility that will meet the needs of the City staff and public.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Public Works Director Michael Eastling and members of the SEH staff will be available
to discuss the work to date and to outline some of the possible directions which may be
taken toward construction of a new City maintenance facility.
Respectfully submitted,
G)Q
. Prosser
Jam ianager
City JDP:cak
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 31
HRA Letter No. 47
Agenda August 4, 1997
Issue Statement:
Discussion on selecting a site for a stormwater storage pond near Richfield Lake.
Background:
At the City Council's April 14, 1997 meeting, the Council discussed and then tabled
action on selecting a location for stormwater ponding. Staff was requested to bring the
item back to the City Council when necessary. The Council Study Session provides an
opportunity to revisit the issue and consider making this an agenda item for the August
25 City Council meeting.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation's (MnDOT) plans for 1-35W improvement
requires additional stormwater ponding capacity. Three locations have been discussed:
the apartment complex at 64th Street and Dupont Avenue, the single family area north
of Richfield Lake (an area equivalent to 13 to 23 single family properties) and Lyndale
Garden Center (see attached April 14, 1997 City Council Letter). The City's
engineering consultant indicates that 1-35W will require 2.5 to 4.4 acres of ponding.
• MnDOT would contribute resources to acquire property for ponding. If the Richfield
Lake area planning process leads to redevelopment, an additional .8 to 1.3 acres may
be needed. The HRA would then be asked to share in the cost for that portion required
for redevelopment.
The Lyndale Garden Center is the location recommended by the City's engineering
consultant and the Planning Commission. Lyndale Garden Center is underutilizing their
site, given the low building value in relationship to the land and the seasonal (April,
May, June) nature of their active business.
A chronology of key events related to 1-35W, stormwater ponding and Richfield Lake
area planning is attached. In addition to the key events, planning consultant Fred
Hoisington, staff and development and design consultant Murray Kornberg and Gary
Tushie have met with Tim Duoos, owner of Lyndale Garden Center, at various times
during the past few months. The planning area and the future of Lyndale Garden
Center have been discussed. Mr. Duoos wants redevelopment activity to occur
somewhere else and to not be disturbed. The need for parking during May and June
requires the full ten acre site. Mr. Duoos expressed a willingness to own or lease a
facility at another location if the parking issue could be handled. Mr. Duoos believes
any outcome for his business must be based solely on the economics of a proposal.
Staff has kept Mr. Duoos informed of upcoming events related to the Richfield Lake
40 area planning. Mr. Duoos has not participated in work sessions with the neighborhood
because he believes that the sessions do not relate to the economics of Lyndale
Garden Center.
The City Attorney has proposed the following courses of action.for condemnation
should that be necessary. Two parcels would be identified. Parcel one, that portion of
the site needed for ponding, would follow a quick take condemnation process by the
City. The decision to acquire parcel two would wait until a redevelopment plan is
approved. Then if acquisition is required as part of the plan, then parcel two, the
remainder, could follow a regular condemnation path in accordance with the approved
redevelopment plan. Condemnation of parcel two could be by the HRA in the future.
Recommended Motion:
No motion is requested at this time. However, staff requests direction as to the
placement of this item on the August 25 agenda.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The Study Session allows the Council to review and discuss information needed to
make a decision on a ponding site.
2. It has been determined by MnDOT and confirmed by the City Engineer that 2.5 to
4.4. acres of land are needed for a new stormwater pond as a result of the proposed
1-35W improvements.
3. The City's engineering consultant has reviewed several potential locations for the
new pond and has determined that the Lyndale Garden Center site would be the
most appropriate and effective.
4. The Planning Commission has reviewed the site options and recommends Lyndale
Garden Center as the best place for ponding.
5. Lyndale Garden Center owner Tim Duoos has been continuously informed of
meetings and provided printed information. In addition to direct mail, direct delivery
and telephone contacts, Fred Hoisington, Murray Kornberg, Gary Tushie and staff
have met with Mr. Duoos to explore options and opportunities.
6. A voluntary negotiated sale might be arranged with Lyndale Garden Center. The
economics of the transaction can be explored further with owner Tim Duoos.
However, the desire to be on a busy corner in the business district and the need to
provide a two-month, short-term parking site to accommodate business demand
likely cannot be achieved.
7. If a timely sale cannot be arranged, legal counsel has recommended a
condemnation process for the ponding area.
8. Lyndale Garden Center is underutilized. Its property value is predominately in the
land. Building assessed value per acre, as a measure of intensity of development
for key properties, follows:
Property Assessed Value/Acre
Lyndale Garden Center (9.97 acres) $73,100/acre
K-Mart (5.67 acres) $267,000/acre
Market Plaza and Village Shores (4.75 acres) $1.93 million/acre
Richfield Bank and Medical Clinic (7.14 acres) $751,000/acre
Lyndale Hardware/Trestman/Big Wheel (2.71/acres) $399,000/acre
Single family homes at five units/acre $350,000/acre*
9. The residual land, after ponding could help the community meet needed housing
demand.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Other sites can be considered
2. If a site is not selected, MnDOT may choose to select a site for the ponding without
regards to the City's preference.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
MnDOT needs to know the City's site preference to keep their work on schedule.
Is Respectfully submitted,
Jam . Prosser
City anager
JDP:cak
11
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. ioi
Agenda April 14, 1997
Issue Statement:
Consideration of potential locations for a new storm water storage pond near Richfield
Lake.
Background:
At the March 25 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed
three possible storm water treatment pond locations. The new storm treatment water
pond is needed to accommodate the increased runoff that will result from the upgrade
of 1-35W and the Crosstown Highway. The three locations included the Wood Lake
Park apartments, the single family area immediately north of Richfield Lake and
Lyndale Garden Center. In making their recommendation the Planning Commission
considered the following technical data presented by Pete Willenbring of WSB, the
City's engineering consultant:
• Data on land use and the reuse potential of the three sites as presented by
Community Development staff
is • Past public comments from a March 13 open house
• Public comments received at the March 25 meeting
Please refer to the various attachments for more detailed background information.
After reviewing the various data the Planning Commission recommended on a vote of
5-3 that the Lyndale Garden Center be the location for the new storm water pond.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt a motion approving the Lyndale Garden Center as the preferred site for a two to
three acre storm water storage and treatment pond.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. It is has been determined by MnDOT and confirmed by the City engineer that two
to three acres of land will be needed for a new storm water pond as a result of the
highway improvements.
2. The City's engineering consultants have reviewed several potential locations for
the new pond and have determined that the Lyndale Garden Center site would be
the most appropriate and effective location for the pond.
3. At nearly ten acres in size the garden site has the highest potential for reuse after
. consumption of two to three acres for a pond.
4. At the March 25 Planning Commission meeting they recommended to the City
Council that the garden center site be the location for the new pond.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Defer action until April 28, 1997.
2.. Select one of the other two potential pond locations.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Over 1,300 notices were mailed out to residents and businesses in the Richfield Lake
area inviting them to attend the March 25 Planning Commission meeting to voice their
opinion regarding the pond location. Only three individuals addressed the Commission
on this issue. Both the ownership and management of Lyndale Garden Center were
notified of this meeting but neither was in attendance. That same letter invited people
to the City Council meeting on April 14.
Respectfully submitted,
James D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
is
0
ATTACHMENT
is
OPTION
PROBLEM Lyndale Garden
STATEMENT Center
eed 2-3 acres of land for dvantages
stormwater treatment pond ¦Type B pond will treat au
near Richfield Lake drainage to Richfield Lake
NPotential for redevelopment
(new businesses and housing
diversity )
RIncreased tax base with
redevelopment
EReduced maintenance with
new pond next to lake
Disadvantages
RLOSS of existing business
NPOssible high land cost (offset
k some by residual land value)
APARTMENT
OPTION 4-10 Lots North of
Wood Lake Park Lake
¦Type A Pond Near Freeway
Advantages Won't Disrupt Lake
035W drainage could be 035W Drainage Could Be
handled near 35W Handled Near 35W
Disadvantages 0Type B Pond Treats Alt
Drainage in Watershed
A
pond
¦
Type
treats 35W Disadvantages
r
ain
drain
only
age
¦High land cost GLOSS of 410 S. F. Homes
¦Little redevelopment potential ¦Type A Pond Treats 35W
¦LOSS 0190 housing urns
Drainage only
¦Hgh maintenance with new 214i917 Maintenance NPond Far
pond tar from lake t. From Lake
¦Largest decrease in tax base MNo Redevelopment Potential
¦MOderate Decrease in Tax
Base
Ptlhlic In•olventcrtl
Process
March 13 Open House
Receives Public Comment
¦ March 25 Planning
Commission Recommends
Preferred Option for Storm
Treatment Pond
¦ April 14 City Council Acts on
Planning Commission
Recommendation
Al
9
61 1 e?J t
q.r
Ar
i ?
I
it
I ~ v
Q
I Z f? `J
O ?+ \\,
c I Q r-r.
°: I ro
I ? ro
p... J
I r--•1 C?J
I v ?
v_+ O • O
m n v
Ci•
O
T
WSB
ATTACHMENT A2
I \-V
1 I
Y 1 ?.1 ? 1 ?. ., O
I e r I I i ' .I I
_
1 Q Z
I
I
v
e, z
t
i _ I I
/
/ I I
/
6
i s
`` 0
E
'D
z T) O r T
m m a7 m
0
ZI 0 ill in :n
11 Z 1
O n
?
N
'nl
v S
i-l
m h in _i
v -1 n In
m
- ?4?
?
v c? m ,
n T in r, m
Z
l
Z In 2 O
-i r- a
O
f N 1-
A n in
< T A
in
n
v
N
N
1
fn
Ric IsradJ Lake Im
rovcnicnt 11r
t _ ' "- _
p
ujcc _
_ __ _ ?. -.•• _ _
Ci ty Ptojcci No.
it
s1
a?
I
•
•
0
ATTACHMENT B
PAGE 1
/ e, L/ to
COMMENTS RECEIVED AT MARCH 13, 1997 OPEN HOUSE
is
NAM COMMENT
Robert D. Nelson Visual Appearance. Consider areas that can be landscaped - such as curs a north of obth -
7410 Girard Avenue so the freeway can be as attractive as 35E from 7th Street to downtown St. Paul.
798-6051 Sound Abatement. When building sound walls, consider the materials and an_les of wall
surface which will not reflect sound - (recall the ceiling of Orchestra Hall) as well as
thickness and density of walls to restrict pass through of sound. Also you may recall some
public phone booths that have some sore of sound panels that work well When you put
your head inside that area, it is quiet! What can that tell highway sound engineers ot'ho\k
to provide?sound absorption on a large scale?!
Jim $ Pat Matczvnski We would like to be able to give input for a sound wall on the west side of 35W. Irving
6911 Irving Avenue Avenue is affected by noise from 35W and residents should be able to vote. for or against a
861-1282 sound wall. If a sound wall is constructed, could it be built to absorb noise rather than
bounce sounds?
Gary Ness I support the commercial option for the water treatment pond. Build a sound wall along
1611 W. 72nd Street 35W between 73rd and 68th Street.
866-3596
Barb g Steve Uphoff We have studied the proposed expansion of35W/Hwy 62. We just want you to know that
6540 Emerson Avenue we are considering relocating as we feel we are outgrowing our home.
869-0947/861-4303-w
Lonnie Birhanzel Install a noise wall on Richfield side of freeway to extend all the way to Portland Avenue.
6227 Fifth Avenue Wall should be kept as low as practical. Suggest 10' above present street level. Install
861-5085 sidewalkbike path to connect Fifth Street to Portland Avenue, thereby creating a pathway
all the way from Nicollet to Portland.
Linda Saathoff I live at 6420 Emerson. I am not looking forward to the noise barrier wall coming so close
6420 Emerson Avenue to our back yard. and --ould appreciate it being built as far to the west as possible.
861-2651
Jim Saathoff I have concern that moyina the retainine wall next to the alley on the 6400 block of
6420 Emerson Emerson will create a drainage problem if the alley is not improved as part of the
861-2651 456-4511 wall freeway construction project.
Retina Saleck W e cannot be left so close to the road - Crosstown. Noise and pollution are horrible now
6211 Clinton Avenue and not healthy for us. Walls are cracking and so is our driveway.
866-8000
Brad Olson L- Lyn Froiland W ant to knm% if %%identne 66th Street will acquire their home. They are interested in
131? W'. 66th Street sellinL. Need to do root repair and want direction soon from city.
Lorri Olson Wanted to Lno\? impact of project on her property.
Manager of Richfield Shops
at 66th Nicol let
Edward Saleck Please include at least one storm drain in front of 6211 Clinton. There now are three
6211 Clinton Avenue drains for the vacant lots across the street.
866-8000
40
ATTACHMENT B
PAGE 2
LJ
NAME COMMENT
Joseph g Wendy Capetz We're absolutely 100% disappointed and opposed to the construction and we are
6227 Wentworth concerned about the de-valuation of our property in our neighborhood. 1 yie,.y this as a
866-1 166 two-three year construction nightmare that will have a negative impact on our day to da\
860-4060/509-2820 lives. i"m not sold on the idea of a "beautified end result. . We're losina, distance from tite
freeway and these plans were just recently revealed to us. (We just purchased our home in
September and we had no disclosure of this proposal at the time of our purchase.)
Ultimately, it will be difficult to sell the house during the course of construction and there
is no guarantee that the end result will "improve" our property value. In fact, we're
concerned it will de-value our home instead. Are there going to be any considerations for
reparations for those who will be directly impacted by the reconstruction? 1 would propose
that the City of Richfield delay the construction to re-evaluate what this will do to the
values of the homes directly affected and have some considerations for those of us who
will have to live with the noise, dust and negative situation during the re-build process.
The wall is moving too close to the homes... period. Also ...is there a noise wall provided
during the construction?
John Walstrom We need a noise wall - west side of freeway. It doesn't need to be as high as others.
7200 James Avenue
866-3851
Dorothy & Arnold Peterson We live at 7120 Lake Shore Drive overlooking Wood Lake where there is no wall. We
7120 Lake Shore Drive strong)v disagree with building a wall where we overlook Wood Lake. Our home is
869-1809 elevated from the street so the wall would need to be grotesquely high and unsightly.
1 Ken Janes I would like for you to take my house. The fence is moving too close.
6216 Third Avenue
861-6180 932-8607
Steven O. Lindgren These comments do not reflect the official Chamber of Commerce position; however, the
? Suite 130. 1401 West 76th loss of anv business in Richfield should be of concern to the City Council. The
Street
s
51
0 employment opportunities which have been provided over the years by Lyndale Garden
ob-
0 Center are st_niticant. An economic analysis of the 3 options for a storm water treatment
should include a detailed review of all aspects pertaining to any loss here. Thanks for the
Open House!
Russell KennedN The potential loss of housing stock is of great concern to me. Five homes have been
6-141 Grand Avenue identified for acquisition; however a number of others may be taken eventually is a loss we
869-4851 can ill afford. Not only an encroachment on the neighborhoods, but it will surely
/ depreciate propem . I also am concerned about the possibility of a noisewall for entry on
V 35W on the «est side. This surely will depreciate property values and disrupt the real
estate market in the neighborhood. Another concern is the possible acquisition of Lyndale
Gardens. ``k e cannot afford the loss of tax and payroll revenue that this business generates
.
I can't think of an\ area to Richfield where they could relocate. Much of the proposal has
merit and \% ill hopefully relieve a serious traffic problem in the Commons.
Peter Suek With the reconstruction of the 35/62 Commons, some south family homes may be more
-141 Emerson Avenue open to moving to provide space for the storm water basin. Lyndale Gardens is a good
v 866-7 185 business to have on a _ateway to Richfield such as Lyndale Avenue. If we have a good
plan for the Lvndale Gardens area. then I would approve.
Kandy Johnson Please raise and lengthen the noise wall for the impact of the new bridge connecting 35W
6314 Humboldt Avenue north with Hw•\ 1'_ 1 and Hwy 62. Noise wall from 66th and 35W along Girard up to Hwy
861-12215 62. From my kitchen window 1 can already see and hear traffic on 35W.
Larr\ \ ozniczka
6744 Wentworth Avenue I would like to see: 1) West bound access to TH 62 compensating for increased local
traff
wh
L
d
l
h
ic
en
vn
a
e access to nort
35W is lost. 2) Pedestrian path from Fifth to Portland
869-1236 south side of TH62. 3) Economic tradeoffs of 3 ponding options. Seems single family
option is least expensive to Richfield tax base.
ATTACHMENT B
PAGE 3
0
Kelvin's Auto Body proposed. Wants to be placed on mailin-a list.
`
6232 Lyndale Avenue
Tom And Barbara Elliott 3/17/97 Wants to receive a description of the
6741 Harriet Avenue options for a storm water pond near Richfield
Lake. Favors an alternative*that increases the
City's tax base. Supportive of new businesses
along Lyndale Avenue. Does not want to lose
housing to widen the freeway. I sent her
information on the storm eater pond options.
Mr. and Mrs. Ralph Lott 3/17/97 Want to know how close I-35Vv will
6224 Nicollet Avenue be to their house. Concerned that Nicollet
Avenue is adequately lit under 1-35 W to make
- it safe for pedestrians. Think a street light is
needed at the corner of Nicollet and Blaisdell
Avenues. Want additional lighting in Nicollet
Park.
John, Catherine & Greg Robert 3/18/97 Want to know the impact of 1-35 W
Woodlake Cleaning access on their business.
6440 Lyndale Avenue
Sandra Mueller 3/19/97 Opposed to closing access to 1-35W
6521 Fifth Avenue north at Lyndale Avenue. It will hurt
businesses on Lyndale Avenue. Doesn't want
to lose Lyndale Garden Center because it is a
major attraction for people from outside
Richfield to come and shop in the HUB
shopping area. Prefers to see apartments to be
acquired for storm pond. If Lyndale Garden
Center is acquired. she wants it relocated close
by. such as the K-Mart site.
0
•
•
•
r:
ATTACHMENT C
Property Tax Comparison: Garden Center and Reuse Scenarios
1. Garden Center, Current Situation:
• Land Area 9.93 acres
• Building area 48,940 square feet (11% building coverage)
• Payable 1997 Taxes $153,017.15 (actual, less specials & fees)
2. Commercial Reuse after Pond
• Land Area 6 acres (approximately)
• Building area 65,340 square feet (25% building coverage)
• Taxes $294,030 (assumes new taxes at $4.50/square foot)
• 3. Residential Reuse after Pond
• Land Area 6 acres (approximately)
• Number of units 120 Market Rate Condominium Units (20 units/acre)
• Taxes $268,780 (assumes average market value of $120,000/unit)
40
0
17?
• EXCERPT FROM 3/25/97 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
(UNAPPROVED)
PC Letter #11
ITEM #3 RLAP Storm Water Pond
Community Development Manager Melin presented _three options. for the location
of the storm water collection pond for an expanded 35W. The three sites were at the
current Woodlake Park Apartments, a residential housing area to the north of Richfield
Lake and the Lyndale Garden Center. Mr. Melin further stated that staff recommends the
Lyndale Garden Center as the suggested site for the collection pond.
Following questions from Commissioners Linnihan and Kilian, Pete Willenbring,
WSB Associates, reviewed the sites from an engineering perspective. He stated that the
Lyndale Garden Center site best met the engineering criteria concerning the location of
the collection pond.
Commissioner Kilian asked about transportation issues concerned with the
• highway reconstruction. Transportation Engineer Tom Foley stated that the same
entrances and exits from I-35W and the Crosstown 62 would remain the same with
exception to northbound 35W and eastbound 62.
Mr. Lawrence Wozniczka, 6744 Wentworth Avenue, suggested that an analysis of
the tax advantages and disadvantages of the three proposals be conducted. He added that
he would not want to see the Lyndale Garden Center be the selected site but would prefer
the blighted housing to the north of the lake.
Commissioners Kilian and Hansen concurred that they would like to see the tax
figures for all three sites before they make a decision.
Commissioner Bjorklund stated that she was concerned that representatives of the
Lyndale Garden Center did not show at the meeting and stated that she felt that the
Lyndale Garden Center would be the proper site because it met the land use criteria set up
for selection of the site for the pond. Commissioner Gepner agreed with Bjorklund and
further stated that the Lyndale Garden Center site would be the easiest to purchase.
Mr. Steve Kirchner, Manager, Richfield Bank and Trust, stated that he had met
with the owners of the Lyndale Garden Center. Mr. Kirchner further stated that the
owners of the Garden Center had said that they would have representation at the meeting.
• He then added that he would like to see the commercial businesses remain on that section
of Lyndale Avenue.
I L-1 ti
Mr. Phil Swanson, 6500 Woodlake Drive, stated his concerns about the •
appearance of the commercial businesses to the north of the Lyndale Garden Center on
Lyndale Avenue.
Commissioner Hadley stated that there is a list of criteria that must be met in
order to construct a storm water collection pond and that the Lyndale Garden Center
property best meets those criteria.
WGepner, SBjorklund to recommend approval of the Lyndale Garden Center a
the site of the collection pond.
E
0
Richfield Lake Area Key Events 1996-1997
(as of July 30, 1997)
0
Date Event
March 4, 1996 City Council Study Session; update on surface water
management, opportunity to propose options to MnDOT that
explore stormwater management that does not include the taking
of Wood Lake Apartments at 63rd and Dupont Avenue.
June 1996 Completion of Richfield Lake Area Planning Analysis by Tom
Martinson, consultant.
July 1, 1996 Special City Council/HRA study session; a discussion of city
development opportunities that includes the Richfield Lake Area
as a potential area.
July 23, 1996 The Planning Commission receives a presentation of the
Martinson report by Tom Martinson. City Council and HRA
members are invited to participate.
August 19, 1996 The HRA authorizes planning consultant Fred Hoisington to
assist with an evaluation of the Richfield Lake Area.
September 24, 1996 The Planning Commission hosts a Visual Imagery Workshop
conducted by Tom Martinson. The intent of the workshop is to
gather information and opinions on community appearance and
image and relate it to Richfield Lake Area.
October 1996 Martinson summarizes the results of the Imagery Workshop in a
report. Recommendations are made relative to the highway,
bridge and noise wall design to assist the city engineer in working
on design issues with MnDOT.
November 18, 1996 The HRA authorizes developer consultant CSM to assist with an
evaluation of the Richfield Lake Area, CSM includes additional
members, Rottlund Homes, and Tushie-Montgomery Architects.
December 16, 1996 Dan Linnihan, Planning Commission Chair, meets with the Wood
Lake Townhome Association at their request at their annual
meeting.
December 26, 1996 Letter from city staff to eight Townhome Association members
who attended December 16 meeting. Assurance provided that the
association will be kept informed and that currently there are no
plans for the area.
January 14, 1997 MnDOT sponsors an open house at Richfield Lutheran Church to
provide information about the upgrading of I-35W and Crosstown
62. Fred Hoisington is available to answer questions about
Richfield Lake Area as a study area.
•
Date Event
January 22, 1997 Sun-Current reports on the MnDOT open house, that the
Richfield Lake Area is being studied and that public
meetings are being planned.
January 25, 1997 Richfield Remodeling Fair at the Richfield High School. Fred
Hoisington is available to answer questions about Richfield Lake
as a study area.
February 1997 A Question/Answer summary shares information about the
Richfield Lake Area study and is distributed through Richfield's
Your City. The Community is invited to attend a February 18
Public Information Meeting. "
February 7, 1997 A letter signed by the Mayor and the Chairs of the HRA, Planning
Commission and Community Services Commission was sent to
approximately 1,350 residents, property owners, tenants and
businesses inviting them to the February 18 Information Meeting
and the March 1 Visioning Session. The neighborhood of 1,350
is identified as the area east of I-35W, south of Crosstown 62,
west of the Soo Line Railway and north of 68th Street. Boards
and Commissions for the City also received the same letter.
February 18, 1997 Fred Hoisington hosts an information meeting to discuss the
Richfield Lake Area and received comments and questions from
participants. Approximately 100 people participated.
February 19, 1997 By letter, the Mayor invites 167 community leaders to the March
1 Visioning Session. The contacts include city boards and
commissions, community groups, churches, Chamber of
Commerce and school leaders.
March 1, 1997 Fred Hoisington hosts a visioning session attended by 70 people
who help define the areas current function and possible future role
that gathers information on defining the Richfield Lake area for
the community.
March 10, 1997 The Sun-Current prints the expansion plans for I-35W and the
Crosstown Commons.
March 13, 1997 A public information open house was presented at Richfield City
Hall. A display was provided showing the various options for
stormwater storage including the Wood Lake Apartments, the
Lyndale Garden Center and an option that would include
acquisition of single family properties.
By letter, Tom Foley, Transportation Engineer, notified the public
of the March 24 Regular City Council meeting, March 25 Regular
Planning Commission meeting and April 14 Regular City Council
meeting.
•
r1
Date Event
March 14, 1997 A joint memo to the Council and HRA Commissioners outlines
the summary of the advantages and disadvantages of the various
storm water holding sites for I-35W expansion that were
discussed during the March 13 open house.
March 17, 1997 The HRA, City Council, Planning Commission and Community
Services Commission held a workshop at the City Hall Council
Chambers to receive feedback about the February 18 information
meeting and March 1 vision session.
March 25, 1997 A presentation is given to the Planning Commission by Pete
Willenbring regarding the potential location for a new storm
water storage pond near Richfield Lake. The Commission
accepts the staff recommendation and vote 5-3 to recommend the
Lyndale Garden Center as the site of the collection pond.
March 26, 1997 The Sun-Current publishes an article stating that residents near
the Richfield Lake area wish to keep the lake as a natural habitat.
April 1997 The Richfield Lake Area Newsletter is printed and distributed to
approximately 1,300 residents and businesses, outlining the
problems, opportunities and the process by which the Richfield
Lake Area is being studied.
April 14, 1997 The Richfield City Council discusses the location of the holding
pond for the expansion of I-35W and Crosstown 62. Jim Prosser
states that the Planning Commission recommended the site to be
located on the property currently owned by Lyndale Garden
Center. The Council votes 3-2 to table consideration of the
location of the storm water storage pond. Tim Duoos, owner of
Lyndale Garden Center, made a presentation to the Council and
submitted written comments.
April 23, 1997 The Sun-Current publishes an article concerning the reaction of
Tim Duoos, owner of Lyndale Garden Center, to a proposal to
acquire the garden center in order to make way for a two-acre
storm water storage pond. The article contains dialogue from the
April 14th City Council meeting.
May 1997 The May issue of Richfield's Your City includes an update
regarding the Richfield Lake Area. It outlines the vision
statement and guiding principles for the area that have been
developed.
May 5, 1997 The entire vision statement and guiding principles that were
summarized in the Richfield's Your City newsletter is mailed to
business owners and residents in the Richfield Lake Area.
0
•
•
Date Event
June 3, 1997 Fred Hoisington and Michael Schroeder hold a public meeting for
residents and businesses regarding the Richfield Lake Area.
Approximately 50 people attend. Public input is collected
regarding two different lake area concepts. The concepts identify
the high intensity development area at 66th Street and Lyndale
Avenue and different ways of relating more directly to the lake in
a housing and retail sense.
June 25, 1997 A letter from Richfield State Agency expresses concern that the
business community has not had an opportunity to be involved.
The City response is for both businesses and residents to work
together on development strategies and participate in the
opportunities provided.
July 1997 The second issue of the Richfield Lake Area Newsletter is printed
and distributed and discusses two different concepts for
redevelopment.
July 29, 1997 A public meeting is held for residents and businesses regarding a
composite plan derived from feedback from the June 3 meeting
on two concepts. Areas for housing change are noted north and
west of Richfield Lake and adjacent to the Holy Angels' athletic
field. Feedback will continue to be received on the composite
concept through September.
[H:/CDADMIN/RLAP/EVENTS.DOC]