Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2-3-92 agenda
CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 1992 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER I. 6:00-6:45 P.M. DISCUSSION OF FEASIBILITY OF CONSTRUCTION OF THEMED MINIATURE GOLF COURSE IN VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK OF RICHFIELD ,STUDY SESSION LETTER N0..8 II. 6:45-7:00 P.M. DISCUSSION OF REPAIRING. CARS IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 9 III. 7:00-8:00 P.M. DISCUSSION OF CITY OF RICHFIELD'S 1992 LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES AND POLICY PACKAGE STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 10 IV. 8:00-8:15 P.M. DISCUSSION OF FUTURE ROLE OF HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION SERVING SENIORS AND DISABLED STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 11 V. 8:15-8:45 P.M. DISCUSSION OF RICHFIELD'S POSITION ON PROPOSED METROPOLITAN COUNCIL REGIONAL TRANSIT FACILITIES PLAN STUDY SESSION. LETTER NO. 12 VI. 8:45-9:00 P.M. DISCUSSION OF AIRPORT ISSUES STUDY SESSION LETTER N0. 13 9:00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Study Session Letter No. 13 Agenda February 3, 1992 Issue Statement• Update on airport issues. Background: The following information regarding airport issues is provided. • 4-22 .EIS - The 4-22 EIS deadline has been extended to February 28, 1992. The extension was provided as a result of Richfield's request for additional data. The data could not be provided on a timely basis from the MAC and FAA. MnDOT extended the deadline in order that the information could be provided and reviewed by the City prior to completion of our comments. • Noise Ordinance - A Noise Ordinance has been prepared for the MSP. The ordinance would prohibit the use of Stage II operations from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. A copy of the ordinance is provided. It would be appropriate for the. City to consider a position on the matter. The proposed ordinance would initially cap Stage II operations at a level. comparable to proceeding year for the same period. .After an initial period projected at six months,. Stage II aircraft operations during the nighttime period would be prohibited. • Airport Communications - The next issue of the airport newsletter is currently being prepared. for publication. The issue will be included in the Your City/Your Schools as well as an insert in a future issue of Richfield Sun Current. The Metropolitan Airports Commission has agreed to reconsider the possibility of FAA capacity design review for MSP. Copy of correspondence related to this matter is attached. Recommended Motion: Review airport status issues. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Identify the need to review the City's position regarding airport issues. 2. Identify additional items of concern to Council Members. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item will be presented for discussion at the Study Session of February 3, 1992. The comment period for the proposed Stage II Nighttime Use Ordinance has resolution has been prepared o the City Council. The matter Council consideration prior to been extended to March 9, 1992. A n this item for consideration by may be placed on the agenda for that time. Res c ully submitted, Jam D. Prosser Cit Manager JDP:cak RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING A PROPOSED MAC ORDINANCE LIMITING NIGHTIME STAGE III OPERATIONS AT M$P WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Airport Sound Abatement Council has established the Stage III Working Group; and WHEREAS, the Stage III Working Group has reviewed a variety of alternatives to accelerate the use of Stage III airplanes at the airport; and WHEREAS, a federal legislation has been approved to increase the use of Stage III aircraft nationwide by the year 2000; and WHEREAS, the Stage III Working Group has proposed an ordinance which would provide some relief from noisier jets during the hours of 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.; and WHEREAS, many Richfield residents are adversely impacted by the noise. from airplanes flying during these hours. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: 1. The City of Richfield encourages the use of quieter Stage III aircraft nighttime operations. 2. The proposed nighttime ordinance should be expanded to exclude the use of Stage III planes during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to _7:00 a.m. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of 1992. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk MEIROPOLTTAN AIItPORTS COON ~ ''' STAGE 2 AIItCRAFT NIGI;TTIIlVk~ USE P:ESTRICTION ORDINANCE NO. An Ordinance to promote and conserve. the public safety, health, peace, and convenience and to reducx nighttime aircraft noise in the communities surrounding the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport by limiting, and eventually eliminating, nighttime operations with Stage 2 aircraft, as as equitable balance between the needs of air 'commerce and economic development, and the environmental protection of azea residents from disruptive noise created by flights during those hours when peoplc near the Airport aze sleeping. WHEREAS the. Metropolitan Airports Commission owns and operates the Minneapolis-St Paul International Airport and has the legal authority to promtilgate Ordinances, enter into contracts, and act as necessary to achieve the safe and efficient operation of the Airport; and WHEREAS the Metropolitan Airporu Commission is obligated under its charter and statutory authority to determine in the public interest the proper balance between the metropolitan area's aced for adequate air navigation and transportation servicxs and facilities and the Commission's obligations to protect the residents of the azea from adverse emrironmental impacts and to protect itself from legal liability resulting from excessive levels of aircraft noise; and ' WHEREAS the Commission has, since -the advent of jet aircraft, undertaken a continuing series of programs and actions .designed to mitigate the noise impacu of air transportation on communities adjaccnt to the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport; and WHEREAS in March 1990 the Commission. established the Stage 3 Utilization Working Group ("Working Group") to evaluate proposals before the Commission aimed at increasing use of quiet Stage. 3 aircraft at the Airport and alleviating the problems caused by aircraft noise, including a proposal to restrict Stage 2 aircraft during nightime hours; and WHEREAS after study and analysis of these proposals the Working Group and Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council approved in concept a recommendation to alleviate the disruptive impact of nighttime aircraft operations by restricting use of Stage 2 aircraft at the Airport during the nighttime hours; NOW, THEREFORE, the Metropolitan Airports Coaunission does ordain: The following words and phrases when used in this Ordinance shall havc the meanings respectively ascribed to them in this Section: 1.1 .AFFECTED AIRCRAFT: A subsonic or supersonic aircraft operand at the Airport with a maximum certificated gross takeoff weight of more than 75,000 pounds, except military aircraft or other aircraft owned and operand by the U.S. gaverament 12 AFFECTED AIRCRAFT OPERATION: A landing or takeoff of :an Affecud Aircraft at the Airport, excxpt for (1) a landing necxssitand by mechanical failure, air traffic control delays, fuel shortage or other emergency conditions or (2) a landing of an aircraft scheduled for maintenance at the Airport, where that landing was scheduled outside the nighttime period but was delayed due to mechanical problems at the point of origin. 13 AIR CARRIER: Any entity conducting or proposing to conduct operations at the Airport pursuant to a cxrtificate to conduct air transportation services in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 1371, 1372, 1375, 1386, 1387, and/or 1388, and/or any other applicable provision of law by which such entity may conduct commercial air. transportation sezvicrs. Any group of Air Carriers serving the Airport that is subject to more than 50 percent ownership or control by a single entity shall be collectively deemed to be a single Air Carrier for purposes of this Ordinance. 1.4 Aircraft Operator. The entity responsible for as Affected Aircraft operation at the Airport. 1S AIItPORT: Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport - Wold Chamberlain Field, or "MSP," a public airport under the supervision, operation, direction and control of the Commission, and located in Hennepin County in the State of Minnesota. 1.6 .COMMISSION: The Metropolitan Airports Commission or "MAC," sometimes referred to as the Minneapolis•St. Paul Metropolitan Airporu Commission, a public corporation organized and operating pursuant to Chapter 500, Laws of Minnesota 1943•and amendments thereto, ownez and operator of the Airport. 1.7 FAA: Federal Aviation Administration. 1.8 FAR:. Federal Aviation Regulation, found in Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations. 1.9 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: The Executive Director of the Metropolitan Airports Commission. 1.10 MONTHI.Y PERIOD: The monthly period begins on the first of each calendar month and ends on the last day of the calendar month. 1.11 STAGE 2 AIRCRAFT: A United States registered Affected Aircraft certified by the FAA as complying with the Stage 2 noise standards of Appendix G Part 36 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 36), or an Affected Aircraft certified by ffie country of registry as complying with the noise standazds of,Chapter 2, Volume I of Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. Where an aircraft is certified as both Stage 2 and Stage 3, depending on landed weight, all reports under this Ordinance must disclose the leaded weight of the aircraft. 1.12 STAGE 3 AIRCRAFt: A United States registered Affected Aircraft certified by the FAA as complying with the Stage 3 noise standazds of Appendix C, Part 36 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 36), or an Affected Aircraft cxrtified by the country of registry as complying with the noise standards of Chapur 3, Volume I of Annex -16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation; this definition shall also include aircraft cxrtified to any more stringent noise standazds which may be adopud by the FAA or the International Civil Aviation Organization in the future. The use. of voluntary operating uchniques at the Airport to comply with Stage 3 noise standazds in lieu of FAA cxrtification shall not bring an aircraft within the definition of Stage 3 for purpose of this ordinance. 2.1 This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its enactment by the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission and shall remain in full force and effect until amended, modified or rtscinded. 3.1 This ordinancx shall apply is all respects to every Affected Aircraft that now operates or in the future may operate at the Airport. . 4.1 To reduce avcraft noise in the communities surrounding the Airport during the Nighttime Period (11 p.m. and 6 a.m. C.S.T. or C.D.T.), the following nighttime restriction shall be observed. 4.1.1 Ni ttime Stage 2 Baseline: On and after the effective dau of this ordinance each ..Aircraft Operator shall be assigned a Nighttime Stage 2 Baseline applirable to each Monthly Period. _ 4.12 Each Aircraft Operator's Nighttime Stage 2 Baseline for a given Monthly Period shall be the number of Stage 2 operations it flew during the Nighttime Period in that same month of the preceding year. For example, an Aircraft Operator's Nighttime Stage 2 Baseline for the Monthly Period from August 1, 1991 to August 31, 1991 would be the number of operations it flew with Stage 2 aircraft in the Nighttime Period from August 1, 1990 to August 31, 1990. ' SECTION 7 PENALTiE.S AND SANCTIONS 7.1 MISDEMEANOR Any person (including a corporation, compaay, firm, partnership, or a joint stock association) violating any of the provisions of this Ordinance shall be punished by imprisonment for not more thaw ninety (90) days or by fine of not more than seven hundred dollars (5700), or both, for each suc3t violation. Each instance of as Air Carrier operating a Stage 2 aircraft at the Airport in violation of this Ordinance, any failure to file a required report in a timely manner, or any other violation of the provisions of this Ordinance shall be deemed to be a separate violation. 72 LOSS OF NIGHTTIME STAGE 2 BASELINE Any Air Carrier that violates this Ordinance during the period between the time of its enactment aad March 31, 1992, shall be subject to loss of all or part of its. Nighttime Stage 2 Baseline for such period of time as the Commission after noticx and opportunity for hearing shall deLerminC. SECTION 8 SEVERABII.ITY OF REGIJLATiON S.1 If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof is held unconstitutional or otherwise unlawful, the remainder of the Ordinance aad the application of the same shall not be affected thezeby. SECTION-BY~ECITON ANALYSIS OF MEIROPOLTTAN AIItPOR'IS C;O1~~IIVII.SSION STAGE 2 AIRCRAFT NIGH11~ USE ORDINANCE This section defines the words and phrases used in the Ordinance. Subsection 1.1 defines "AFFECTED AIRCRAFT" to include aircraft with a gross takeoff weight of more than 75,000 pounds, except military aircraft or other aircraft owned and operated by the U.S. government. Subsection 12 defines "AFFECTED AIRCRAFT OPERATION" to include all landings and takeoffs by Affected Aircraft at the Airport, except those due to mechanical failure, air traffic control delays,. fuel shortage or other emergency conditions, or landings of aircraft scheduled for maintenance at MSP that were delayed by mechanical problems at the point of origin. This section establishes an effective date for the Ordinance of thirty (30) days after enactment, and provides that the Ordinance shall continue in effect until amended, modified or rescinded This section states that the Ordinance applies to all Affected Aircraft that operate, now or in the future, at the Airport. This section establishes the "nighttime period" of 11 p.m. to 6 a.m., and provides for two restrictions on the use of Stage 2 aircraft at the Airport: first, between the effective date and April 1, 1992, a cap on Stage 2 operations during the nighttime period; second, on and after April 1, 1992, a ban.. on .Stage 2 operations during the nighttime period. The section provides that each Aircraft Operator at the Airport will have a Nighttime Stage 2 Baseline, which equals, for each month, the number of Stage 2 operations that Aircraft Operator flew during. the nighttime periods in the same month of the preceding. yeaz. That Baseline serves as the "cap" on Stage Z operations in the Nighttime Period for that Aircraft Operator between the effective date and April 1, 1992. The section establishes a ban on Stage 2 operations in the Nighttime Period on and after April 1, 1992. Aa exception from the ban is available to an Aircraft Operator that can show the MAC that the flight in question was originally scheduled to land outside of the 4.13 Initial imitation Period: From the date on which this ordinance takes effect .through March 31, 1892, no Aircraft Operator shall conduct a total number of nighttime stage 2 operations in any given Monthly Period which excxeds iu applicable Nighttime Stage 2 Baseline. . 4.1.4 Nigh 'me Period Stage 2 Ban: Beginning April 1,1992, t1o Aircraft Operator shall conduct any Stage 2 operation with an Affected Aircraft during the . ~ Nighttime Period 4.15 ~,~~ 4.15.1 Beginning April 1, 1992, as Aircraft Operator conducting scheduled commercial service using a Stage 2 aircraft may land that. aircraft during the Nighttime Period if the flight (1) was originally scheduled to land outside of the Nighttime Period, (2) ' was delayed due to mechanical problems or weather conditions, . sad (3) does not arrive at the Airport more than thirty minutes before or thirty minutes after its originally scheduled time of arrival. _ 4.152 An aircraft operator who conducts a Stage 2 operation during the Nighttime Period. after March 31, 1992 must report that. operation as required by Section 5.1, below. If the aircraft operator believes that the operation falls within the exception provided above, it should request an exception when it files its next monthly report and should provide all information available showing that it meets the three requirements for an exception. The burden is on the Aircraft Operator to show that it meets all three of the requirements for an excxption. 4.153. No excxption will be granted to an Aircraft Operator that fails to make a good faith effort to schedule its flights acxording to - their actual times of operation, or that schedules one or more flights that fail to arrive or depart on schedule and that instead operate during the Nighttime Period more than 15% of the time. SECTION 5 COMPLIANCE ... . -- _ ~ -_ S.1 - To show compliance with the provisions of this ordinance, beginning with the first Monthly_ Period after the effective date of this Ordinance, and each Monthly Period thereafter, .each Aircraft Operator shall submit a report to the Commission that lists all Affected Aircraft that have operated at the Airport during the any Nighttime Period in the precxding month by the aircraft characteristics in 5.1.1 through 5.1.4 below aid that provides the additional summary information in S.iS through 5.1.7 as follows: 5.1.1 Type or class and model number; 5.12 Type of engines; 5.13 Registration number; 5.1.4 Whether the aircaaft is certified by the FAA as complying with Part 36 Stage 2 or Stage 3 noise standards (and, where the aircraft is certified as both Stage 2 and Stage 3 depending on landed weight, the landed weight of the aircraft); S.1S Number of Affected Aircraft operations during the Nighttime Period for the preceding month with actual and scheduled arrival or departure times; 5.1.6 Number of Affected Aircraft operations by. Stage 2 aircraft during the Nighttime Period for the preceding month. 5.1.7 Number of Stage 2 aircraft operations during the nighttime period that were (1) not Affected Aircraft Operations under this Section 12 of this Ordinance or (2) excepted from the restrictions of this Ordinance under Section 4.15. Any aircraft operator claiming as exception under Section 4.15 should request an exception and provide required information justifying that exception. 5.2 Each Aircraft .Operator's required monthly report shall be submitted to the Commission within 20 days after completion of the precxding monthly period. 53 The Executive Duector shall provide those administrative procedures necxssary for reporting compliance with this ordinance. 5.4 Zf as Aircraft Operator conducts no Stage 2 operations during the Nighttime Period in two succeeding monthly periods, it may cease filing monthly reports beginning with the second month in which it had no Stage 2 operations during the Nighttime Period, aad need not resume filing .monthly reports until 20 days after the next monthly period in which it conducts Stage 2 operations during the Nighttime Period 6.1 An Aircraft Operator may petition the Commission for an extension of the date provided in Section 4.1.4 of this ordinance. The Commission may at its discretion grant an extension of the Initial Limitation Period until December 31,1992, to an Aircraft Operator that demonstrates that it cannot comply witb the April 1 date and shows that it has firm orders for Stage 3 replacement aircraft or hushldu for Stage 2 aircraft that will be installed by the December date. The burden shall be on the Aircraft Operator seeking an extension to show that it meets these conditions. • Nighttime Period, was delayed due to mechanical problems or weather conditions, and did - not land more than thirty minutes before or thirty minutes after its originally scheduled time of arrival. The exception is not available to operators that do not make a good faith effort to schedule flights accurately. SECTION S COMPLIANCE - This section provides for monthly reporting by Aircraft Operators to demonstrate compliance with the Ordinance. ' SECTION 6 EXTENSION OF COMPLIANCE DATE This section provides that the MAC may extend the compliance date for the - Nighttime Stage 2 ban from April 1,1992 to December 31, .1992, for an Aircraft Operator that cannot meet .the April l date and that has firm orders for Stage 3 replacement aircraft that will be in service or hushkits for Stage Z aircraft that will be installed by the December date. .This section provides that violation of the Ordinancx is a misdemeanor, and that each violation is punishable by a 5700 fine, 90 days imprisonment, or both. In addition, Aircraft Operators violating the Ordinance between the effective date and April 1, 1992, may lose their Baseline allocation. This section provides that any provision of the Ordinance held unlawful may be severed and voided without affecting the applicability of the remainder of the Ordinance. I. SU~IIKARY OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE The proposed Ordinance would limit and eventually eliminate operations with Stage 2 aircraft between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. C.S.T. or C.D.T. at the .Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP). For purpose of this ordinancx, the "nighttime period" includes the hours between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. C.S.T. or C.D.T.; the affected time span is thus narrower than the Federal Aviation Administration's traditional 10 ~.m. to 7 a.m. nighttime period used for calculation of aircraft noise contours). In the initial phase (between 30 days after enactment of the Ordinance and April 1, 1992), aircraft operators are limited to their "baseline" number of Stage 2 operations in the nighttime period. An aircraft operator's baseline will be set equal to the member of nighttime Stage 2 flights it had during the same month of the preceding year.. On and after April 1, 1991, Stage 2 operations are prolu'bited during the nighttime boon. MAC may grant an extension until December 31, 1992, to an aircraft operator that cannot comply with the April 1 date and shows that it has firm order for Stage 3 replacxment aircraft that will be in service or hushldts for Stage 2 aircraft that will be installed by the December date. II. ~ ANTICIPATID OR ACTUAL COSTS AND BF.NEFPIS OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Noise Problem at MSP Creation of the Stage 3 Utilization Worldn~ Group In July 1989, MAC staff presented an airline Stage 3 Utilization stuvey it had prepared of ten U.S. international airports to the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC). The survey showed that MSP had a low overall Stage 3 percentage (30%) and that Northwest Airlines, which hubs at MSP, had a low Stage 3 percxntage at the airport (27%). . On August 9,1989, Minneapolis City Councilmember Steve Cramer responded to the relatively low proportion of Stagc 3 aircraft flying to and from MSP by proposing to the Comaussion that it prohibit Stage 2 operations between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. That proposed restriction is embodied in the Ordinance. Alternative restrictions, including increasing the stringenry of goals under the current voluntary "noise budget," a program under which each carrier serving the airport strives to stay within an allocation of "noise energy;" prohibition on the use of Stage 2 aircraft imported from Europe at MSP; a requirement that each avline fly the same percentage of Stage 3 aircraft at MSP as in its overall fleet; and use of differential landing fees, were also discussed in Mr. Cramer's letter. MAC has subsequently negotiated a differential landing fee with all signatory air carriers and imposes an identical charge on other users through ordinance. In March, 1990, is response to the MAC staff findings and Councflmember Cramer's proposals, MAC formed the Stage 3 Utilization Working Group to, consider these proposals. The Working Group is composed of representatives of the MAC, local government groups,. state agen©es, Northwest Airlines and other carriers. Aa FAA representative is a nonvoting member of the Working Group. The goal of the Working Group is to reduce noise at MSP by promoting a substantially increased percentage utilization of Stage- 3 aircraft. After the Working Group and MASAC analyzed the proposed restriction and various alternatives as discussed below, it recommended to-the Commission that the proposed restriction be adopted as Commission Pou~• Between March, 1990 and Apri1,1991, MACS Working Group considered a number of proposals, including those originally raised by Councilmember Cramer, to reducx noise at MSP. The Working Group studied current and projecud fleet mixes for carriers serving MSP;. the ADNE noise budget goals; nighttime Stage 2 utilization at MSP; noise restrictions on Stage 2 aircraft at .other airports; and options for nighttime Stage 2 fleet restrictions. The Working Group collected extensive data about daytime aad nighttime operations by specific carriers and by specific aircraft types at MSP. On April 19, 1991 the Working Group issued an Interim Report summarizing its findings and recommendations. In 1989, there were an average of 416 daily aircraft departures (and an equal number of arrivals) performed by scheduled air carriers and regional carriers at MSP. Thirty-one percent of the air carrier flights were flown with Stage 3 aircraft. By the years 2000 and 2005, 524 and 550 scheduled departures are forecast; before enactment of the National Noise Policy and without implementation of the Working Group recommendations, Stage 3 percxntages were forecast to be 70 percent and 89 percxnt, respectively. The Working. Group .found that average 1990 activity between 11 p.m. aad 6 a.m: included approximately 8 daily scheduled arrivals and 4 daily scheduled departures, with 4.6 of the arrivals and 2.6 of the departures flown with Stage 2 aircraft. In the broader nighttime period of 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., there are approximately 29 daily scheduled arrivals and 32 daily scheduled departures, with 17.1 of the arrivals and 212 of the departures flown with Stage 2 aircraft. 2 Stage 2 flighu between 1l p.m. and 6 a.m. are especially disruptive to sleep of residenu around the airport. .Analysis of noise complainu received by MAC's Noise Complaint Hot Line indicates that each aircraft operation between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. is 6 times more likely to result in a complaint than an operation between 10 p.m and 11 pam, and over 1Z limbs more likely to draw a complaint than a flight between S p.m. and 10 p.m. One late night flight over St. Paul or Minneapolis can generate from 5 to 15 complaint calls within the next 20 minutes. Complaint data also shows -that Stage 2 night departures aze more likely to restilt in complaints than are arrivals or Stage 3 departures. ' The Working Group also im-estigated the availability of programs to convert Stage 2 aircraft into Stage 3 aircraft, for carriers unable to finance new aircraft. These conversion programs imiolve either acoustically lining existing engines ("httshkdtting") or outright engine replacxment with newer, quieter engines, to meet FAR Part 36 Stage 3 noise levels. Hushldtting, the less-expensive option, typically achieves only the *n~n~**~um Stage 3 noise requirements, while adding weight and reducing aircraft performance. Hush ldu have been certified for installation on Boeing 727•100s and -200s and DC9-10s and -30s; and hush liu aze being developed for Boeing 737-200 and DC-8-b2/63 series aircraft. Re-engining is considerably more expensive. It typically achieves more than minimum Stage 3 compliancx and improves aircraft performance and fuel efficiency. Re-engining is currently available for the Boeing 727-100 and -200 and DC-8-61/62/63. B. EFFECT OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON AIItPORT OPERATIONS, ,CAPACITY, AND. AIItCRAFT NOISE The following numbers of fGghu were flown with Stage 2 aircraft during the 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. period in 1990. The Working Group estimates that approximately this level of operations would be affected by the proposed ban on use of Stage Z aircraft during that time period: Passenger carriers: total: 0.9 arrivals daily Northwest: 0.0 arrivals daily Continental, Delta, United & Midway: 0.9 arrivals daily aggregate Cargo carriers: total: DHL: UPS: .Burlington Consolidated Freight variable by month 4 arrivals in October 18 arrivals/month April-Sept. 4 arrivals/month Feb.=May 44 arrivals/44 departures monthly 3 Charters: total: about 67 arrivals/ 15 departures per month Sun Country 63 arrivals/12 dep./month Hawaiian 3 arrivals/2 dep./month Other. 1-2 flights in some months The costs and benefiu of the proposed Ordinance were analyzed with respect to the effect on noise and on airport operations and capacity. In addition, the Working Group looked at impacts on the regional economy and aircraft acquisition and operating costs. The proposed Ordinancx would eliminate appro~dmately S daily arrivals and 3 daily departures by Stage 2 aircraft between 1l p.m. and 6 a.m. The elimination or replacement of these flights by Stage 3 aircraft would remove the most disruptive events during the nighttime hours. ff applied to 1989 noise conditions, the reduction in Stage 2 flights would reduce the population within the Lda 65 coatour from 41,000 to 36,000 persons. The proposed Ordinances would have no direct impact on airport operations and capacity. Instead, as discussed below, they would affect airline operations to some small degree, and might have some effect on the quality of air service received by MSP. There would be minimal impact on the scheduled passenger carriers serving MSP. At present, based on the October 1989 to September 1990 period, there are only 13 daily Stage 2 arrivals and no departures in this time period. The impacts on cargo aad charter carriers would be somewhat greater. Cargo Stagc 2 activity in this period currently includes 12 arrivals and 22 departures daily. This inckudes operations by four different carriers: DHI, UPS, Burlington and . Consolidaud Freight tEmery). Cargo activity would have to be replaced with Stage 3 aircraft or rescheduled; it is possible that Consolidated Freight, which carries mail for the U.S. Postal Service, might terminate service, but that contract would probably be picked up by another cargo carrier or trucking comparry. Charter Stage 2 activity inckudes 2.1 daily arrivals and 0.4 daily departures, principally by Sun Country. Charter activity would have to be replaced with Stage 3 aircraft or rescheduled to other. hours. If flighu are rescheduled, with departing flighu leaving later and arriving flights returning earlier, charter passengers might lose a minimal amount of vacation time. It is possible that some operations would be eliminated. 4 - For those airlines that acquired Stage 3 aircraft, the increased efficienry of those aircraft could be off-set by larger size.' Fuel and operating cost efficiencies for purchased or leased aircraft would benefit passenger carriers more, and charter and cargo operators less, because the latter make fewer .flights -per day. The affected passenger flights represent a small proportion of total airport service,. so there would be only minimal impact on the quality of scheduled passenger av service provided by carriers at MSP. Rescheduling or replacement of Stage 2 cargo and charter aircraft by the e~tisting carriers appears to be achievable. In addition, other cargo carriers might be able to replace the service with compliant afrcraft or in other time periods. There is a potential for impacts on cargo and charter service if replacement flights do not occur. tonal economic im~S: Because of the small number of flights affected, and the likelihood that ,those flights will be rescheduled or flown with Stage 3 aircraft, 'major regional economic impacu from the proposed Ordinaacx appears unlikely. Air~uisition and operating costs: Cargo and chartez carriers without Stage 3 aircraft would have to accelerate plans to acquire use of these aircraft if they did not want to reschedule flights out of these hours. III. ALTERNATIVE RF,SIRICTIONS CONSIDERED A Operational Alternatives The proposed measure is aimed at reducing the most disruptive noise events that affect residential areas around MSP in the most noise sensitive hours. Operations options, including preferential runway use and flight tracks to duect many of the 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. Stage 2 flights over more compatible areas, .are in place or under study in the Part 150 process. However, prevailing winds, weather conditions, aad traffic levels at the airport result in overflight of residential areas a significant percentage of time, requiring action to control the number of Stage 2 flights. 5 B. Measures to take effect during davtime hogs (7:00. a.m. to 10:00 v~tn.) The Daytime Measures considered fell into two types: first, revisions to the adsting noise budget, a voluntary system under which each carrier serving the airport strives to stay within an allocation of "noise energy;" sail, second, restrictions aimed at altering Stage 2/3 operational levels.. Additional detailed information about the current voluntary noise budget is available from MAC staff Several measures were considered. which would involve direct regulation of the percentage of Stage 2 operations by each carrier. For example, the Woridng Group considered setting pre-established "moderate" percentages of Stage 2 operations, with interim levels aad a final phase-out of 2005; more stringent levels with a final phase-out in 2000; a prohibition on a carrier operating more Stage 2 operations at MSP than the percentage of Stage 2 aircraft in the airline's fleet; a prolu'bition on a carrier operating a higher percxntage of Stage 2 operations at MSP than Stage 2 operations by that carrier's flcct. As indirect regulation, the Woridng Group considered changes to the Noise Budget program; amendment of the Noise Budget to establish noise energy cxilings (measured in "Average Daily Noise Energy" or "ADNE") through 1995 at levels tied to Stage 3 percxntage goals; amendment of the. Noise Budget with ADNE cxilings tied to forecasts of operations and aircraft mix as found in the Long-Range Comprehensive Plan far MSP; and amendment of the Noise Budget to shift some ADNE set aside for new entrants to incumbents. After elimination of some measures considered, the .best of the measures were evaluated in detail.. pecisj,Qn: Defer action on daytime phaseout goals pending review of National Noise Polity. C Measures to take effect during X11 10 n.m. to 7 a.m. period aced b': F Ain the Integrated Noise Model The period covered by the INM defines the hours when the FAA considers aircraft operation potentially disruptive to sleep. As a result of increased activity at MSP between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m and from 6 a.m. and 7 a.m., coupled with the noise "penalty" included in the Integrated Noise Model for operations during those periods, the L,dn 65 noise contow has e~cpanded to include approximately 41,000 people, composed to 19,000 in 1987. If all Stage 2 operations between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m were replaced with Stage 3 operations, the population within the 65 L,dn would fall from 41,000 to 21,500. . 6 The Working Group considered a number of .measures for the 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. period, including a range of phaseout dates beginning with 1995 and ending with 2000. There is considerably more activity in this period than in the narrower 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. period, with I1S daily scheduled arrivals and 15.4 daily scheduled departures by Stage 2 aircraft aatiapated is 1995. Northwest Airlines has considerable activity in this period,with flights to smaller communities by smaller Stage 2 aircraft for which they reportedly have no replacement Stage 3 aircraft and additional flights arriving to and departing from their maintenance base at MSP. Decision: Continue to discuss options for Stage 2 phaseout during full 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. period. D. Alternative meacLrec to take effect daring IVLA_c ti~httime period from it ,p_m_ to 6 gym. In addition to the proposed measure, alternatives discussed that would apply to the 11 p.m. to b am. period included Stage 2 phase-outs with a sage of phaseout dates between July 31, 1991 and December 31, 2000. pecision: Of the range of Stage 2 phase-out proposals, the preferred alternative is that embodied in the proposed Ordinance. kV. ALTERNATIVE RESTRICTIONS NOT INVOLVING AIRCRAFT RESTRICTIONS; COSTS AND BENEFITS COMPARF,D TO COSTS AND BENEFITS OF PROPOSID ORDINANCE Consideration has been given to measures involving no change in operating restrictions on Stage 2 aircraft. The principal purpose of the proposed measure is to eliminate the most disruptive flights during the hours when people in the vicinity of the airport are sleeping. This benefit would accrue to thousands of homeowners in the vicinity (41,000 people and 16,000 units in the 1989 Ldn b5 noise contour). The costs of insulating these homes to provide some of the same noise benefits would be appro:dmately 5240 mfllion. The benefiu of soundproofing are not equivalent to the benefits of eliminating nighttime Stage 2 flights, because soundproofing is only effective during the winter, when houses are closed and heated, and summer, when houses are closed and airconditioned. When doors and windows are open, soundproofing has no effect. ' 7 . , ' ~ .Acquisition of those homes that would be removed from the 65 Ldn by the proposed Ordinance-would be prohibitively expensive and not feasible due to unacceptable social impacts. To benefit the same number of people, approximately 3750 houses would have to be acquired at as average cost of 5100,000/house-for atotal cost of 5375 million. Further, while acquisition would remove the same number of people from within the 65 Ldn contour, it would not -benefit those residents outside that contour, while elimination of Stage 2 operations during the Nighttime Period would benefit all area residents affected by aircraft noise. 8 ;~ ~M ~: .., .~~ MINNESOTA ADVISORY COUNCIL ON METROPOLITAN AIRPORT PLANNING Senator Keith Langseth Co-chair Monday, January 27, 1992 Hugh ,Schilling Chairman, Metropolitan Airports Commission P.O. Box 11700 Twin City Airport Station St. Paul, MN 55111 Dear Mr. Schilling, Representative Bernie Lieder Co-chair We appreciate the Metropolitan Airports Commission's participation in the January 22, 1992 meeting with Mr. Ben DeLeon of the FAA Great Lakes Regional Office regarding airport capacity. We understand that the MAC plans to discuss some additional details with the FAA and decide by February 1 whether to request a study. Although the State Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning does not have the authority to require the MAC to do a capacity design study, we feel the MAC should give serious consideration to cooperating with the FAA in such a study. We believe this could avoid the possibility of future delays i.n the process. Please let us know whether the MAC wi.11 request a study. Sincerely, :~~~ ~ ~~~ ~/ ~ Senator Keith Langseth Co-Chair State Advisory Council KL/BL/ph . ~,> ~~ ~_. Representative Bernie Lieder. Co-Chair State Advisory Council cc: Members of the State Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning G-24 State Capitol, St. Paul, MN 55155 ,~~" W \) /V^) V i (TW] ' V- VY 1rV/^`, V i W V O I'~ H 7~ H a 0 (~ ~-~-i c--+ --; Q z ~ ~ \ ~ V • J~~) V j\ } J~ -{, I. !r' ~ T V/ .-~ c~ Y ~; a- ~.1 ~ ' ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ , > ~ ',T _~ `;~_. ~ ~ ( ~ ~ , Z+ p ?,.,., ~ S ~~ `~ ~ 3, -.. ~ .--, c~ ,~ ~ w z o W ~ ~ H o~ ~ ~ G z, ow , ~ w ~ ~, t7 zw ~ H ~ w~ x ~ w ~ aW aW'~~ o z rn ~ rn ~~~~ z ow z W ~~ ~~ ~~ a a NNW ~A O~~ d aHA ~ '"'~ ~~ ,...~ A (~' ~o w ~~ ~~ wo Jh w ~ a~ o e a ~ w az ~o wo ~o zrn zc~ -, °~~ ~r n ~c>~i QQ acs w 0 :~ ,. v ~+ ~--a Ems-, FI ~--~ r_~ --~-1 T ~- ' w~ a vi ~ ~ H ~ z ~ a ~ a ~ oz a~ x z ~ z a o ~, .., H z w rn a 0 a ~a as d ~ ~~„ w ~~ ~ w a ~ ~z ~o a ~a w~ ~a ~ w ~ ~W o ~ ~ ~ H w~ zH H za zz z ~ ~z x A a~ A w ~o E- ~v w wv w ~ wW wo a w w w o~ vii ww a ~. z ~ w ~ w a ~ ~ a H ~ ~ ~ ~ z ~ w ~ za w 4 w z A v iw ~w w 5~ ~~ a d v w w w xH win z~ win H~ tnv~ zw wz Ho rnc~ z~ w~ Ho ~nc~ cn a ~x ai o ~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Study Session Letter No. 12 Agenda February 3, 1992 _ Issue Statement: Richfield's position on proposed Metropolitan Council Regional Transit Facilities Plan. Background• Regional transportation studies are at a point where major decisions are needed. These studies include 135W and I494. Light rail transit (LRT) has been a topic of major debate during these studies. -There was some confusion related to transportation issues during the 1991 legislative session. The Metropolitan Council, a planning agency rather than an implementing agency, was directed to prepare a regional transportation plan. Members of the Richfield Ad Hoc 135W/I494 Traffic Committee met with a representative of the Metropolitan Council on January 23, 1992 to discuss the draft Regional Transit Facilities. Plan as prepared by the Metropolitan Council. A copy of the proposed plan is attached for Council-review. Following discussion, the. Committee directed staff to prepare a position statement on the Metropolitan Council Regional Transit Facilities Plan. It is important that Richfield's position be forwarded to the Metropolitan. Council as soon as possible because the plan, as modified, is scheduled to be presented to the Legislature on Thursday, February 13, 1992, for approval. Recommended Motion: Consider Richfield's position on the Metropolitan Council draft Regional Transit Facilities Plan and direct staff to prepare a position statement to be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council as quickly as possible. Basis of Recommendation: 1. A Regional Transit Facilities Plan prepared by the Metropolitan Council could have significant impact on current and future transportation studies and on the City of Richfield. 2. Other communities have prepared position statements related to the Metropolitan Council proposed Regional Transit Facilities Plan, copies of which are attached. 3. The proposed, plan is to be submitted to the Legislature for approval on Thursday, February 13, 1992. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: Members of the Ad Hoc Committee and City staff as well as a representative from the Metropolitan Council will be attending the February 3, 1992 Council Study Session. Council should give staff a clear indication of position at this Study Session so that a position statement may be prepared and submitted in a timely fashion. y submitted, James D/. Prosser City Hager JDP:cak Attachments METROPOLITAN COUNCIL TRANSIT FACILITIES PLAN CITY OF RICHFIELD POSITION STATEMENT The City of Richfield takes the following position on the .Draft Metropolitan Council Transit Facilities Plan: 1. Support transit that moves the most people in the most cost effective manner. 2. Support transit that recognizes the dispersed pattern of regional development. 3. Support the concept of transit hubs to encourage suburb to suburb transit service. 4. Recognize that improvements to regional transportation facilities are needed to protect local communities from the harm caused by diverting regional trips onto local streets. Regional trips are best served on the regional transportation network, otherwise increased traffic on local streets will result in even greater losses of homes. 5. Call for a delay on details of recommendations affecting I35W and I494 pending public hearings on the draft Environmental Impact Statements for 135W and I494. 6. Object to the selection of the LR~ (Light Rail Transit)-plus Lane Conversion as the. preferred alternative in the I35W corridor. This alternative diverts 2,400 peak hour vehicles to local streets causing avoidable significant environmental impacts and the need for $28 million in capital costs to widen local streets. 7. Question issues .raised by opponents of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes. Time savings of HOV lanes is significant and reliable. Enforcement is manageable. Weaving is not a problem and Diamond Lane Alternative will be the safest of all alternatives being considered for the corridor. 8. Stress the need to limit the impacts of carrying regional trips to the regional transportation corridor. Efforts should be made to keep the traffic off the local street system. 9. Oppose any LRT on Soo Line through Richfield as disruptive of the community and in conflict with adjacent land uses. Recommended by the Richfield 135W/I494 Ad Hoc Traffic Committee on January 23, 1992. t JAN 14 '9~ 1518 P.li3 ss ))city of s~) bioomington, mtnnesota .. • MuNclpal 9uilding • 2245 West OId Shakopee Road • Bloomington, Minnesota 65431-3096 ~ (612) 881.5811 January 14, 1992 _•'~_ Chuck Siggerud, City of Burnsville Don Fondrick, City of Bichfisld Bob Morgan, Gity of'Mianeapolis Craig xobinron, MnDOT Ra: MQt Council Transit Facilities Plan ~. On January 21, 1992, the Metropolitan Council will be having a hearing to consider its proposed Long rangy Transit Facilities Plan. Ths City of Bloomington Council on Monday, January 13, passed thQ accompanying resolution setting forth the City of Bloomington position concerning this plan and recomm•ndad modifications to it. In an effort to keep several of the affected communities along tree 35W route aware of actions bsinY done by others, I am sending you a copy of this Bloomington acttion. Yt would be appreciated if you would do the acme if your organization takes atry position eonceraing this .plan. .Thank you very much for your cooperation and if you have any questions, plaase contact rue. Sincerely, I/ Charles V. Honehell Director of Publfe Works CVH/mlw Attachment Host-N"' brand fax tra~amittal memo 7671 eotaoe• ~ro .«.+ ~ ~ q 1 ~ / sot. M x ~~~ ~ x "~~ ~9'GP AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION/EQIML OPPORTUNlT1- lMRIOYER ~~ JAN 14 '9c 15:1g ~ P.2i3 RESOLUTION N0. 92- RESOLUTION C01~4IENTING ON THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL'S DRAFT REGIONAL TRANSIT FACILITIES PLAN WHEREAS, the ..City Council of the City of Bloomington is the official governing body of the City of Bloomington; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has prepared a draft Regional Transit Facilities Plan to serve as the transit strategy for the Twin Cities for the next several decades; and "WHEREAS, it hac sctablishsd January 21, 1992. as a time to receive input concerning that draft plan; and WHEREAS, a strong, sfficisnt transit systsm is needed for the metropoli- tan area; and WHEREAS, the plan is quite aggressive in regards to change. in the approach of transit planning and has high cost. impact potential; and WHEREAS, its basso premise of opposing additional freeway construction, and in fact, rseommpnding conversion of several existing lanes of freeway into transit lanes is being made from an evaluationapproaeh that is too limited.; and ' WHEREAS, the recommendation for Y..35W and potentially, I.494 would have significant itapacts on the City of Bloomington in regard to the capacity of the facilities to ssrv~ our citizsnry, the divsrcion of traffic to local streets. the aafery ramifications, and the cost to the taxpayers. THEREFORE, BT IT RESOLVED that.,ths of the City of .Bloomington position on the Metropolitan Council draft Regional Transit Facilities Plan being concidsrsd January 21, 1992, be as follows: 1. That the City supports a strong transit systsm for the'metropolftan areA; . 2. That there is concurrence in most aspects of the basic plan if fund- . ing can bs obtained; ' 3. That the statsmsnt: "Mors highways lead to mots congestion". and its attending conclusions is misleading and should be changed. ' 4. The evaluation approach is too limited and should follow more along the concept that the primary concern should be the total psopls- moving capacity of a transportation systsm. Further, this system should look at aspects outside of the transit componeat aloha and • provide a safe, economical trancportation system. • 5. The svaluation ipproach should bs enlarged to include other factors, such as overall ~onctruction cost of recommended cations. safety.. •. acpscts, local impacts, and the total people carved when deciding between alternative actfons, rather than s3erely opting toward the . JAN 14 ' 9c 1~ ~ 19 ....,- ... moct people using transit. 6. Ths rscommendation to construct a major capital improvsmsnt on the I.35W South as an YRT plus lane conversion alternative is incorrect when the critical information available in the EIS is considered. Yn oompariaon to the high-occupancy vehicle alternative of the EYS, the plan recommendation would result in 12~•22t fewer people served along thia.critical corridor. It would also result in 3S! more accidents which is a severe safety aspect. 'Over 6661 more vshiclsc would be forced onto local roads causing ~xtansive local congestion. Finally, it would cost $170,000000 or 18~ more to construct, which is a significant cost to~ths taxpayers. 7. The I.35W South and 1.494 projects chould contain a strong transit component and any decision. regarding which alternative to implement chould be based on the information incorporated in those EYS's ,_• ~ rather than the limited evaluation approach set forth in this transit plan. passed and adopted this 13th day of January. 1992. Mayor ATTEST: Secretary tc the Council ---- --- r / ~.... - - = --- C c : _~oy ~d n _,_._._o t ....._.~..Y....__. _.._..._.__ . _._._. ~~...._......._ ...~.~..~........_ ~.. ~. ~.... .~.. _.~ ..._..,..__.__ ..._........~...._..... METROPOLITAN COUNCIL TRANSIT FACILITIES PLAN POLICY POSITION OF THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS .APPROVED JANUARY •16,1992 I. OVERALL POSITIONS - STRONGLY SUPPORT THE PHILOSOPHY AND TRANSIT CONCEPTS PROPOSED IN THE TRANSIT FACILITIES PLAN ` - METRO .COUNCIL/CITY COOPERATION MUST CONTINUE A$ PLAN I$ DETAILED AND IMPLEMENTED II. REORGANIZED AND IMPROVED TRANSIT 6ERVICE - SUPPORT INCREASED FUNDING FOR TRANSIT. - SUPPORT APPROPRIATE TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS THROUGHOUT THE METRO AREA. - 6VPPORT PROPOSED REORGANIZED IRAN&IT 6ERVICE INCLUDING.TRANSIT HUBS, CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS, AND PROGRAMS TO IMPROVE DELIVERY OF TRANSIT 6ERVICES TO EXI6TING SERVICE AREAS AS WELL AS TO NEW AREAS. ~ ~ - ADD I35W/L~-KE STREET 118 A TRANSIT HUB. jIII. MULTI, OCCUPANT VEHICLE (MOV) PRIORITY . CONTZNVE CITY POLICY OF ACTIVE SUPPORT FOR MOV PRIORITY MEASURES - DEFER TAKING A POSITION ON DIAMOND LANES AND MIXED OBE LANES IN I94 NORTH AND IN I3SW ONTIL THE CITY TAKES A POSITION ON DIAMOND LANES AS PART OF THE I35W DL~IS. ZV. .LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT - BUPRORT REDUCTION OF LRT 6Y6TEM FROM NINE CORRIDOR6 TO AN INITIAL BYBTEM OF THB CENTRAL AND I35W CORRIDORS • SUPPORT THE CENTRAL CORRIDOR A3 'rHE PRIORITY CORRIDOR -SUPPORT 6EEKINO FEDERAL FUNDS FOR THIS INITIAL SYSTEM BEGINNING •WITH AN AA/DEI$ FOR THE CENTRAL CORRIDOR. THE ~tTa SHOVED OVERSEE THIS ~1A/DEIB. ~ . -THE PLAN MUST 8E TO BUILD BOTH CORRIDORS. IT-MUST DEAL WITH IMPLEMENTATION PLANS FOR I3SW AS WALL AB THE 'CENTRAL CORRIDOR.• . ~ . THE CITY~B ABILITY TO CONCUR ON DESIGN FOR I35W WILL BE ;:... CONTINGENT ON'ASBVRANCE THAT LRT.WILL BE IMPLEMENTED IN I3SW ZN A TIMELY MANNER. i . -THE CZTY 6HOVLD NOT CONCUR IN aN LIGHT LANE FREEWAY DESIGN FOR 23SW WITH AN ADDITIONAL 4~ FEET RESERVED FOR LRT, UNTIL THERE IS ASSURANCE THAT LRT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED IN S3SW IN A TIMELY MANNER. - 6UPPORT AN INTERIM LRT SURFACE ALIGNMENT DOWNTOWN CONTINGENT ON ?'INDING AN ACCEPTABLE MEANS OF CONNECTING DOWNTOWN WITH THE MEDIAN. OF I3EW AT LAIC STREET WITHOUT MAJOR PERMAPTENT RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION • THE ONLY LRT ALIGNMENT PROVIDING SERVICE TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA WE$T BANK CAMPVe AND TO THE CEDAR•RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY ZS AN ALIGNMENT ON THiZ/WABHZNGTON AVE. - THE BEST SERVICE TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA EAST BANR CAMPUS IS PROVIDED WITH STATIONS ON OR NEAR WASHINGTON AVE... • • LRT ON WASHINGTON AVE AT GRADE I8 NOT ACCEPTABLE. IT WOULD DESTROY THE VIABILITY OF MUCH OF THE PRIVATE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY IN THE STADIUM VILLI#GE AREA. • THE CHOICE OF LRT ALIGNMENT ON WASHINGTON AVS IN TUNNEL OR CN~ THE DINRYTOWN nYPA85 SHOULD DE MADE IN THE AA/DEIB _ - • •` GOVERNIWCE BUPpORT THE REGIONAL GOVERNMENT. MODEL FOR LRT IMPLEMENTATION AT SUCH TII-~E AS~IT HAS BEEN GIVEN THE ABILITY AND DIRECTION TO ACTUALLY DESIGN. AND BUILD LRT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AGREED ON PLA-Id . .~ -.THE CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES.MVST HAVE ~ STRONG, CLEARLY DE!'INED ROLE WITH MAJOR DECISSON MAKING'RESPONBIBILITIES. DIRECT PARTICIPATION 8X MINNEAPOLIS ELECTED OFFICIALS I$ ESSENTIAL. - THE CtTRRENT LRT PLANNING AND ENGINEERING ACTIVITIES YN THE CENTRAL AND I~SW CORRIDORS MUST CONTINUE WITHOUT INTERUPTION. - LOCAL GOVERNMENT-AND IACAL ELECTED OFFICIALS SHOULD REMAIN ACTIVE IN p'ROMOTION OF LRT~ INCLUDING LOBBYING FOR STATE AND . FEDERAL FUNDS. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Study Session Letter No. 11 Agenda February 3, 1992 Issue Statement: Discussion regarding the future role of Human Services Commission serving seniors and disabled. Background• The Human Services Commission serving the seniors and disabled was established in 1973. The focus of the Commission is to provide advice to the City Council regarding senior issues; specifically regarding identifying needs and evaluating current services. Recently, the South Hennepin Regional Human Services Planning Agency has been reestablished. Part of the new format for this organization includes a local Human Services Planning Council. The Council includes representatives from a variety of organizations. It is appropriate to discuss the role of the Human Services Commission and the newly formed Human Services Planning Council to determine the respective rolls of each agency in the future. Recommended Motion: Discuss the roll of the Human Services Commission serving seniors and disabled and the Human Services Planning Council. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The Human Services Commission has indicated a desire to evaluate their future roll. 2. It is appropriate to avoid duplication of planning efforts. Alternative Recommendation: Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter will be presented for discussion at .the Study Session of February 3, 1992. Connie McDonald, ,Chair of the Commission, has been invited to attend the meeting. .Respect ully submitted, Jame Prosser ;City Manager JDP:cak Copy: Connie McDonald .~ 1992 LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES POLICIES CITY OF RICHFIELD 1992 LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES ~ POLICIES • TABLE OF CONTENTS RICHFIELD'S 1992 LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES ...................... 1 1. COMMUNITY RESOURCES OF VITALITY ........................... 2 A. SUPPORT LGA B. LGA FORMULA C. LOCAL GOVERNMENT TRUST FUND D. HACA E. SUSTAIN LEVY. LIMITS REPEAL F. CITY FUND BALANCES G. PENALTIES AND INTEREST ON DELINQUENT PROPERTY TAXES H. SUPPORT FISCAL DISPARITIES I. 77TH FINANCING J. EXPAND T.I.F. FUNDING USES 2. RESOURCES FOR REDEVELOPMENT ................ ............. • 5 A. GAINERS T.I.F. INCENTIVE FOR FISCAL DISPARITIES B. EXTEND T.I.F.. TIME LIMITS C. MODIFY T.I.F. USE FORMULA D. EXPAND T.I.F. USES E. LGA/HACA PENALTIES F. FISCAL DISPARITIES EXEMPTION FOR T.I.F. 3. RESOURCES FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING ....................... 6 A. -BLIGHTED PROPERTIES PROGRAM B. MHFA LOANS OF IMPROVEMENT AND EXPANSION C. EXPAND MHFA LOAN LIMITS D. RENOVATION/REDESIGN/REMODELING GRANT 4. RESOURCES FOR RENTAL HOUSING .............................. 7 A. MHFA LOAN PROGRAM 8. HOUSING RENEWAL INCENTIVES C. REVENUES FOR REDEVELOPMENT D. TENANT RELOCATION E. RENTAL HOUSING IMPROVEMENT INCENTIVE 5. NEW RESOURCES FOR VITALITY ................................ 8 A. AIRPORT 1. HOUSING REPLACEMENT 2. NOISE ABATEMENT - 3. NEW FORD TOWN/RICH ACRES BUYOUT 4. CITY/SCHOOL AIRPORT IMPACT AID 5. OFF-SITE AIRPORT NOISE MITIGATION __ B. TAX DELINQUENCY PENALTY DISTRIBUTION C. MORTGAGE REGISTRY AND DEED TAX D. REVENUES FOR REDEVELOPMENT i 6. RESOURCES FOR.TRANSPORTATION .............................. 10 A. HIGHWAY:FUNDING B. I494 C. 77TH STREET D. LRT/SOO LINE E. STREET UTILITY FUND F. MSA G. METROPOLITAN REPRESENTATION FOR HIGHWAY PLANNING 7. COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ........................ 11 A. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT B. HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE 8. COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE.. .. ..... ........ ......... 12 A. PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY B. SCHEDULE FOR REDISTRICTING C. ABSENTEE•BALLOTING 9. COMMUNITY AFFORDABILITY............. ............ .... 13 A. MANDATES B. COMPARABLE WORTH C. . EMPLOYEE BENEFITS D. LOCAL POLICE AND PAID FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATIONS E. INTEREST. ON. ARBITRATION F. WORKERS' COMPENSATION G. VETERAN'S PREFERENCE H. LIQUOR ISSUES I. TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES ADDENDUM ........... ......................................... 16 A. SUMMARY. OF HOUSING TASKS AND-FUNDS REQUIRED RICHFIELD'S 1992 LEGISLATIVE INITIATLVES Richfield, .like many other first ring suburbs in metropolitan regions, finds itself in a unique position. First ring ..suburbs that developed post World War II have reached a critical development stage.. Special efforts.-are necessary to .revitalize and reposition their housing market. At the same time, they must develop and maintain viable commercial tax base to help support the cost of services. These communities cannot be placed in the same category as other suburban communities, nor can they reasonably expect to compete for legislative attention in the same manner as core cities. Without special attention'to first ring suburbs, communities like Richfield can become our "throw away" suburbs. However, with proper attention, these communities can serve a vital role in stabilizing regional development and supporting their center cities..- Richfield has responded to.their challenge of reestablishing its position within the metropolitan .area... Some of the significant efforts include: -.commercial redevelopment; - the upgrading of planned public improvements now, at a lower cost than the future; - acquisition and clearance of deteriorated conditions; - selective clearance of obsolete conditions followed by replacement with more appropriate Land uses; -.rehabilitation of existing single family housing; -.rehabilitation of existing multifamily housing; - upgrading parks, playgrounds, and other community facilities; - initiating neighborhood crime watch/fix up campaigns; and - social service support for an increasing number of older, lower. income and more ethnically diverse households. The following information summarizes Richfield's most acute problems and recommends legislative solutions. The objective is to remain progressive with respect to the many challenges facing Richfield's quality of life and community vitality.. Resources must be of a sufficient quantity to have a positive impact on the needed redevelopment, maintenance, and essential services. A .response to Richfield's vitality must recognize the need for .resources now to deal with the impact of airport operations and planning. -1- CHALLENGE 1 - COMMUNITY. RESOURCES OF VITALITY Richfield is a fully developed residential community, with some retail, and is significantly challenged to provide sufficient resources for redevelopment, maintenance, and essential service needs. RESPONSE: PROPERTY TAX REFORM AND STATE AIDS TO CITIES- 1.A. SUPPORT LGA The City recommends that the Legislature maintain Local Government Aid (LGA) or an equivalent, program of revenue sharing collected on a-state-.wide basis with cities .remaining an essential component of the `property tax system. The City opposes any additional cuts in LGA or HACA or the further transfers of aids to taxing districts. Such aids and transfers would: • further increase disparities and tax burden between Richfield and other more wealthy taxing jurisdictions; • diminish the City's ability. to compete for residential and economic .development; • threaten the delivery of essential City services. 1.B. LGA FORMULA The City supports the position that the LGA formula should reflect a city's essential needs. The Legislature must recognize that problems caused by low property capacity -and it recommends that .the LGA formula address those problems. 1.C. LOCAL GOVERNMENT TRUST FUND The City supports .the 1991 creation of a Local Government Trust Fund (LGTF) which receives the revenues from 1.SC of State Sales Tax and the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET) plus the one-half cent local sales tax option. The total two cents collected should be used only for the programs currently listed in Statute for payment from the Fund or equivalent programs such as a new city aid formula. The availability of sales tax and motor vehicle excise tax revenue growth for local aids should not be eroded by the addition of new. programs to be paid out of a Local 'Government Trust Fund. As a result, a city's share from __ Local Government Trust Fund should grow annually at the same rate as sales tax and motor vehicle excise tax revenues. _2_ 1.D. HACA The City opposes payment of additional HACA for property class rate reductions from the Local Government Trust Fund beyond those rate reductions already in law through taxes payable in 1994:. 1.E. SUSTAIN LEVY LIMITS REPEAL The City supports the Legislature's commitment to repeal City levy limits for taxes payable 1993.. Removal of levy limits will enhance local: accountability, allow cities to plan for and respond to changing financial conditions and the increasing costs of State and Federal mandates.. -Levy limits have been. inconsistent with the.principles of local self-government and accountability. For the past four years,. cities have had to cope with mid-year cuts in State aid and aevy limits Ghat are below the inflation rate and below the .growth experienced in their populations and households. Levy limits. have also been particularly severe in light of the rising costs of State mandates such as comparable worth, workers' compensation, binding arbitration, a presidential primary and solid waste regulations.. 1.F. CITY. FUND. BALANCES The City supports. the position that the Legislature should not attempt to control or restrict city fund balances. These funds are necessary to maintain the fiscal viability of city governments to purchase capital goods and infrastructure, to maintain high level bond ratings and to pay the operational costs of administration of local - government prior to .the time that the tax settlements. are received. by the City. Cities must have sufficient fund balances at the beginning of each fiscal year to finance expenditures for the first full six months of the year. Without adequate fund balance, it is necessary for cities to pay interest costs on short-term debt. This increased cost to taxpayers yields no real community benefit. 1.G. PENALTIES AND INTEREST ON DELINQUENT PROPERTY TAXES The City urges the Legislature to pass legislation to provide that cities receive their proportionate share of .revenues from penalties and interest collected on delinquent property taxes. These revenues should not be - deducted from State aid payments. Under current law, counties and school districts receive penalty and interest payments on delinquent property taxes. However, cities __ only receive penalties and interest for their special assessments and are precluded .from receiving penalty and interest on delinquent property tax. There is no apparent reason to treat cities differently than counties and _3 _ school districts with respect to, collection of delinquent property taxes. Cities must have an equal opportunity to restore penalties and interest receipts on their share of delinquent property. tax. 1.H. SUPPORT FISCAL DISPARITIES .Support the Fiscal Disparities Program which offsets some of the financial differential between developed and developing communities and acknowledges the greater needs of developed areas. 1.I. 77TH. FINANCING Support financing improvements to 77th Street in advance of I49.4 improvements. Appropriated funds are not yet firmly .committed.. 1.J. EXPAND T.I.F. FUNDING USES Support modifying the definition of administrative services within Tax Increment .Financing (T.I.F.) Districts to include health and safety support services identified by the redevelopment district plan and budget. CHALLENGE 2 - RESOURCES FOR REDEVELOPMENT Richfield has made significant progress in reversing the- deterioration and decline in commercial-retail areas of the City. Market conditions, the significant lead time required for. development, and the considerable expense to address the remaining blighting conditions and planned public improvements requires additional resources. RESPONSE: 2.A. T.I.F. INCENTIVE FOR FISCAL DISPARITIES GAINERS Develop and support legislation that would provide special financing incentives unique to communities that-are significant fiscal disparities ,gainers. This would help balance the concerns of fiscal disparities losers who believe that they are supporting commercial/industrial tax base poor communities to a greater extent than necessary. 2.B. EXTEND T.I.F. TIME LIMITS Support maintaining or extending the 25 year duration of Tax Increment Redevelopment Districts. 2.C. MODIFY T.I.F. USE FORMULA Support modifying the definition of administrative services within Tax Increment Districts to include health and safety support services identified by the redevelopment district plan and budget. 2.D. EXPAND T.I.F. USES Support including housing rehabilitation as an eligible activity for tax increment generated by new and existing redevelopment districts. 2.E. LGA/HACA PENALTIES Remove the LGA/HACA penalty imposed on housing districts and redevelopment districts. 2.F. FISCAL DISPARITIES EXEMPTION FOR T.I.F. Support allowing Richfield to exempt tax increment projects from fiscal disparity contributions even if the initial decision was to contribute from the project. _5_ CHALLENGE 3 - RESOURCES FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING _ Richfield. has approximately 11,200 single family. homes (5 percent built prior to 1939, 62 percent build prior to 1960). The single family homes require renovation and repair to be livable and desirable. Resources are insufficient to counter flight to developing suburbs and potential abandonment. It is estimated that it would cost $212,979,200 to revitalize the. existing single family. housing stock. RESPONSE: 3.A. BLIGHTED PROPERTIES PROGRAM Support the continuation of the 1991 blighted properties program which provides grants for acquisition and demolition of blighted neighborhood conditions. Approximately-200 homes have been identified. 3.B. MHFA LOANS OF IMPROVEMENT AND EXPANSION Support. modifications to MHFA home improvement loan programs which ensure that sufficient amounts of funds. (often 515,000 to $20,000 for repairs only, .520,000 to .$30,000 for repairs, improvements and expansions) are available to persons with an income less than the median of the metropolitan area and residing in Richfield's average $82,900 home. 3.C. EXPAND. MHFA LOAN LIMITS Support increases to MHFA first time buyer loan program price limits. which ensure that Richfield buyers purchasing .the average $82,900 existing home may participate. 3.D. .RENOVATION/REDESIGN/REMODELING GRANT Support a promotional program of renovation/redesign/ remodeling. A minimum $50,000 grant is needed in support of a program of marketing, education which results in value added improvements without regard to income. and house price limits. This program coincides with proposed acquisition of blighted property and modest income rehabilitation programs. -6- CHALLENGE 4 - RESOURCES FOR RENTAL HOUSING Richfield has approximately 4,600 rental units (63 percent one bedroom, 29 percent two bedroom), which were built primarily from 1960 to 1970. The apartments require renovation and repair. to be livable and desirable. Vacancy rates are variable. The rental. housing investment climate does not make owner investment attractive. MHFA rental housing loan programs .require rent control and income qualifying which are disincentives to owner participation.. An increasingly lower income and more diverse population causes concentration and places greater demands on health and safety programs. . RESPONSE: 4.A. MHFA LOAN PROGRAM Support modification of MHFA rental loan programs to provide opportunities to achieve broader economic integration of rental occupancy. 4.B. HOUSING RENEWAL INCENTIVES - Support new non-loan programs which provide incentives to owners for updating and repair and to offset cash flow losses due to MHFA income and rent control. programs. Approximately $100,250,000 is estimated to be required to revitalize the existing rental housing stock. 4.C. REVENUES FOR REDEVELOPMENT Support new revenue sources which can be used for the selective acquisition and clearance of deteriorating buildings and replacement with more appropriate land uses. - 4.D. TENANT RELOCATION - Support the modification of State tenancy relocation laws which. would allow. interim relocation of tenants during. building renovation at a reduced level of contributYon if -- projects are funded exclusively by local and state (not federal) resources. 4.E. RENTAL HOUSING IMPROVEMENT INCENTIVE Support a legislated delay in property tax assessment increases for improvements made to rental housing. _~_ CHALLENGE 5 - NEW RESOURCES FOR VITALITY Support a package of new and modified revenue sources o ensure that resources are of a sufficient quantity to have a positive impact on housing, redevelopment, maintenance, and essential services in Richfield. Of particular concern are the impacts due to airport operations and ong range planning. RESPONSE: 5.A. AIRPORT Support immediate mitigation of the .growing pressures of airport operations and expansion plans: by securing legislative support toc 1. HOUSING. REPLACEMENT Finance-the development.. in Richfield of 30 homes .annually for five years as a housing replacement resource for residents impacted by the Metropolitan Airport Commissions' acquisition program in New Ford .Town. and Rich Acres neighborhoods of .Richfield. It is estimated that blighted property site assembly cost (acquisition, relocation,-demolition) followed by coordinated development will approximate 58,964,000. 2. NOISE ABATEMENT Finance noise abatement for housing adjacent to the airport but located in neighborhoods not identified for acquisition and clearance activity. This _ activity is estimated to cost $26,500,000. - 3. NEW FORD TOWN/RICH ACRES BUYOUT The New Ford Town and Rich Acres neighborhoods are subjected to extraordinary airport impacts. Both neighborhoods should be bought out. The buyout should begin within the next year. Financing should be provided by the Metropolitan Airports Commission. - ~ The buyout should be supervised by the Richfield HRA. 4. CITY/SCHOOL AIRPORT IMPACT AID The City of Richfield.-and School District should be - made whole for the net loss of revenue because of the buyout. LGA and school aid formulas should be adjusted to provide for this "impact aid". _g_ 5. OFF-SITE AIRPORT NOISE MITIGATION The Metropolitan Airports Commission should immediately increase the level of funding for off- site noise mitigation. The Legislature should set a minimum funding .level for this purpose. 5.B. TAX DELINQUENCY PENALTY DISTRIBUTION. Support the redirection to Richfield-of a portion of the property tax delinquency penalty and interest income which presently goes to Hennepin County and the School District. 5.C. MORTGAGE REGISTRY AND DEED TAX Support the .redirection to Richfield of a portion of the Mortgage Registry and Deed Tax collected when Richfield .meal estate transactions are recorded by Hennepin County.. S.D. REVENUES FOR REDEVELOPMENT Support a metropolitan area-wide revenue source to finance the redevelopment of deteriorating commercial and housing areas. CHALLENGE 6 -RESOURCES FOR TRANSPORTATION ` Richfield is significantly impacted by proposed improvements to I494, 135W, 62 Crosstown and TH77. Richfield has been directly involved with monitoring and influencing the planning for these roadway improvements. Careful attention mush be given to balancing regional and local interest. Richfield understands that lack of additional capacity for these roadways would likely generate additional pollution within the community. However, the loss of homes and encroachment in residential areas must be carefully. considered. RESPONSE: 6.A. HIGHWAY FUNDING Support. establishing a clear funding mechanism. for I494, 135W, and TH77 improvements. 6.B. I494 Support priority funding for I494 with special attention to I35W/I494 interchange. 6.C. 77TH STREET Support advanced funding for construction of 77th. 6.D. LRT/SOO LINE •. Oppose the use of Soo Line as an LRT alignment option. 6.E. STREET UTILITY FUND Support the establishment of the Street Utility Fund as an option funding source for street maintenance. 6.F. MSA In order that .adequate funding is available to maintain streets, Richfield supports the raising of the Municipal State Aid system limit to 3,000 miles. 6.G. METROPOLITAN REPRESENTATION FOR HIGHWAY PLANNING Recently, MnDOT consolidated two metropolitan state construction districts 5 and 9. Richfield joins the LMC ^~ in support of legislation which would continue the previous metropolitan membership on MnDOT reflecting two districts to ensure that adequate statewide representation continues. -10- CHALLENGE 7 - COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Richfield recognizes the need to protect our fragile environment. There are a number of issues of special concern regarding the environment including: RESPONSE:- 7.A. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT Richfield agrees that existing mechanisms should continue to be used to the greatest. extent..possible to address surface and groundwater management problems instead of establishing a new system. of creating new organizations. Richfield agrees that local units of government should retain the basic responsibility for surface water management since they are the level. of government closest to the problem. 7.B. HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE Richfield currently permits a system of open competition for residential waste haulers. Our perception is that people of Richfield .believe that the current system works well but that there is a need for more. effort and convenience related to household hazardous waste disposal. We also agree that legislation should continue to fund educational and operational pilot program efforts on the subject of solid and hazardous waste disposal including alternatives for the disposal of household waste such as those promoted by the Household Hazardous Waste Reduction Project . -11- CHALLENGE 8 -.COMMUNITY .GOVERNANCE The need to develop accountable governance systems which permit free and open access to the political process as well as developing affordable systems are priorities for our community. Of special interest to Richfield are the following issues: RESPONSE: 8.A. PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY The City urges the Legislature to provide State and/or politi-cal party revenues to pay for all costs associated with the presidential primary and in the event that the. primary is conducted by mail, the State must administer and fully fund all costs of conducting the balloting and recording the results of adjusting the voter file. The presidential primary is a political activity rather than an_actual election. State and/or political, par y`revenues should pay_for typical local expenses such as preparation of ballots and election equipment, supplies and personnel _`including election judges and administrative staff, advertising, newspaper notices, postage,. polling place rental, transportation costs and the cost of maintaining a political party preference identity on voting records. If the Legislature does not provide funds to cover such costs, then the City supports the repeal of the presidential primary election. S.B. SCHEDULE FOR REDISTRICTING The. City supports changes in the schedule of legislative and local redistricting in order to permit cities sufficient time to update voter records so as to make it possible to conduct other elections that must be held. during and after the time in which redistricting must be accomplished. The City would support a court order suspending the timeline for local redistricting until legislative redistricting is completed and the suspension of local redistricting deadlines is lifted by order of the special redistricting panel. 8.C. ABSENTEE BALLOTING ' The City urges the Legislature to evaluate the results of the increased availability of absentee balloting on voter participation, the incidence of spoiled ballots and local. election costs. The City would prefer that the Legislature refrain from making additional changes in absentee election requirements in the next two years if such changes will increase local costs for administering the process . -12- CHALLENGE 9 - COMMUNITY AFFORDABILITY There are a number of issues of particular to the City because they affect the affordability of City services. Those includes RESPONSE: 9.A. MANDATES The City opposes .any additional mandates. The City supports legislation which would :allow local governments to disregard mandates which are not tied to additional funding. Cities continually face a growth in the number and cost of Federal and State mandated programs which substitute the .judgements of Congress and the Legislature for local. priorities. Recent examples of costly mandated programs include comparable worth, employee right-to-know, legal compliance audits and newspaper publications. Any new mandates should include revenues or alternative revenue producing mechanisms otherthan the general property tax or local government trust #und. .The Legislature should also repeal obsolete, unnecessary and unduly restrictive mandatory laws and rules. 9.B. COMPARABLE-WORTH The City supports efforts to eliminate any sex base differences in compensation in public employees and asks the Legislature to refrain from further amending current law until the Legislature evaluates implementation reports which will be prepared in 1992. The City also supports providing financial assistance to cities in the form of special levies or permanent tax base adjustments for equity adjustments or a limit on the amount of equity adjustments which a local government must make in any given year. 9.C. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS The City supports legislation promoting the efficient and - economical provision of employee benefits including life, health and dental-care for City officers and employees. The City specifically opposes any legislation which would provide authority for employees or groups of employees to unilaterally select particular care providers. 9.D. LOCAL POLICE AND PAID FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATIONS The City supports the position that local Police and Fire Relief Associations with City consent should be encouraged to merge into PERA Police and Fire Funds under the uniform policy enacted in the 1987 Legislature. Any amendments to the policy should lower City consolidation costs while fully protecting the solvency of the PERA Police and Fire -13- Fund. Further, if despite City objections, the Legislature enacts any further benefited enhancements for local Police and paid Fire members, all costs of the benefit increase should be born by the State. 9.E. INTEREST ON ARBITRATION -The City opposes a requirement that interest be paid on arbitration awards. 9.F. WORKERS' COMPENSATION The City supports modifications to the workers' compensation statutes which would restrict presumptions. of occupational disease to apply only after an employee can establish an absence of personal risk factors that could have caused the disease or illness. The law allows for the legal,.presumption that :Firefighters,. Police Officers and Paramedics, among other employees. contract certain diseases or illnesses due to their employment.. Employers must then rebut the presumption by introduction of evidence. This burden is difficult and increases the chance that employees .receive. compensation for non-work related illnesses and. diseases. Currently, the .law provides the following presumptions for the following personnel: Police and Fire: .Myocarditis, Coronary Sclerosis, Pneumonia or its sequel, and infections or communicable disease (exposures ..outside of a hospital) and for Fire only - cancer. All of the listed diseases or illnesses are common to .the entire population and an equal or greater correlation may exist between the specific illness and the individual's personal. risk factor such as smoking,-diet, exercise, heredity and life styles and the correlation between the job and the illness. 9.G. VETERAN'S PREFERENCE The City supports amending the Veteran's Preference Act to provide that a veteran must select one and only one hearing procedure rather than be able to request both a Veteran's Preference Hearing and a grievance procedure under a collective bargaining agreement. 9.H. LIQUOR ISSUES The City strongly opposes the establishment of one class of beer and the offsale of wine in other than liquor stores. The establishment of one class of beer in -14- Minnesota would cause substantial problems in controlling the sale of beer in filling stations, grocery stores, drug stores and elsewhere where 3.2 beer is now sold. 9.I. TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES .The City recommends that the Legislature reinstate the previous definition of emgloyees covered by PELRA to employees who are employed for more than l00 working days in a calendar year. This is very important to the operation of City services.. The current legislative language is confusing. Reestablishing the previous language which would provide l00 workings days instead of the 100 calendar days would greatly improve Richfield's ability to provide services to the community and would not encourage the .inappropriate use of seasonal workers. Many of the workers used for these programs are students. The 100 calendar day-limitation does not accurately reflect the time that many of these. workers have available to serve. the community. ADDENDUM A City of Richfield 1992 Summary of Hous ing Tasks and Funds Required Number of Funds Required Tas k ~ Units Affected For Accomplishment 1) Single Family Activities a) Acquisition and clearance - of Pre-1939 single family 200 S 11,600,000 .homes ($58,000 per home) _- b) .Acquisition and substantial repair of Pre-1939 single 400 S 32,279,200 family homes (580,-698 per home) c) Remodeling and repair of single family homes built 5,000 $104,000,000 from 1940 to .1961.($20,800 per home) d) General repair to .single .family homes built. from 5,000 $ 62,500,000 1940 to 1961 (512,500 per home) e) Generale repair to single family homes built from 500 $ 2,500,000 1962 to 197,1. ($5,000 .per home) f) General repairs to single family homes built from 100 $ 100,000 1971 to 1991 (51,000 per home.) _______ ______________ Single Family SubTotal 11,200 $212,979,200 2) Multi-Family Activities a) Acquisition, tenant relocation and substantial - repair of multifamily units 600 $ 25,500,000 built prior to 1962 ($10,000 per-unit repair, $32,500 per unit acq./relocation) b) Repair, updating and short term tenant relocation, 3,500 $ 26,250,000 .for multifamily units built from 1962 to 1971 (57,500 per-unit) c) General repairs to multi- family units built from 500 $ 2,500,000 1971 to 1991 ($5,000 per unit) _______ ______________ Multi-Family Repair SubTotal 4,6,0.0 $ 54,250,000 -16- d) Providing handicapped assessibility in .all .existing rental buildings 4,600 S 46,0.00,000 with 4 units or more ______ ___=====s==== .per. building. ($10,000. per unit) Multi-Family SubTotal 4,600 $100,250,000 3) Airport Impact Mitigation a) .Acquisition of blighted 90 $ 8,-964,000 __ conditions, relocation, clearance, development of new housing. (599,600 per home) three year program. b) Noise abatement for housing most adjacent to airport 1,.766. $ 26,500,000 (515,D00 per home) CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Study Session Letter No. 10; Agenda February 3, 1992 Issue Statement: Review of the City of Richfield 1992 legislative initiatives and policy package. Background: The attached City of Richfield legislative initiatives and policies are based upon Council policy and direction as previously established. Policies will be presented to the Council and to our legislative representatives at the Study Session of February 3. The legislative initiatives which have been prepared are a condensed version of some problems facing the City with some proposed solutions. The legislative initiatives have been previously provided to the Legislature so that they may review these issues prior to the Study Session on February 3. Recommended Motion: The legislative initiatives and policies will be presented for discussion purposes with Council Members and Legislators. No formal action is required at this meeting. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Prior discussions with Council on legislative issues. 2. Recommendations by League of Minnesota Cities and Association of Metropolitan .Municipalities. 3. Staff recommendations. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council may choose to revise, delete or add policy at their pleasure. Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter will be presented to the Council at the Study Session of February 3. lly submitted, Ci D. Prosser JDP:cak CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Study Session Letter No. 9 Agenda February 3, 1992 Issue Statement: Discussion regarding repairing cars in residential neighborhoods. Background• The City Council, at a recent meet regular Council meeting, heard from a resident who was concerned-about neighbors who-were repairing cars for what appeared to be "for hire". The resident was further disturbed by what appeared. to be foot dragging by the criminal justice system. Public Safety has been aware of this and similar situations over the years.. In some instances,. the residents comply when informed that they are. or could be in violation of-City ordinances. In others, enforcement has required lengthy and costly court action, as is the case with the current problem. Subsequent to the complaint by the resident at the regular Council meeting, staff prepared a summary for the Council. In addition, staff, along with the City Attorney's office, prepared an injunction on both residents who appear to be operating a _ business. The injunction will require the residents to demonstrate that they are not conducting business, from their residence. This injunction should be filed and served the week of January 27. Lastly, staff has reviewed our current ordinance(s). and determined that a better approach to this problem would be to amend our ordinance, restricting the repair of automobiles to vehicles registered to the occupant(s) of the residence. Currently, the prohibition of commercial auto repair in residential areas is addressed through the zoning .ordinance. Enforcement relies upon our ability to prove that a business is being operated. The proposed ordinance would simply prohibit the repair of autos not registered to the owner. Recommended Motion: Discuss the proposed ordinance prohibiting repair of autos not registered to the .owner. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Clarify and simplify the enforcement of the prohibition of .the repair of autos not owned by residents. Alternative Recommendation: ~ 1. .The ordinance could be expande~ to permit repair of immediate or extended family autos. However, enforcement would become very difficult. 2. The Council could decide to not take any action at this time- pending the outcome of the citation on the current complaint. Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff will discuss these issues with the Council at the Study Session and seek Council direction. Respectfully submitted, Jame- Prosser City ` anager JDP:cak BILI. NO. ~„ AN AMENDMENT TO SECTIUN fr~0 - OF A:PPENDIR B OF THE ORDINANCE CODE C1F THE CITY OF RICHFIELD TY•YE CITY OF RYCTTFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Subsection 514.28 oP the o:edinancE code of the City:of Richfield entitled "Home Occupatiorus" is hereby aunended by adding thereto the folloYnrinng new subdivision: Passed bar the City Cou~,cil of the City of Richfield, Minnegat$ this day of , 1992. CITY OF RYCH~'YE~D sy Martin : I{irsch, 1bLayor ATTEST Thomas P . Fer er, City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Study Session Letter No. g Agenda February 3, 1992 Issue Statement:. Study of the feasibility of construction of a themed miniature golf .course in Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield Background• For the past three years, staff has been investigating the feasibility of themed miniature golf courses. Staff has visited courses at Wisconsin Dells and other locations. The City retained Lee Maxfield and Tom Melchior of Maxfield Research Group to perform a preliminary feasibility and site location survey in 1990. In 1991, they completed a follow-up financial study to go into more detail. The first study (attached) looked at Taft Park, Rich Acres Golf Course, and Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield (VMPR) for potential sites. That study determined that VMPR was the best site to attract the greatest clientele. The second study (attached) reviewed the market possibilities and the financing potential. Mr. Maxfield and Mr. Melchior will be at the Study Session to discuss the results of their studies. Staff has also collected information from the International Association of Amusement Parks and Attractions (IAAPA) Miniature Golf Course Committee. Copies of pertinent articles are attached. In addition, staff has interviewed three miniature golf course designers and builders. All three provided information on costs, locations, and revenues which corroborated the information in the Maxfield studies. Funds are available in the Capital Budget for the construction of an 18 hole course. Staff and course designers recommend that the course be designed for 18 holes but also provide capacity to permit another 18 holes to be considered in the future without repetitive costs. This proposed design for 36 holes, but construction of only 18 holes, allows for power, pumps and piping to be appropriately sized at a marginal increase in cost. Should traffic be such that the second 18 needed to be built, construction costs would be lower than the first 18. Recommended Motion: None at this time. The subject of miniature golf is on the February 3, 1992 Council Study Session agenda for discussion purposes only. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The Council's 1993 goals include "exploring opportunities to convert Government Operations to Enterprise Operations" and "increase profitability of Enterprise Operations." 2. The Community Services Commission has been considered various opportunities, such as the waterslide and miniature golf, for increasing sources of user fee revenues in the community. 3. The adopted 1992 Capital Budget includes miniature golf. Alternative Recommendation: None at this time. Discussion/Decision Mode: This is being discussed at a Study Session to allow the Council to learn more about the issue. Members of the Community Services Commission and the consultant will be available to answer questions and join in the discussion. Respectfully submitted, Jame Prosser City ager JDP:cak Attachments December 28, 1990 MEMORANDUM T0: Gretchen Blank City of Richfield FROM: Lee A. Maxfield Thomas R. Melchior Maxfield Research Group, Inc. RE: Assessment of the Potential for a Miniature Golf Course Introduction We have completed our assessment of the market for a miniature golf course to be located in a city park in Richfield and summarized our findings in this memorandum. Because our research was conducted in the off-season, it was impossible to obtain a complete picture of the overall market. Although we were able to contact several owners, all were reluctant to provide detailed information on business volume, income or customer counts. We visited other courses where we could not reach a contact person to gather whatever information was available from the-site (e.g., signage) and to examine access.. Our examination of the market for miniature golf included a review of available literature to provide background on the subject. This literature search. did not reveal specific information regarding market size or demographics, but did indicate some general trends. First, there appears. to be an increase in the interest in miniature golf, fueled perhaps by the growth in the number of baby boomers with children who are looking for additional family activities. These persons likely played as youngsters since miniature golf experienced a strong resurgence in the 1950's (from its original popularity in the 1920's). - a 612.338-0012 620 KICKERNICK 430 FIRST AVENUE NORTH 612.338.0659 FAX M1NN'EAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401 Gretchen Blank City of Richfield December 28,1990 . Page 2 Second, there has been a trend to combine a number of other recreational activities with miniature golf, in order to provide variety. and increase the overall draw of the amusement center to children and teens. Video arcades have been added at a number of Putt-Putt miniature golf courses to provide revenue year-round. At most Putt-Putt courses with arcades, the .non-golf revenue exceeds that of the miniature golf revenue. _,_ Third, new courses are often more elaborate than older ones and there is a trend to include miniature golf in amusement areas in shopping malls, such as the Mall of America now under construction in Bloomington. Miniature Golf in the Twin Cities Area We attempted to contact 14 miniature golf courses in the Twin Cities area and were able to reach five of them. Calls to the other courses resulted in disconnected numbers or no answer. These 14 courses, listed below, were all the miniature golf courses we were able to locate in the metropolitan area. Of these, seven were located in the northeast .quadrant of the metropolitan area, five were in the southwest quadrant, one in the northwest quadrant and one in the southeast quadrant. Lower land values in the northern portion of the Twin Cities, compared to the southern portion, likely accounts for the larger number of courses in the northern half of the area. Courses contacted: 1. Fairway Golf - 1700 Como Avenue, St. Paul 2. Gasoline Alley - 10300 Central Avenue, Blaine 3. Putt-Putt - 3718 West Lake Street, Minneapolis 4. Putt-Putt - 2601 Southtown Drive, Bloomington 5. Swings - Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard, Chanhassen Other courses: 6. Amusement City - 1870 Rice Street, Roseville ' 7. Como Miniature Golf - 1339 North Lexington, St. Paul 8. Country View - 2926 North Highway 61, Maplewood 9. Family Fun Ways - 2100 North Frontage Road Highway 13, Burnsville 10. Funland Park Kartway - 2440 Highway 36, North St. Paul 11. George's Golf Range & Mini Course - 2341 Highway 55, Mendota Hts. 12. Lilli-Putt - 1349 N.W. Coon Rapids Boulevard, Coon Rapids_ 13. Lilli-Putt - 4920 South Highway 101, Minnetonka 14. Spring Lake Amusement Center - 1066 N.E. Highway 10, Spring Lake Park Most courses have other amusements besides miniature golf, such as bumper boats, bumper cars and batting cages. Video games are also available at several courses allowing for year round revenue. One course we contacted in Blaine will be adding kiddie rides and batting cages to existing miniature Gretchen Blank City of Richfield December 28,1990 Page 3 golf, bumper boat and go cart attractions, reflecting the national trends mentioned above of offering a greater variety of attractions. .This same location is planning a second miniature golf .course within the next few years. Swings. in Chanhassen, the newest of the courses we contacted, receives substantial business from its driving range which can accommodate 60 golfers. Swings will be adding batting cages and a golf school in 1991, but has placed plans for bumper boats on hold .due to the low profit margin. -• Most of the courses have a snack bar available, although there is a limited menu (e.g. hot dogs, chips and soft drinks). The owners of the Putt•Putt courses also own Nora's restaurant (originally a Porky's drive in) adjacent to the Lake Street Putt-Putt. This is an informal, inexpensive family restaurant .which due to its, proximity to the golf course allows for accessible food service for. miniature .golf patrons. The courses we contacted charge adult rates from $1.95 (Putt•Putt) to $3.25 (Swings-"Maxi Course") with .various discounts for children under 12, seniors, groups, etc. Miniature golf often costs more in other cities, such as in New York where a round usually starts at $6.00. Prices do not appear to vary during the season. The miniature golf season runs from Memorial Day through September although courses usually open earlier in May and remain open into October, depending on the weather. Summer hours (July and August) are from noon to midnight every day, according to those courses we contacted while spring and .fall hours are from 3 PM to midnight weekdays and noon to midnight on weekends. Variation exists depending on other attractions. Swings, with substantial business from its driving range,. opens as early as possible in the season (late March or April) and keeps the longest hours. Based on our research, it appears as though a number of seasonal amusement center. operators live in the outside of the Twin Cities during the off-season. Our interviews with three operators of miniature golf courses indicated that business appears to be good, but they are very concerned about competition and as such were unwilling to provide any specifics about their level of business. The owner of the Putt-Putt courses (in Bloomington and on Lake Street in Minneapolis) was particularly concerned about the prospect of a new course opening in Richfield and questioned whether it was appropriate for a governmental unit to be building attractions with taxpayer money that would be competitive with the private sector. The Putt-Putt courses do not have any other attractions to compliment miniature golf and are overall less interesting than some. of the newer courses in the area. Our review of literature on miniature golf indicated several ways of examining need or demand. One•way is•that 40,000 to 50,000 persons are needed to • support a miniature golf course. The Twin Cities seven county metropolitan area currently has a population estimated at 2.3 million. Assuming that 50,000 persons are necessary to support one 18 hole course, then theoretically Gretchen Blank December 28,1990 City of Richfield ~ Page 4 the Twin City area could support 46 courses. Because we were. unable to contact each course, we do not know exactly how many 18-hole courses are in the area. We estimate the total at between 20 and 25, however. We inventoried 18 courses at the fourteen locations listed above, although we expect that several of the locations we could not reach have more than one 18- hole course. Even if we are short by one-third, the actual total is still less than 40 courses. This would indicate that several more courses could easily be supported in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Since a disproportionate share of existing courses are in the northern half of the metropolitan area, the southern portion appears to be better able to absorb new miniature golf course development. The only proposed miniature golf course that we are aware of in the south area is planned for the Mall of America in Bloomington. We did not, however, conduct a thorough review of possible new attractions or amusement centers in the south area. Two courses are being planned as part of the amusement portion of the Mall Of America. The space for these courses is being treated as leased mall space, similar to any other store in the center. The operator of the course would not be identified by our contact at Melvin Simon Associates, in part because the operator has not yet received financing to build the course. Current plans call for two courses: a more traditional 18- hole course and a more elaborate 9-hole course which will feature hi-tech characteristics. Our contact did not want to elaborate on features of the course or reveal any other details such as fees since the financing for the course is not finalized. We do not believe that this miniature golf facility would be directly competitive with an outdoor course in Richfield.. Patrons of the Mall of America will be drawn for a variety of reasons, including the shopping experience, and will not go specifically for miniature golf. Demand for a course. in Richfield will be more localized with, for some patrons, a link to the other activities available in the park. Site Review To determine the most appropriate location for a miniature golf course in a city park in Richfield, we visited and evaluated the following eight parks: Donaldson, Augsburg, Roosevelt, Washington, Christian, Taft, Veterans Memorial and the Rich .Acres golf course. We determined that all but three of the locations were inappropriate due to poor access, inadequate parking or lack of room to build a course without altering the character of the park. The three areas deemed appropriate are: Veteran's Memorial Park, Taft Park and Rich Acres. • Taft Park is an active park with lighted baseball. fields, snack bar and ample parking. From our visit, at least two areas appear large enough to handle a miniature golf course: The western portion, which has many trees and is separated somewhat from the ball fields and an area more centrally located between two of the fields. Because-our visit was during winter, we were Gretchen Blank December 28,1990 City of Richfield Page 5 unable to determine exact locations of walking paths, playing fields, etc. Taft Park's major drawback is poor access, located on the edge of a neighborhood of primarily single family homes. Rich Acres is appealing because of .the existing golf course, easy access and well known location. Some ancillary services are available (such as food) and there is a regular staff which would provide management efficiencies for a new attraction. Rich Acres drawbacks are lack of parking, limited room for both additional parking and the course, and uninteresting topography. The cost of developing a course at this location appears to be very high, given the need for additional parking. ,_ Veteran's Memorial Park has excellent access, ample parking, is a well known location and offers a number of ancillary services. There is. sufficient room for a miniature golf course. in a location which offers some elevation change, near Portland Avenue.- While these are all important characteristics for a miniature golf location, perhaps the main asset of Veteran's Memorial Park is the variety of other activities already available there. As with amusement centers run by private concerns, the combination of other attractions with miniature golf will result in each attraction helping to draw participants to the' other attractions. The addition of a water .slide will further add to the variety of park activities. Summary We believe that a miniature golf course would be successful from a market standpoint if developed in Veteran's, Memorial Park. Although we do not have specific demand estimates, we believe that interest in miniature golf is on the increase. The number of families is growing and families with young children will continue to increase throughout the 1990's. Births to women of the baby boom generation (persons born between 1946 and 1964) have resulted in the highest total number of births since the baby boom ended. The peak year for births was expected in 1987 or 1988, however 1989 posted the largest number of births since 1964 and preliminary numbers for 1990 indicate that births continued to increase. As a result, the 1990's should see demand expand for family activities. There are very few courses in the southern portion of the Twin Cities; only the Putt-Putt in Bloomington, Lilli-Putt in Minnetonka, one course in . Burnsville .and the new Swings course in Chanhassen. As previously mentioned, a course in a park in Richfield would not be~directly competitive with the indoor courses planned for the Mall of America. Veteran's Memorial Park is the .most appropriate location of the parks we examined. It has the .swimming pool and other facilities (existing and planned, e.g. the water slide) which already attract persons. Adding to the base of activities should strengthen existing ones and encourage usage of the Gretchen Blank December 28,1990 City of Richfield ~ Page 6 new activities. In addition, Veterans Memorial Park was the only one we examined which had all the other necessary attributes in place: sufficient parking, good access, ample land and support facilities. Based on our research, we recommend fees of no more than $3.00 for adults and $2.00 for children. Lower rates would be preferable, however, we expect this fee structure would place a Richfield course between the Putt-Putt courses and _ the Mall of America courses. The literature we reviewed indicated that an average 18 hole course can expect to attract 100 person per hour during peak hours with 1,000 persons per day. .considered a very good day. Assuming that an average of between 500 and 600 persons per day would patronize the. course during a 150 day season and that two-thirds were paying the adult fee .(given our suggested rate structure above), then you could expect to have approximately $200,000 to $240,000 in revenue during the season, not including income from concessions. A review of the "Sourceletter Supplement" on miniature golf presented a set of estimates of annual gross revenues for golf courses with various population levels within a 20 minute drive (page 28). Unfortunately, the figures do not account for varying levels of competition, which may depress revenues for the courses in areas with greater population and, thus, larger number of courses. Nevertheless, our revenue projections appear to be in the mid- to high-range. Another table in this "Sourceletter" presents. pro formas for a private course and one run by a Park and Recreation Departrhent (page 29). Estimates of gross revenue from miniature golf in this table appear very high and may be unrealistic for a facility in Richfield, based on our calculations. The revenue estimate in the pro forma for the private course is also higher than any of the estimates presented on page 28. In order to refine data on pricing and customer counts, we recommend updating competitive market information in spring 1991, assuming this would not delay plans already in place for a 1991 opening. Utilizing various assumptions regarding-fees and customer counts, you can, in the meantime, calculate a number of revenue scenarios for a course in a Richfield park. We have enjoyed completing this assignment for you and are available to answer any questions you may have regarding our research. MA?{FIE~LD ~xOiJP November 11, 1991 MEMORANDUM T0: Don Fondrick City of Richfield, Minnesota FROM: Tom Melchior- Maxfield Research Group, Inc. RE: Potential for a Miniature Golf Course in Veteran's Memorial Park We have completed our update of market information on .Twin Cities area miniature golf courses and projections for the proposed course in Veteran's Memorial Park and summarized our findings in this memorandum. This document is divided into two major parts. The first part presents data on .miniature golf courses in the metropolitan area including our interviews with course staff/managers/owners. The second part presents our projections of attendance and revenues for the proposed course based on the market data and information provided by the International Association of Amusement Parks and Attractions (IAAPA). Our projections of revenue and attendance are much lower compared to the preliminary ones made in December 1990. We had incomplete information.at that time while current estimates are based on additional research including our own primary research and information supplied by the IAAPA. We believe they are more accurate than the previous projections. Miniature Golf Courses in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area We identified 19 miniature golf .course complexes in the urbanized portion of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area with a total of 25 individual courses; five of the complexes have multiple courses. This compares with 14 complexes (and 19 courses) identified in our research in December 1990. Subsequently, the term."course" will be used to represent "complex" in this memorandum. Based on our review of the Yellow Pages phone directories in both Minneapolis and ~St. Paul and our interviews with staff persons at the courses, we are confident that these are all of the miniature golf courses iri the area. We~ were able to gather information on 16 of the 19 miniature golf complexes; the other three had closed for the season when we conducted our research in late ~~~ 612-338-0012 620 KICKERNICK 430 FIRST AVENUE NORTH 612-338-0659 FAX ~ MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401 Mr. Don Fondrick City of Richfield November 11, 1991 Page 2 September 1991. We also identified two planned courses although we did not conduct a comprehensive survey of Twin Cities area communities as part of our research. Age of Course Table 1 presents market data on each Twin Cities area miniature. golf course. The courses are listed alphabetically by city. Based on our information from 11 of the courses and our estimates from two others, opening dates by decade are as follows: 1 course in the 1950's, 5 of the courses in the 1960's, 3 in the 1970's, 4 in the 1980's and three thus far in the 1990's. About-one-half of the courses have been built in the past 15 years. Fees Fees vary by course but range from roughly $2.00 to $3.75 for adults; four of the courses charge about $2.00 per round for adults, more than half the courses charge about $3.00 for adults and dust one course is above $3.50 for adults. There are lower fees for children 12 and under at nearly half the courses (one course charges a lower fee for children 5 and under), while the others charge the same fees for both children and adults. Most courses include sales tax in their quoted rate while others add the. tax. The average price for all courses including tax is $2.69 for adults and $1.97 for children 12 and under. Season Length Table 1 also shows maximum season length for each course, which is dependent on weather. There are two indoor courses in the region that are open all year, both located south of the Minnesota River: Grand Slam U.S.A. in Eagan and Second Season Golf Center in Lakeville. Season length for the remaining courses is fairly consistent with two-thirds opening sometime in April and all closing sometime in October, depending on the weather. About one-third of the courses wait until May 1 to open. .Hours of Operation Hours of operation depend on the time of year with more variable hours in the off-peak season (opening day to early June; Labor Day to closing). During the peak season (early June to Labor Day), most courses open at 10:00 AM and close at 10:00 PM or 11:00 PM weekdays. On weekends, courses stay open 1 to 2 hours later. Friday and Saturday nights are by far the busiest period. Some courses open very early all~year because they also have a driving range which caters to persons who practice before work. During the off-peak season, some courses do not open at all during weekdays, or if so, not until 3:00 PM or 4:00 PM to take advantage of the after-school crowd. Some courses have very flexible hours during the off-peak season with the weather often.a determining factor. o~ a~ ~d 0 N , vl N .~ n -I Oi0 N 7 N d 00 O 1d N g ~ ~ ~ ~ ., . .1 N ~ 3a O ~ 3~1 ~d Uri ~ ~ (: r-1 S.+ ~ C U O iD ~ p ~ tap Gp J ~ CA 1.1 Qp 1 tl .C ~ OD . 1~ cp Sa ~+ A 7-I - ~ ~ i-i ~ J.~ ~ O ~ O~ oo a ° ~ a°~ .rl td W Vl ~Ua~d .r1 ~ C1 1d ao .~ Vl •r~l ~a~~~ rd N •rl +~~dD 6 a ~ ~ ~~ ~ b ~ ggb d O id •rt ..~ 1 + ~ O cd ,~o ~ 1d O No•.~ O N L+ o Cq '~ QO to N ..d '~ c ,G d0 QD Sd - b PCI GO V1 OAS tl. pi `/ b .... ~ w q^q 3 ~ r-~ ~ ~ 3 ' ~ O .~ ..i..i v ~ O v v ~ L*r M p ~ '1 O N ~ O .. r-1 N r-1 • • p r-I ~-d ~ r-1 pp ~i r-1 00 ~ 00 .-1 ~ ~ O~ ya ~ ~ ~ i ~ O ~ i 00 ~ to M M MM M~ 1~ ~ r"~~ ~ ~1 N C .q. .. 3 ~ .. A 3 0 ~ 3 ~~ ...~ ~, ..... N i S-r O v `~ .. ~ .--1 ~ .--i N ~-d N r-1 .-1 O r-1 ~-1 N rl O N ~ ~ O ul ~ ~ ' ~ ~ O O r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O O O N ~ N ^ ~ 0 ~ ~ .-i ~-1 .-i ~-1 ~--1 N W O ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~w~ ~ ~ H E"~ ~W~7i U ~ [--~ H N Q,"3 C!J H [~ z H .~. ~ O q~ 1.~ ~ r7 O •,a ~ 1n ~ N ~ N Qi ~ r+ t d ~ 'L3 ~ ~ '-i J.1 ,!: VY v! U O U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '(~ M ~ Q', V} W O q1 tU • .-1 00 O O ~ zx b 3a N tr1 cd Q ~ tU O O~ ~+ ~ O ~~-1 tY1 O O 1!1 ~1 R! 3d R!. ~ M M ~ d d Q U U U U rl ~ ra ~ O O O O a O ~ O ~ , c d rl r-1 rl r-i .--~ ~ b G b ~ 1!'1 m 1!1 O V1 N O t1'1 00 ~ N p t` u1 ~o ~ •N .-1 N N e-I N N M ~k N O Os. O O u 1 O ~O ~ •M rl M N N M N M 1 ~ O 11 -1 r .1 r N p .--I O ~ ~ ~ O~ D\ O~ ~ r-1 ~--1 W O . U ~ • ~ i~ ~ J .1 '~". ,~3 O ~ d d d p <U s a ~+~ >~ ~ a' t o ~~ ~o m c a a '~ W r--1 N ~ ~ o •~ o ~ ~ ~-`~+ U U C7 oq ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~7 D\ O 00 ~O 00 O~ O+ O~ O~ ~ G O «7 3~1 W N 1.1 N al N U ~ ~ f3. ~ r N a cu ~ ,~ ' ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ , i~ c d a i ..-I cd rl O tO b0 U C7 .Y . 3 ~ U W C ~ ~' t ~l 7 v1r G ~ ~, .;.i .. en a~ a~ b Vl hp N 'd M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~, r-1 to N O ~ ~ ~d ~+ ~ 3a o N ul b R) ~ cq ~ to gN ~+ ~ v~ ~ y i i . o c da. .a~D ~ ~ oo icd a ~ ~ .a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~i > `+' v o0o d d a eo ~ ayi ~ ~ S doi b, i ~, ..+ ~+. ~d A ~ q ~ q ~+ ~ ~ ~ o ~ •d ~ ~ a a ~n ~ z° z° a~ ~+ ~ ao A ca ..+ ~i p ~ ..,. v w , ,-a ~ ~ ~ O v ~ ~ ~ r RS , w to ~ N - ~ M .. r-i r-1 O ~ M • • r{ O O~ r O r 'd 'C1 00 ,--1 e-1 rd r OO r-1 r r M ^ , , r , r r N r r N r1 •• W^ r ~ ~ ~o ~• ~ rn rn ~ o. rn ~ ~ o~ 3 ~ v N ~+ cA ^ ^q W ^A ^ N v W x v q W 3 ~ v .--I N .--1 1 3-r :OM V~ -1 O~ M O O r-'1~ 1 , r p . y r y M .. r ~ r ~ r O~ ~ r r rl r ,-1 e-i , r Q, \ O OO ~ r , r r O D\ M M , • .. .. p N 3-I - r N ~ ~ n M P• Zi ,--1 O~ O~ ,-1 O~ O~ e-1 O U O 3 ~ ~ Cn ~ rr1 O ~ M O 1f'1 1 rr1 --1 O M O f ~+ • ~ ~ ,--1 M 1 M e'- r h d ,-I G i. '~ ~ ° i 'd ~ o o vi o 0 0 0 0 r 3 ~"~ W Cn ~ ..a ~ , , , - r r r r , - ~ " ~d a ~ a a ~-+ ~ 6 w v a~ o a~ cn a d a d ~ ~ ~ 6 ~ d ^ ~ ~ E ., z a. ~' ~ ~ ~ o H N `~ ~ ~ ~ Z~ r 3-r t!'1 O ~ O O O O O O ~ ' r 'd I~ rn Q~ rr1 O tf1 u'1 O u i ~ iJ H ~ r rl .,-I e-i r--I ,-1 N N r-1 N M ~ rt1 d J.1 ~ ^ ~ N O O U ~ W r bj a u1 ^ O O O~ O~ rr1 I~ O O O O O O O O O O O ~ 'C1. ,. , ~ ~ r 'd N M ,--i M N M y ,D M M ~ ~ ~ dp ~I cd U W V O Vl h~ • ral 00 ~D ~O 00 -1 00 --I 00 r--I 00 r-1 ~O M ~ O z ,--1 M M e , N ~ 'x i N O N to N ~ t7 b ~ ~.' ~p ~D Qri ~O I~ Q.' O\ I~ ld .L ~Oi ~ ,~-i ~ Z ~ r--1 z t~1 ,--1 ~ i V ~1 , O ~ y •.a ~ N ~ GL O L~ •rl 'G W ~ x -~ cd 7' d ~ a ~ a°~ ~ x 3 . w . q~ .,0~ ,~ .~+ ~ cd U o W aG ~ .~ pO., ~ cd ~ b ~ b 1.! .-I ~ x ~ Gl C7 ~ cC R cd z o ~' «a o ~ o ~ G ~ ~ ,-a + r-+ ~d cd o a~ «~ o r+ on o ~ ~ a ci o 3 3 a cd , ~ •~ + v i ~d aid d .a a, o~~ ~a pcn qv~~ M v ,~ ~ a a a ~ ~ ,-+ ~ ~ y .,.~ o ~ ~+ ~ ~+ cn ~ ° v if ~~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~~ ~ v ~ n v' °n c v c a - c~ .c n i t- + c ~ c Mr. Don Fondrick City of Richfield Other Attractions/Amusements November 11, 1991 . Page 5 Most of the courses have attractions in addition to miniature golf. Table 2 lists each of these attractions with the number. and percent of area courses that include them. Interestingly, no single. attraction is present at more than 6 courses or 35 percent of the total. We included Beaver Mountain in this table (even though we have incomplete information on this facility) since they have a waterslide in addition to miniature golif. TABLE 2 AMUSEMENT ATTRACTIONS IN ADDITION TO .MINIATURE GOLF TWIN CITIES AREA MINIATURE GOLF COURSES* September 1991 Attraction No. of Pct. of all aourses* courses video games 6 35 driving range 6 35 go .carts 4 24 batting cages 3 18 baunper -boats 3 18 kiddie rides 2 12 basketball 2 12 par 3 golf 2 12 waterslide 2 12 pool tables 1 6 In addition to miniature golf... 4 or more other amusements 4 24 2 or more other amusements 8 47 1 other amusement 14 82 no other amusements 3 18 * Includes incomplete information for Beaver Mountain in Burnsville fora--total for 17 courses. Source: Maxfield Research Group, Inc. The miniature golf complexes with other amusements fall into one of two categories; they are either golf oriented (with a par 3 course or driving Mr. Don Fondrick November ll, 1991 City of Richfield Page 6 range) or they are amusement oriented with several other attractions aimed at children and teenagers. Of the~14 courses with attractions other than miniature golf, 6 are golf oriented (43 percent) and 8 are oriented to children (57 percent). The driving range is a more popular attraction than. miniature golf at least three of the golf-oriented courses (Swings Recreation, Second Season Golf Center and Troop Golf Center) according to those we interviewed. Several of the courses are planning to add amusements in 1992, however in December of 1990 two of these also indicated they would add attractions in 1991 but did not. Attractions such as bumper boats and go-carts require far more maintenance than miniature golf and in some cases are more labor intensive. None were planning to add another golf course although Troop Golf Center is planning to add a putting green (and batting cages). Planned Miniature Golf Courses We identified two planned miniature golf courses during our research, however, we did not do a thorough search of planned courses. The two we identified are to be located at 1) Valleyfair in Shakopee and 2) the Mall of America in Bloomington. Vallexfair's course will open in 1992 adjacent to the main amusement park in a separate area. Patrons will thus not have to pay the admission fee to Valleyfair to only play miniature golf. Valleyfair management would not reveal details about pricing, hours etc., however they did indicate it would be a nicer course than most of those existing in the Twin Cities today. We estimate that their fees will be at least in the $3.75 - $4.00 range. Mall of America will have two courses, one with 18 holes and one with 9 holes. According to our contact at the Mall of America, there is no new information since we completed our research last year. The two courses will be operated separately from the Knotts Camp Snoopy amusement portion of the mall, but they do not yet have commitments from operators as of yet. The nine-hole course will have a high-tech theme with laser light features and may be called "Flash Track". The other will be a traditional 18 hole course. Pricing has not-been finalized, however our contact indicated that adult fees for both courses will be "at average or perhaps a bit low... about $4.50 to $4.75". Clearly, they have failed to conduct research on fees at courses now operating in the Twin Cities since this pricing structure would place. them $1.00 above the most expensive course (Lilli Putt in Minnetonka) and about $2.00 above the average. Market Potential/Pro_jectians for the Proposed Richfield Course The following sections utilize information discovered in our research on Twin. Cities area miniature golf courses and on amusement industry literature, notably publications from the IAAPA. Mr. Don Fondrick City of Richfield Market Potential November 11, 1991 Page 7 Industry sources maintain that a population base of 100,000 persons in necessary to support one miniature golf facility with 36 holes (two 18 hole courses). Based on a 1990 population of approximately 2.3 million, the Twin Cities area could support 23 facilities with 46 courses. Our research identified 21 facilities with 28 courses, including the two planned projects at the Mall of America and Valleyfair. This indicates that the metropolitan area could support additional miniature golf courses. Our research also showed that more than .half of the courses are located in the south portion of the metropolitan area with all but three located south of the Minnesota/Mississippi Rivers. Since the metropolitan area's population is nearly evenly divided .north and south of I-94, then the south portion could support roughly 12 facilities with 23 courses. Including the .two planned facilities, there will be 12 facilities and 17 courses in the south portion of the metropolitan area. This indicates that the south area is nearing saturation of miniature. golf facilities. Existing courses are concentrated in Burnsville/Lakeville with one-third of the south area's facilities in these two communities. In addition, the two proposed courses will have special appeal: Valleyfair's due to the strong draw from attractions already in the area (e.g. Canterbury Downs, Valleyfair) and the Mall of America due to the strong retail component and Knott's Camp Snoopy. Both of these courses will thus likely be indirect competition only. Industry sources indicate that courses should be located 5 to 8 miles apart in addition to having the 100,000-person population base. We believe this is an excessively large area, particularly for densely developed urban areas such as Richfield, south Minneapolis, and east Bloomington. We estimate that a five- mile radius from Veteran's Memorial Park contains at least 250,000 persons. The area covers all of Richfield, nearly all of Minneapolis south of Lake Street, a portion of Highland Park in St. Paul, the portion of Bloomington north and east of Nine Mile Creek and the eastern one-third of Edina. In addition to the proposed course at the Mall of America, only one other facility (Putt-Putt at Southtown Drive west of Penn Avenue) is located in .this market area. The other Putt-Putt course is located in Minneapolis on West Lake Street on the periphery of the market area. Based on the population base of the five-mile radius, it should be able to support three facilities with five courses. Including the Putt-Putt course in Minneapolis and the proposed courses at the Mall of America, there will be seven courses in three facilities in the market area. Despite this number of courses, we believe another course could be supported in the area for several reasons. First, the Putt-Putt courses, of which there are five in two complexes (in Minneapolis and Bloomington), are dated in appearance and are unexciting by today's standards. They are, however, the least expensive courses in the Twin Cities and thus may be perceived as a good Mr. Don Fondrick November 11, 1991 City of Richfield Page 8 value to a portion of the market. In addition, both Putt-Putt facilities are located on valuable pieces of land in developing commercial areas. Both courses are not the highest and best use of the property and will likely be redeveloped during the 1990's. The. owner of the courses said he would be interested in selling both because he was dissatisfied with profits in recent years. Second, as previously mentioned, we do not believe the courses in the Mall of -' America will be direct competition for a course in Richfield. No one will go to the Mall of America only to play miniature golf. The appeal of the two. courses there will be in combination with other attractions or as a place to leave the children while parents shop. Attendance Projections In order for a miniature golf course to be successful at Veteran's Memorial Park, patrons must be drawn from the entire primary 5-mile market area and not just from local residents or persons utilizing other attractions at the park. The course needs to be viewed as an independent business and marketing activities such as advertising and promotions will, need to be an integral part of the operation of the course. Our revenue estimates assume that appropriate marketing along with competent management will occur at the course. We have estimated that the proposed miniature golf course will have attendance of 25,800 persons annually (plus or minus 10 percent) in the first full year of operation, assuming the course-will be open fxom mid-April to mid-October. In calculating these projections, we have divided the six-month season into three parts: peak, middle and low season. Peak season would run from mid-June through Labor Day, the typical summer vacation period for elementary and secondary schools. Approximately 70 percent of attendance would occur during this period. Our research indicated that average attendance on weekends would total 300-400 persons per day with a maximum of 500 persons. Weekday attendance (including the busy Friday night period) would average much less, probably 150 persons per day. This is significantly less than our estimates from December 1990 due to more complete information available this year. Middle season would run from late May (no later than Memorial Day) until mid- June and from Labor Day through the end of September. This is a period of generally nice weather, but a time when school is in session. The course would be open weekday evenings and weekends, but not during the day on weekdays. Attendance would average about 250 persons on weekends, but only 50 persons on weekdays (including Friday nights). Length of the low season will be dependent on the weather and could extend play from April 1 to~early November. In making our estimates, we assumed a period from mid-April to mid-October. We assumed that the course would be closed weekdays (except Friday nights) with attendance averaging only about 70 persons per day on Friday night, Saturday and Sunday. Mr. Don Fondrick City of Richfield Recommended Fee Structure November 11, 1991 Page 9 Our recommended fee structure assumes development of a mid-priced 18-hole theme course costing $250,000 to $300,000. Higher fees would be possible if a more elaborately designed "mega-course" were to be built. Given the development of such elaborate courses at the Mall of America and Valleyfair, we believe that a slightly-more modest course that would be at the upper end of the spectrum of existing Twin Cities courses would be abetter fit in the market. We recommend a top price of $4.00 to $4.25 per round for adults and $3.00 to $3.25 for children 12 and under, plus tax. This would place the proposed course at the-top of the market for existing Twin Cities area courses, but lower than the courses planned at the Mall of America and Valleyfair. As a new course with superior landscaping and features, this would be a reasonable price given the alternatives in the market area, the two Putt-Putt facilities.. Group discounts should be considered and marketed as an attraction for birthday parties or other events. We also recommend that reduced fees be charged for daytime .play on weekdays, typically much slower periods than at night. We recommend fees of $.75 to $1.00 less prior to 3 PM weekdays. Projected Revenue Assuming that about 15 percent of rounds will be played during the weekday discount time period and that 30 percent of patrons overall will pay the children's rate,. we project total golf revenue of approximately $95,000 to $100,000, plus or minus 10 percent, for the first full year of operation. This includes an allowance for reduced group rates. This does not include any additional revenue from the sale of snacks, pop or novelty items. Projected Expenses We estimate that operating expenses will average about 45 to 50 percent of gross revenue, or roughly $45,000 to $50,000 based on our review of industry data. This is a very rough estimate since a number of factors such as staffing (the largest operating expense item), maintenance and management may be functions shared with other park operations. First-year expenses may be higher due to typical start up costs (e.g. extra advertising) which may or may not be included separately as part of capital expenses. Our estimate assumes that only one staff person will be required to operate the miniature golf facility at any one time and that this person will be paid only slightly above the minimum wage ($4.50/hour). If this person also handles other park duties during slow periods, then estimated expenses will likely be nearer the low end of our expense estimate. Staff time for management and maintenance has been included separately, however both functions are assumed to be part time (10 hours per week or less) and thus shared with other park operations. Mr. Don Fondrick City of Richfield November 11, 1991 Page 10 If a course were to be built. using debt financing of $300,000, the annual debt service would be $42.,700 over ten years at 7 percent interest. Subtracting this amount as well as the estimated range of operating expenses from the projected revenue of $95,000 to $100,000 leaves a surplus of between $2,300 and $12,300. If the entire proceeds after operating expenses (estimated at $50,000 annually.), were applied to the debt, the payoff period would be 6.4 years on a $250,000 loan and 8.1 years on a $300,000 loan, at 7 percent interest. Summarv Based on our research into local miniature golf market conditions and on industry data regarding revenue and expenses,.our projections indicate that an 18-hole Chemed miniature golf course could be supported with positive cash flow in Veteran's Memorial Park in Richfield. We recommend development of a themed course with very attractive landscaping and lighting, a facility above what currently exists in the Twin Cities market. More elaborate courses are being planned by Valleyfair in Shakopee and the Mall of America in Bloomington. A course costing between $250,000 and $300,000 (total start-up costs), would likely generate between $95,000 and $100,000 per year in gross golf-only revenue, based on projected annual attendance of 25,800 persons. We recommend-that the course be planned so that a second course could be added later should the-first one prove very successful. Operating expenses decline as a proportion. of total revenue with a second course. We expect interest in miniature golf will increase during the 1990's as the number of children continues to increase-into the next century. The birth rate has been increasing since the early 1980's and 1990 recorded the largest number of births in this country since the end of the baby boom in 1964. Miniature golf remains a popular family activity and a good value when compared to other entertainment such as movies. Demand for a course in Richfield would increase further if either (or both) of the Putt-Putt .courses are redeveloped to more intense uses, as we believe is likely ometime during the 1990's. If you have any questions regarding this information, we would be happy to assist you in any way possible. ~ v ~, ~~ ~~ ;~ ~~ ~ .,~5•~•~ ~ ~ • •/ .. ~`' • ~ • ~"~-:~•• -, -:-~ SECOND MINIATURE GOLF SURVEY 1. Area of Miniature golf course operation, excluding parks: Square Feet Percentage Response Average Area 0-20,000 60% 10,795 20,0001-40,000 30% " 30,290 More than 40,000 10% 54,667 2. Miniature golf course characteristics: . Average Average No. of Percentage Parking Number of Holes Res_ posse Spaces Employees 18 63% 44 3 36 33% 57 8 54 4% 170 14 3. Annual attendance profile: Annual Attendance Range 0-20,000 20,001-40,000 40,001-80,000 More than 80,000 4. Number of Employees: Number of EmRjQyg~. 1-3 4-6 7-13 More than 13 Percentage Response 51% 23% 16% 10% Percentage Resoo" nse 49% 35% 7% 9% 5. Length of Season: Full-time Part-time Months Operation Operation 1-3 24% 90% 4-6 35% 6% 7-9 10% 4% 10-12 ~ 29% 0% 6. Type of market In which minlature golf operation Is located: Annual Attendance Ranges (thousands) Over-all Marke 0=2Q 20-40 40-80 Average Residential- 19% 11 % 22% 16% Tourist 27% 33% 33% 27% Mixed 42% 33% 45% 43% Business 12% 11 % 0% 12% Other 0% 11 % 0% 2% 7. Surrounding Residential Populations (estimated): Radius Average Residential Populations 5 miles 41,684 10 miles 87,543 15 miles 163,838 8. Zoning designation of real estate on which minlature golf course is located: Type of Zoning Residential Commercial Agricultural Industrial Percentage Response 21% 68% 4% 7% 9. Dld your local zoning ordinances require a specific number of parking spaces? Yes 41% No 59% 10. Wes it necessary to seek a special exception from local zoning ordinances to build your minlature golf course? Yes 34% No 66% Was it necessary to seek a zoning change from local authorities to build your minlature golf course? Yes 15% No 85% 11. Is miniature golf the main attraction at your facility Yes 52% . ~ No 48% 12. Game room operations at the miniature golf course: A. Game room on site: 50% No game room: 50% B. Of those with games rooms: Video games: 76% Midway games: 24% C. Area of game room: Area of Average miniature golf game room facilit ft2 urea ft2 0-20,000 915 20,001-40,000 1,116 More than 40,000 4,160 ' 13. Snack bar operations at the miniature golf course: A. Snack bar at course: 73% No snack bar at course: 27% 14. Other attractions available at miniature golf site: Water slide 9% Bumper boats 11 Amusement park 9% Batting cages 25% Carnival 1 % Driving range 12% Go-kart track 1 a% Other 15% Bumper cars 4% 15. Miniature golf course physical characterisltics: A. Putting surtace: Course area (thousands of ft2) 0-20 20-40 40+ Average Carpet over cement; ~ 72% ~ 92% 100% 80% Carpet over wood: ~25% 0% 0% 16% Other: 3% 8% 0% 4% 8. Topography of course: Course area (thousands of .f12) 0-20 20-40 40+ Average Basically flat: 46% ~ 33% 0% 39% Raised hazards on specific holes: 35% 13% ~ 50°/a 30% Elevation changes between holes: 19% 53% 50% 31 C. Use of water on course: . .Course area (thousands of ft2) 0-20 20-40 40+ Average One water hazard: 27% ~ 8% 0% 13% _ - More than one water hazard: 15% 30% 27% 23% WatertallS: 29% 35% 33% 31 Other: 35% 27% 40% 33% D. Props and themeing on course: . .Course area (thousands of ft2) 0-20 20-40 40+ Average None: 17% 4% 0% 11% Animals or other ~ figurines: 21 % 33% 14% 25% Decorative buildings: 40% 21% 36% 33% Artificial rock structures: 12% 25% 29% 18% Other: 10% 17% 21 % 13% 16. Is your miniature golf course Indoors or outdoors? Indoors: 10% Outdoors: 90% 17. Annuai gross revenues derived from miniature golf alone: Revenue Profile Course area (thousands of ft2) 0-20 20-40 40+ Average Less than $20,000 39% 14% 0% 27% $20,001-$60,000 31 % 14% 0% 32% $60,001-$100,000 ~ 12% 29% 50% 21 • $100,001-$200,000 6% 7% ~ 17% 6% More than $200,000 6% 37% 33%~ 17% 18. Profile of sources of gross revenues from miniature golf operations alone: Revenue Course area (thousands of ft2) Source 0-20 20-40 40+ Average Greens fees 81% 78% ~ 72% 80% Game arcades 5% 3% 16% 6% Food & beverages 6% 4% 7% 6% Merchandise . 2% ~ 1 % 0% 1 Other 6% 14% 5% 7% 19. Profile of operating expenses for miniature golf operation alone: Expense Course area (thousands of ft2) Profile 0-20 20-40 40+ Average Maintenance 16% 19% 15% 18% Payroll 31 % 30% 43% 30% Advertising.. 6% 7% 8% 6% Golf supplies 7% 6% 2% 8% General office 7% 7% 3% 7% .Utilities 7% 6% 10% 7% Insurance 8% 6% 6% 7% Taxes 7% 7% 7% 7% Other 11 % 12% 6% 10% l~.~iniature Golf & the Prospective Operator WHERE SHOULD /BUILD? POPULATION REQUIREMENTS ' When locating a 36-hole miniature golf course, there is a *n~n~*+~+um requirement of at least 100,000 people in .the immediate market area. If there is already an existing miniature. golf course in the proposed market, the market should contain over 200,000 people. If there is more than one existing miniature golf course, then make sure that each course, including the proposed course, has at least the minimum requirement of 100,000 people. (i.e., Two existing courses plus one proposed course equals three courses or a minimum of 300,000 people in the market area.) There are several reasons why a prospective operator should make sure that there is an adequate population base in a proposed market. First, there are categories of people in any market who do not play miniature golf -the elderly, persons with physical handicaps or ailments, the youngsters who are not yet able to participate, and persons who do not find outdoor recreation attractive or desirable • just to name a few. Secondly, while miniature golf is a fun recreation outlet, it is not a base necessity of life such as food, shelter and clothing. Therefore, people look. upon miniature golf as an optional activity.. Taking all these factors into consideration, one can expect that only 4090 to 509'0 of all persons living in a market will actually be potential customers. Therefore, out of a market of 100,000 persons, one can only reasonably expect 40,000 to 50,000 people to be the potential customer base. Of these 40,000 to 50,000 t potential customers, approximately 509'0, or only 20,000 to 25,000 people, will be active miniature golf customers. We believe these estimates to be realistic and accurate. In summary, if a prospective operator locates a new miniature golf course is a market area of only 100,000 people and which also has an existing miniature golf course operation, then both the new course and the existing course will be competing for the same 20,000 to 25,000 potential customers. This extremely small potential customer base will jeopardize the longterm profitability of the new proposed miniature golf course. Miniature golf is NOT like the €ast food industry which has historically located restaurants side by side throughout a market. The difference for restaurants is that 100,000 people in a given market area will create the need for 300,000 meals per day or approximately one hundred million meals per year. Typically, there will be over 50 different restaurants is such a market who will satisfy this very large demand. Miniature golf is different! As noted above, this same 100,000 people do not have to play miniature golf each day in order to sustain life and, therefore, there is a need for only one well maintained and operated miniature golf course. There are very few places in America where a high concentration of miniature golf courses has seemed to work. These areas are resorts that have millions of visitors each year. A classic ezample is Myrtle .Beach, South Carolina which as over 12 million visitors each year in approrimately a twelve week period. The Myrtle Beach area seems to support over sizty miniature golf courses. This same philosophy does not apply to the typical inland market locations due to the fact that there is not a continual turnover of the persons living in the market as is the case with resorts. ' We urge that the prospective operator use extreme caution when determining whether or not to build a miniature golf course facility in a market where there is an existing course(s). If we are not careful,. all of us will be the losers. Proof of this is that there are an increasing number of miniature golf courses two to three years old which are for sale due to overbuilding a market. Hopefully, we can all learn from our past mistakes and be more aware in the future of the unique population requirements of miniature golf: HOW MUCH DDES IT COST? Please find listed below the ranges of cost for the four different types and styles of miniature golf course designs. The ranges of figures given are to serve as guidelines only and are not intended as a guarantee of the minimum or maximum costa of construction that a prospectiveoperator-may incur. The ranges of construction costs are for miniature golf courses and parking area only and DO NOT include any cost of building(s) or land. - Pre Built Miniature Golf Course 18-holes $10,000 to $22,000 Standard Miniature Golf Course 18-holes $55,000 to $85,000 36-holes $125,000 to $160,000 54-holes $185,000 to $250,000 Themed Miniature Golf Course. 18-holes $70,000 to $125,000 36-holes $145,000 to $200,000 54-holes $225,000. to $350,000 Elaborately Themed Miniature Golf Course 18-holes $150,000 to $250,000 36-holes $325,000 to $475,000 54•holes $500,000 to $750,000 Building a themed or elaborately themed miniature golf course is much like buying a car. You buy the basic car and then you can continue to add to its coat by adding elected features or accesso- Ties. The same concept applies with the themed or elaborately themed miniature golf course in that you can continue to add specific features with the result being the final cost of construction will con- tinue to go up. Therefore, the sky is the limit. VYhen considering the type and style of miniature golf course you may want to build, please also consider the average gross receipts of other outdoor miniature golf courses throughout the United States. For your information, the IAAPA Miniature Golf Committee has recently completed a second national survey sent to owners of miniature golf courses. In this survey, the owners were asked to list their annual gross revenue derived from miniature golf alone. Please find the results of this question included in the survey on page 4. Annual Revenue Fro$le Ayera¢e Less than $20,000 279'0 $20,001-$60,000 329'0 $60,001•$100,000 - 219'0 $100,001-$200,000 69'0 More than $200,000 - 179'0 LAND REQUIREMENTS The various types and styles of miniature golf courses have different land requirements. There are t" four basic types and styles of miniature golf courses. These types and styles are as follows: (1) PRE BUILT -The pre built miniature golf course.usually consists of 18 holes at one location. These holes are built off site and delivered to the location for installation. (2) STANDARD -The standard miniature golf course has 18, 36, or 54 holes atone location. These holes are built on location utilizing concrete and these courses are usually simple and flat in design. (3) TEEMED • The themed miniature golf course has 18, 36, or 54 holes at one location.. These courses utilize some elevation changes, a small number of water features-and themed buildings or themed areas throughout the course layout. --.r ~~ (4) ELABORATELY TEEMED -The elaboratelq themed or mountain style miniature golf course has 18, 36, or 54 holes atone location. This type of course design incorporates tunnels, waterfalls, artificial rock formations, dramatic elevation changes and elaborate landscaping throughout the course layout. The land requirements for each of these four types and styles of miniature golf courses, including an adequate amount of land for minimal parking, are as follows:. Pre Built Miniature Golf Coarse 18-holes 20,000 square feet Standard Miniature Golf Course 18-holes 20,000 square feet 36-holes- 40;000 square feet b4-holes 65,000 square feet Themed Miniature Golf Course 18-holes 30,000 square feet 36-holes 60,000 square feet 54-holes 90,000 square feet Elaborately Themed Miniature .Golf Course 18-holes 50,000 square feet 36-holes 95,000 square feet 54-holes 140,000 square-feet NOTE: The land requirements specified above are averages and may vary based on the specific type and style miniature golf course a prospective operator might build and may also vary due to parking requirements imposed. by a local city or municapality. Please confirm actual parking requirements. ZONING REQUIREMENTS The zoning requirements for outdoor miniature golf courses vary from city to city. In some cities there will be a requirement that proposed locations be zoned heavily commeraal, such as C-3. In other sties a much heavier zoning will require such as Industrial. I. Please confirm with local city officials the specific zoning requirements for outdoor miniature golf in the market area in which you plan to locate. In order to assist you in your evaluation of your proposed construction costs, please find listed below the typical expense line items which you. can expect when building your miniature golf course. The total cost for each line item will vary from location to location and, therefore, no specific dollar amounts have been assigned. The expense line items are as follows: A. DESIGN & PLANNING On-site visits Travel expense Market evaluation Plans & detail specifications Legal fees Architect review (If required) Engineering approval stamps Permits Property plat & survey inspection B. E%CAVATE\UTILITY\DRAINAGE Water area excavation . Fill\Grading Culverts\Drains Water-tap fees Sewer-tap fees Plumbing subcontractors fee F.I.ANDSCAPING Trees, shrubs, ground Dover and sod G. T~IVIING Tunnel structures Buildings, facades & castles Water areas Deserts Various props Mountains Higway signs. Benches\Gazebos Bridges Pumps, .fountains Pumps, waterfalls Retention walls H. PARxING LOT Crushed gravel, asphalt paving or concrete C. GOLF COUI;SE MATERIAIS AND EQUIP- MENT Concrete for water area Conrete for holes, .patios and sidewalks Rock work Golf course construction labor Equipment rental Carpet & adhesive Initial operating equipment (golf balls, putters, promotional supplies, tickets, etc.) Initial. construction material package (cups, ob- stacles, tee-mats, fence, scoreposts, etc.) D. IRRIGATION Pipe\Sprinklers\Heads & Timer E. ELECTRICAL Light system Course light fixtures Subcontractor fees Sound system installation Special effects lights I. ADDITIONAL E%PENSES Construction utilities Builder's risk insurance Aocouating & administration Reserves & overruns • 20~Yo of total project (in high labor cost areas) J. ADDITIONAL BUILDING COST TO CON- SIDER Restroo~m\Golf\Food\Beverage building NOTE: There maybe other additional expense line items. which you may incur that have not been listed here. . WHERE DO /START? There are several different sources from which to obtain plans and specifications for miniature golf courses. Manyof these companies are new to the industry. We suggest that you require a list of their previous ( customers with addresses and phone numbers. Also, we suggest that you call or write each previous customer to determine the following: (1) Reliability of the company; (2) Thoroughness of plans and specifications; ~ . (3) Accuracy of plans and specifications; (4) Were sound construction techniques used in the designs? (5) Was design functional and reliable. There are three different commonly used methods to contract for the sale of plans and specifications for miniature golf courses. These methods are as follows: (1) Predrawn plans and specifications are sold for a flat fee; (2) Custom designed plans and specifications which are available either for a flat fee. or a per- centage of the total construction costs; and (3) Custom hand drawn plans and specifications which are furnished by a franchise company as a part of their franchise service package. In addition to plans and specifications, initial construction and continual operational supplies are always critical needs for miniature golf course owners. We reoommead that you refer to the "IAAPA International Directory and Buyer's Guide" to find the names of companies who sell miniature golf course _ supplies and services. If you have any questions about the listing in the Directory, please contact the IAAPA for assistance. The IAAPA Miniature Golf Committee has attempted to assist you by providing this information. We hope that as a result you will be able to more realistically look at the miniature golf industry. Also, this information has been provided to support the main goal of the IAAPA Miniature Golf Committee which is to establish ethical guidelines and standards under which the miniature golf industry can continue to grow. 'All of the information contained in this report is from the Miniature Golf For Prospective Operators workshop conducted by David Lloyd of Putt-Putt Golf Courses of America, lnc. at the 19891AAPA Convention & Trade- show inAtlanta, Georgia. MANAGING .FUN esigners and developers of '' ~ miniature golf, that great leveler of all ages, have ...,~ achieved a quantum leap in -' visitor interest • and enthu- ~~ ' siasm in the past 15 years. The new themed adventures, with babbling streams. rushing from hidden coves below thundering waterfalls, offer a brief escape to their patrons. Mountains of hand-formed fill dirt. provide the foundation for these neat little attractions that have even given rise to a new name for this popular past-time, "Adventure Golf." "Adventure Golf' is the latest generic term used, in a variety of Miniature Golf Parka to name. a few, Fish Cove Adventure. Golf, River Country Adventure Golf and Coral _ 'y „ Cay Adventure Golf. Along with a new .~ •~~ ~ name, there is a short but growing list of ~ "' designers and developers who can pro- ;+a~,`~ .~~ duce these adventure style miniature golf `~ facilities. `~,,..y On the practical side, there is more to ~•--,~ ; ~;,,.~ :' miniature golf design than is visible to ~ ~;~,.•„- the casual observer. Thous$nds of feet of -~,~~.~$:~. wiring, drainage, septic, sewer, water . f.'~~~ 1 ' and irrigation lines thread their way un- ~-`;.;_~~.=; derground and stand as obstacles to de- I ''~~ sign and. construction. It is the care and ~c= ~,' r'~ ~ ~,•. ~ ~ concern in this aspect of design that ena- bles adesirable product above these in- ~.:.' frastructures. ~;.~~.~~.~ •a 1 have not yet met the prospective own- :. •~ er who fails to have an opinion on design and believes that he or .she could easily duplicate the effort and skip the outside assistance. The designers and builders that I know have been able to achieve new ideas and designs on successful new courses, not because their ideas are better than their prospective clients, but they have learned through trial and error what works and what doesn't. They have the advantage of not having to re-invent the wheel for each new start-up. There are an infinite number of tricks to design- ing acourse that is tough but which does not create waiting lines at problem holes. For those who have re- solved these problems their courses offer more player enjoyment,. greater return business, fewer operating problems and a greater return on investment. Each month I receive visits and calls from would- be miniature golf owners. Some own one or two at- tractions and wish to make miniature golf their next venture..Others own a piece of land which they be- lieve could generate cash flow while waiting for oth- er~ more intensive development. Some are larger park owners seeking to build greater per capita spending, by increasing the length=of--stay in a Pay- One-Price environment. Others seek to create a new paid attraction. No matter who the caller is, there is always either abrupt surprise or absolute silence on the other end of the telephone when I tell the caller that design can cost from $5,000 to $25,000 and development can run from $100,000 to $500,000 for two 18 hole courses. And everyone wants one with all of the waterfalls and oth- er goodies. ' "How can it cost so much?", they re= tort, "I bet I can build one for less than ~,;~; $200,OOOI" It doesn't take a very sophisti- ~ r.- sated calculator to begin adding up the '` ~ - costs. Start with site planning, engineer- . ing and design. Add thousands of yards vO`'~ ~ I` ~ ~ of fill with an equal amount of labor ,~.~~,~~ hours. Don t forget the heavy equipment ~^~•' ~ to move and grade the fill and there are ~ ~° ~ ~ ` '• ~ more than a couple hundred yards of. car- ~'~ -'•--: ~':~ peting. For each special feature such as a . .> . . . , b waterfall, grotto, stream or bridge there •-~~f.-.~~~ ~~~ ti : is a cost. The amount and type of rock ~.~,h-~ work used can escalate a project budget ~`~ ~ ~.- by 5096... ~ • • ~ • Even without the courae there is still a R~:~ •. F- ~- themed clubhouse, parking lot, sewer, wa- ,~ •,~ ~- ;;~~ ter and electrical utilities along with lo- ~- cal impact fees. There is an unending A'La Carte Menu of theme and construc- tion goodies from which to choose. Yes, you can build a course for $100,000. I built my first board and concrete course in 1975 for $15,000 by capitalizing my own labor. If that's what fits .the market and suits the owner's parameters, it can be a very profitable way to go. • The best money spent will be .front end to deter- mine adesign and attach a price to build it. If the prospective owner can build it for less, then go for it. But remember, it is leas expensive to plan early than to rebuild later. There is also another way to look at the project bud- get. When the course is complete, what are the de- sired revenues and return on investment expected to be? To a great extent this will be determined by pric- 12 1•' ,, FUNWORLD Nouerreber 1988 ~ 4 3 k ~.x. , ing and the type of ~ market surrounding the project. Prices for -... ~.,... .: miniature golf admis- ~ ~- ~ sion can range from -" $1.50 to $S.OO.One thing _ =- ~ - I know for sure is you - ~,~ '__ , ;'cannot charge $5.04 for ' ~ and a $200,000 course , ~ you would go broke in . e, • a hurry charging $2.00 000 $500 f .• - _ '_ .,,~ fi '~~ ~ ~ ' course. or a , r.. ~ - ; s~ ~ . ~ From my view point . s ~::<•-- '~ ~ r^':~:.., I see miniature golf or ~ "Adventure" style golf _, ,~' courses categorized ,x .- into the following de- i '~ `- sign styles. '~'s OUTDOOR -Traditional con- crete and board course -Same course but ad- ding artificial haz- ards such as windmills -Same course but adding land contours with water and landscaping -Portable wood or fiberglass courses sometimes us-~ ing Themed figures -Themed courses with scale model replica build- ings, fiberglass animals, or a garden atmosphere and with land contours and water -Courses built on several land elevations with some rock work -Courses that rely heavily on existing trees or land. features -Themed "Adventure" style courses with more.ex- otic landscape, rock work, and abundance of wa- ter features INDOOR R i x -Indoor courses with topography and exotic land- scape, rock, work, and an abundance of water fea- tunes -Portable. and modular indoor courses with the same features as above There are many successful operating courses in ell of the above categories so the prospective owner should visit these, take photographs and decide what he wishes to achieve with his miniature golf course design .and how much he can successfully budget. -V. ~ Knowing the mar- ket parameters will help the decision= ~ i ~ _ making process and ~ make the job more pro- ~. :'> ductive. Most readers 3 of FUNWORLD are - knowledgeable about { their markets and al- ~~ t ~" ' ready have amind-set `~.l. that will help them su- 1;. '' tomatically select the type of design they wish to have. _ ~ For those persons ' ~ ~ ~-+.- new to the industry it ~~ -r is worth the space to - I ' mention here a few of the things that will ~, ~ 1 have a bearing on the design and ultimate ' investment in a mini- ature golf course: - Size of local tourist and residential close-in mar- kets - Year around versus seasonal market - Traffic count - Availability and coat of land - Size and shape of land - Competition - Traffic Count - Availability and cost of fill dirt - Cost and availability of skilled construction workers Along with this bag of grist for the decision mak- ing mill the prospective owner will have -a particular bent or motivation that will bear heavily on the con- cept and design. Consider these motivations and how they might impact the end product. - To extend length-of--stay - To build capacity - To add a new attraction - To owner finance and develop versus a joint ven- ture with developer - To hold onto a piece of land waiting for a future sale or use - To use equipment and construction skills to capi- rnnt. on p.16 November 1988 ~ FUNWORLD 13 `t'" ~ 1 MANAGING FUN cont. from p.13 talize labor To create a small "Mom and Pop" type business with jobs for family members To serve as an anchor attrac- tion for Shopping Center or similar retail venture. Since admission prices range from $2 to $5. and costs range from $100,000 to $500.000 there is a de- sign that. can fit any•pocketbook. The buyer needs to recognize, ear- ly in the project, what he wants, how much he is~ willing to pay for it, how he is willing to pay for it or how he is going to fund it. You cannot build a $400,000 course for $200,000. Most callers seeking informa- tion believe they can personally build the top of the line "Adven- ture" style course with all of the whistles and bells for $150,000 to $250.000. For those parks seeking a new attraction, miniature golf is cer- tainly worth pursuing either as a joint venture or as a new capital investment. There are some pit- falls that design cannot resolve. IC capacity is critical., miniature golf -may not be for you because the capacity is' not that great f80 to 110 per hour per 18 hole course. If space is a major consideration. then miniature golf may not serve the. purpose. `Miniature golf, either indoors or outdoors, chews up a lot of space in a hurry. Some indoor Malls, Leisure Recreation Centers have introduced indoor "Adven- ture"style courses successfully. Miniature golf design is in its infancy and is somewhat of an art form. Most designers will wish to design and build the course for their clients because of the potential difficulty that could be brought about by an inexperi- enced builder. At the very least the designer will ask for several site review trips including all expens- es. This is necessary because .there are often field changes. from what looks good on paper to what may be more practical. Most on-site changes will pro- vide more interesting holes, more playability, reduce future mainte- nance costs, reduce construction costs or prevent some mistake that will be the catalyst for some unde- sirable end result. There are only a handful of de- signers and frequently they are strictly in-house operators and only do projects in which they are partners.. The trick is to find one that understands your goals and parameters and who is willing to tell. you up .front if what you want is not realistic, that the project should go back to the drawing board before it escalates beyond the budget or worse, ends up as the course that Jack built. Arne Lundniark has been in the amusement business since 1975 and owned a small park in Michigan. He has served on the board o/' the IAAPA and headed up the newly /'ormed Waterpark Committee. In 1975 he built his first miniature gol f course and since then has been in- volved in the design. construction and operation o/' several styles of 'Adventure" style miniature golf' • courses. r ,er"'~~ . Golf Draws Maximum Attendance! D AAPA's first Minia- ture Golf Seminar clearly indicated the enormous interest and enthusiasm for .miniature golf prey alent today in the U.S. and beyond. The Seminar drew almost 500 participants, in- cluding people just consider- ing getting into the industry, experienced professionals, and 25= year veterans. Part of what fuels this enor- mous interest is a genuine lack of good, unbiased information about the industry, for which rea- son IAAPA is also pleased to an- nounce the creation of a standing Miniature Golf Committee. This Committee will be charged with collecting information and creat- ing high quality programs for the minature golf industry on gov- ernmental and public relations. insurance, safety and education. IAAPA does not endorse any particular style of miniature golf, but rather designed the Seminar to present a spectrum of courses for the would-be miniature golf owner by inviting industry suppliers to discuss their offerings and at- tempt to answer the most common' questions prospective builders ask. Our speakers represent a good cross section of what is available in the U.S. today. The panel included Don Clay- ton (Putt-Putt Golf of America), Jack Beatty (Cost of Wisconsin), Bill Miessner (Castle Golf Devel- opment), and Dutch Magrath ~ III. (Golf Players). By virtue of his thirty-five year tenure in the miniature golf busi- ness, Don Clayton opened the Sem- inar by summing up some of the history and current market situa- tion from his perspective. Don in- formed us that miniature golf was invented by caddies in Scottland who played this different version of golf in between carrying clubs. The craze swept on to England cont. on p. 30 December 1988/January 1989 FUNWORLD ~~ /~"z- ASSOCIATION NEWS cont. jrom p.25 under the. name of "crazy golf' and indeed, was first introduced 'to the'U.S. under this name. Dur- ing the 1920's U.S. courses totaled about 500. Today, active courses in the .U.S., according to Don, num- ber about 1500. Here's how Don evaluated these courses' annual earnings: of courses: 1000 300 200 IZ Grose _rceenues: less than $60,000. $60,000-$175,000 $175,000-$500,000 more than $500,000 Before beginning to discuss the courses that Putt-Putt builds, Don pointed out that the largest poten- tial source of profit in miniature golf is real estate appreciation. Don went on to discuss several of the typical questions that would- be miniature golf owners ask: acreage required, appraisal value, start-up cost, and market consider- ations..Putt-Putt course in a non- urban setting requires 100 square feet for an 18 hole course, exclud- ing parking. An urban 36 hole ~ course would require as much as 5 acres, including parking. Don suggests that in general ap- praisal value should be about twice gross .annual revenues. Start-up costs vary depending on the course. Don observed that the first course he ever built cost $5200 and the last $2.7 million. However, an 18 hole .course can generally be opened for as little as $30,000, in- cluding clubhouse, but excluding real estate. As far as the size of the market is concerned, Don recommended that if the population within ten miles is 100,000 or less. you should plan. on no more than 18 holes. Jack Beatty was next up and presented slides of some of the' work that his company does, much of which revolves around theming with waterfalls, changes of eleva- tion, mood lighting and shade structures. He indicated that this. style of miniature golf is often known as "adventure golf'. 30. Jack explained that the courses which Cost builds range from an average of about $115,000 for an 18 hole course to $550,000 for 36 holes, and require three to five months for construction. Bill Miessner also anticipated many of the would-be owner's questions, providing the follow- ing summary of the courses built by .Castle Golf. Castle .courses re- quire 17,000- 20,000 square feet for an 18 hole course; 45,000-50,000 square feet for 36 holes. They ap- praise, according to Bill, at five or six times annual earnings. On the subject of start-up costs, Bill pointed out that, because of the extensive fantasy theming. which is typical of his company's courses, initial costs range from $160,000 for 18 holes to $350,000 for 36 holes, the top-of--the-line courses costing as much as $600,000- $700,000. Bill observed that the ideal lo- cation for one of Castle's courses is a high visibility area, close to population centers and retail are- as which already provide substan- tial drawing power. He also sug- gested that the population within 10 miles should be no less than 150,000 for an 18 hole course. Dutch Magrath III began his presentation by remarking that his company's stategy was aimed at opening courses while keeping costs low, and then adding ele- ments to increase profitability when traffic justifies it. His com- pany has been in the business for 28 years and provides the Sir Goa ney style of figured miniature golf. On average, Dutch explained that his courses average 15,000- . 20,000 square feet, and top out at about .30,000. Start up costs vary greatly depending on design and the degree of ornamentation, but don't generally exceed $250,000. Profitable additions which Dutch discussed include go karts and batting cages. Both of these qualify as big gross revenue gainers, according to Dutch. Ago cart track generally requires about 30,000 square feet, and, with 15 carts costs about $100,000. Bat- Ling cages attract the sports- minded individual who might not otherwise play miniature golf. A six-station cage requires 10.000 square feet and- costs roughly $100.000 complete. ~ ' Other profitable add-ons Dutch mentioned include game roorx-s. bumper boats (especially if it's hot and people ,would enjoy 'getting a little wet- or snack bars which tend to keep people on the premises longer. As the question and answer per- iod got under way, it was clear that the Miniature Golf Committee will not lack subject matter for its programs. Questions ranged from what the industry can do to reduce unfair competition from publicly funded miniature golf courses, to water treatment questions, and discussions of .how to limit cus- tourers who play without paying.. IAAPA received over 50 nomi- nations to the Miniature Golf Committee from Seminar partici- pants, and has already begun the screening process. Seminar par- ticipants should also be receiving a background survey intended to begin the process of compiling in- formation about the miniature golf industry, information. which will be held in tihe strictest confidence and only released as an industry aggregate. Next year, IAAPA hopes through the Miniature Golf Com- mittee to be able to address much more specific operations questions in two or three seminars devoted to particular topics. If you would like more information on IAA- PA's miniature golf programs, have questions, or would like to make suggestions, please direct your correspondence to: THE I:~APA MINIATURE (30LF COMi`'IITTEE, 4230 ling St.. Alexandria. VA 22302. FUNWORLD Decerri6er 1988/January 1989 IAAPA's ~Siniature Golf survey PRELIMINARY SURVEY RESULTS a~rket research to uncover reliable in- formation in the miniature golf busi- ness has proven to be a wor- thy"but elusive goal. Recently, an in ormation gather- ing poll was conducted by IAAPA to identify the general characteristics of the 1500 or so miniature golf courses in the U.S. This survey proved a valuable aid to the Minia- ture Golf Committee in their evalu- ation of the industry prior to devel- oping new services for IAAPA's many miniature golf members. The first survey s results must be viewed with caution however. While they are illuminative in many respects. some figures, espe- cially those on square footage and attendance seem inflated. We be- lieve the survey did not sufficiently distinguish, for example, between the square footage for miniature golf alone and that devoted to other attractions. Attendance figures especially at the upper end also seem inflated, perhaps because some 7% of the 200 or so respondents are located in as- sociation with an amusement park. Still, until we are able to refine these results with a second survey, the .information contained in this first survey can provide'valuable in- sight into this growing area of the amusement industry if used with discretion. Survey respondents indicated the following as their principal busi- nesses within the miniature golf in- dustry: Ownei/operator 8796 Owner/operator/rnnsultant/designer 8% Owner/operator/designer/supplier 196 Owner/operator/consultant 196 Owner/operator/supplier 1`~ Other 296 Free-standing 5196 Part of another attraction 4996 Industry Survey Game arcade 2?% . Snack bar 28% Batting cages 15% Driving range 11% . Water slide/park 6% Go-cart track 3% Amusement park 7% No answer 3% SA`iTARF. FOOTAGE average % of respondents size 0-20,000 sq R 4896 9,900 20,001-40,000 sq ft 1996 32,500 40,001-80,000 sq ft 1596 66,500 80,001-100.000 sq ft 696 91,000 100,001-500,000 sq ft 896 192,000 500,001-1,000,000 sq ft 396 840,000 More than 1,000,000 sq ft 196 1,460,000 ANNi TAT. ATT_ F.NDANGE average 96 of respondents att. 0.20,000 attendance 4196 14,000 20,001.40,000 attendance 2896 32,000 40,00160,000 attendance. 896 54,500 60,001-80,000 attendance 596 73,600 50,001-100,000 attendance 1196 96,000 More than 100,000 atten. 796 233,000 holes 96 of respondents 18!19 6896 36 1896 54 1496 CROSS REVE?WES holes average revenues 18/19 $75,400 36 $140.500 54 $418,400 These averages however grossly distort. the actual distribution of revenues; for which reason the fol- lowing profile is provided. S'~ROSS REVENL>F PROFIT.E gross revenue range 96 of respondents Less than $10,000 4~ $10,000-$20,000 21% $20,001-$50,000 18% $50,001-$100,000 32% More than $100,000 25% decade % of respondents 1930-1940 .5% 1941-1950 .596 1951-1960 9% 1961-1970 16% 1971-1980 2096 1981-1988 ~ 5496 Franchise holders . 18% Independent 8296 Liability insurance is readily available 62`90 Hard to find 3896 Premiums are lower than 1987 1796 Same as 198? 15% Less than 1096 higher than 1987 ~ 3096 1096 or more than 1096 higher than 1987 3896 ~. i •- ~, FilNWORLD AprU 1989 22 C ONSULTA-NT' S REPORT ,..,. IS THIS A GREAT . BUSINESS Oft WHAT? hat other busi- ness allows one the opportunity .to ~ fight zoning battles, fend off curious building inspectors and play with heavy earth moving equipment? Where else can a borrower wage tactical battles with a banker in order to get permission to put the family estate into debt up to its eye- brows? Where else is it possible to put so much sweat equity into the deal that an owner will believe he has discovered a new diet plan? That's the amusement busi- ness for many and owning a mini- ature golf course, contrary to pop- ular thinking, is no different. It is a major project with costs for land and development now ranging up into the high six and seven figure range. While small in size, miniature golf in any of its current success- ful varieties requires the same careful planning, and dedication to excellence in operations as any other successful amusement busi- ness. ~ In fact the simplicity of it Dome easier. IN~IA~UR~' can make mistakes SIIVIPLICITY IS A FRIENDLY TRAP Miniature golf is financially successful for. a number of reasons beyond its popularity with all age groups. It is a simple business fitting the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) philosophy. A guest receives a ball, putter, pencil and a scorecard for 51.50 to 55.00, and when he is through he gets to keep the piece of paper. • The business has low overhead. It does not •have many moving parts or inventory. It is designed not to be labor intensive, (one person running the business can generate 52,000 sales per day without having to add a second person), and it is open seven days a week. So with a business this simple, all that is needed is apiece of land, a small loan from your friendly banker or a relative's deep pockets, and a new owner is bound to make mon- ey...RIGHT? WRONG...Not every miniature golf course is destined to become a whiz•banger. with bottom line, cash on cash return exceeding 2546. The landscape is littered with many courses where frag•. mented remains (an old score card stand or broken Humpty Dumpty figure) peer out through weed infested overgrown lots. LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION Simplicity makes it easy to dis- regard traditional market plan- ning parameters to guide location decision making. Location, loca- tion, location. That advice is as good today as ever. Exit polls prove that visitors to miniature golf courses are traveling to or from a residence, motel or other transient rental accommodation. Those same guests are either on their way to or from eating out, shopping or cruising the strip looking for something to do. Even with this information in hand, it is a good guess that at least 2096 of those interested in building a miniature golf course are interested and actually go ahead with a project be- cause they own a panel of land on a busy highway, near a town that is near another town etc...If the parcel of land is not in an area that will generate the most sales, then maybe it has a better use, or at least the project size should be scaled back. The right location for the deluxe, adventure style courses is land in the 55 to $8 per square foot. category and sometimes higher. If it can be found for less, the buyer should consider himself lucky or get a second opinion about the location. Occasionally, lower profile or traditional flat courses on feeder streets with lower land costs may be consid- ered. But, there is no magic formula. Sometimes a "sleeper" piece of land in an off location will do just fine, but the prospective owner should go in expecting prob- lems. 14 FcnvwoRro May rs8s SHIPS AND DREAMS Many prospective owners are un- realistic about what miniature golf can. do for them. On one hand. is the person always looking for his ship to come in? On the other, is the person pursuing a life long dream? There is absolutely nothing wrong with expecting a ship to come.in with the. development of a miniature golf course; but the person waiting on the dock has to be realistic about the size of the ship that is expected. Insuffi- cient capitalization, having too muc~ ~ that is bi r short-term debt, or planning a p j gge than the intended market will almost certainly scuttle the ship. If it is a small market. residential only,. and not in a.good location, think small. To leave another career and be tied to the operations cash flow for a new livelihood can be dangerous. A re- cent newspaper article about the fellow who left his job, put everything~he had into a miniature golf course (flat variety) in a moderate price location, in a good market and this. represented his life long dream, should give one cause for concern. That miniature golf course is struggling. It has never had the traffic and probably never will. Already other courses have opened in the same market with different locations, no dreams, and are doing fine. ITS SHOWTIIVIE, READY OR NOT Owning a miniature golf course has its problems. Managing one is a very fragile matter. Because of its simplicity, it can be run by one per- son. If only one is scheduled, howev- er, what happens when that employ- ee is, a no-show? No matter .what shin it is an owner/operawr has to cover the problem unless two or more persons are sched- uled during busier periods. This is not life threatening, but it can put a definite crimp in plans. A hired manager, on the other hand, may not be enough of a product champion to understand this type of on-call business entrepreneurship. For that reason, methods are devised to motivate a manager through participation in the bottom line performance of the com- pany. Even with motivation an experienced manager re- quires constant education to have the notion finally sink in that a manager's job is not an hourly job and the number of hours worked is not a measure of success. . cont. on p.22 May 1989 F(TIVWORI.D !J Frequently, course management is lei to ~an outside firm or a general partnership while investors are satisfied with passive involvement and positive cash flow. Coral Cay Adaenture Golf in Naples, Florida. ~'~~. CONSULTANTS cont. from p.15 THE FAMILY PLAN The mental frustration can be ex- tremely intense when trying to con- vince s .family member to come to grips with these realities. Often, family members are given manage- ment opportunities in miniature golf because of its apparent simplicity. Frequently those family members have no inclination or ability to per- form and it is difFicult, at best, to discipline them. Starting a business to give a fami- ly member something to do should be confined to paper routes unless that person is dedicated to work. Starting a family business where everyone is willing to share in the work can be very rewarding. Minia- tore golf is no different than other. operations, it is a demanding task- master that will not go away. It is there waiting and every day is show time, ready or not. TII1~IG IS EVERYTHING The award for the least tolerable mistake in planning the new minia- ture golf course goes to building per- mit and construction timing. If the plan is to open in June in northern areas or in the fall in southern year- around tourist markets, ground must be broken three to five months before depending on the project bud- get and the size and number of courses. If the frost in the ground does not permit a thaw until late March and the goal is to open in June, ground should be broken the grevious fall. If fall groundbreaking • date is to be achieved. it must be preceded by sometimes up to eight months of site location and acquisition, zoning and planning meetings, design, and engi- neering efforts. If the season is Me- morial Day to Labor Day and the cash flow projections depend on the full season, then there is no point in opening in July or August.. • For some reason many owners fail to come to grips with this simple truth. Sales cannot be made if a new course is still under construction. If it can be anticipated that a major part of the season might be missed, it is better to delay the project. PROMOTING A P.I.G. There are other types of owners besides those previously discussed. Many miniature golf developers are already successful in other business- es and professions or may be in the amusement business and are look- ing for positive ways to put capital to work. Moat of these investors are seeking cash flow but there are some seeking s related tax benefit. Miniature golf offers very few op- Not every miniature golf course is destined to become a whiz- banger with bottom line, cash on cash return exceeding 25%. portunities as a tax shelter, but it does shine out as a P.I.G. (Passive Income Generator>. That's a tax ad- viser's description of an investment that has the ability to shelter pas- sive losses resulting from other business ventures. The I.R.S. will no longer permit certain losses, which reduce taxable gross earnings where the investor has no active involvement. However these same losses may be offset by P.I.G.'s and that is where successful miniature golf courses do.offer.an investor some taz related assistance if he is a passive investor. Often general partnerships are syndicated with this in mind. Fre- quently, course management is left to an outside firm or a general part- nership while investors are satisfied with passive involvement and posi- tive cash flow. Other investors, ~ not sheltering passive losses, view the business as a cash generating machine. ~ They want the cash and are content to pay the appropriate fazes on earned income. Some want to operate the business or let a member of.the fam• ily run it. Others wish to remain in- active regardless. of the tax law. 22 Generally these businessmen -are astute enough.. to find the right loca• tion, pay the price based on location and desired results, and set up rea- sonable financing with appropriate debbequity ratios. Even with this success in hand, miniature golf still presents a reasonable opportunity for other mistakes. IF SOMETHIIVG CAN GO WRONG IT WII.L Think about .Murphy's law and pay attention to the full scope of a miniature golf project. There are dozens of other things that can and do go wrong. Here are just a few: 1. Overbuilding or underbuilding for the market. 2. Lack of professional advice from engineers, soil tests, min- iature golf designers and builders. 3. Mistakes resulting from doing it yourself or using inezperi- enced help. 4. Too much short-term debt. 5. Not enough capitalization: 6. Lack of adequate construction budgeting. ?. Do-it-yourself designs. S. Not enough parking 9. Inadequate cash control (re- member its a cash business). 10. Inadequate resale value of land if things go wrong. 11. Lack of attention to market- ing 12. Lack of operating experience or guidelines. 13. Lack of staying power for low seasons and poor weather. For ~ new ~ miniature golf owners who follow the rules, pay attention to timing and do their homework, the ernnomic rewards and pride of ownership justify the effort. After all, miniature golf is a simple busi- ness. Arne Landmark is Vice Pres- ident of F.C. Management develop- ers of miniature golf courses and is also chairman of the IAAPA Minia• tore Golf Committee. Fp1VWORLD May 1989 . MAIN A'~TRACTION , „ - .. ~~` ; ~.; y ~ ~ a :~ • ~ ~ .o . s ~ ~' ..• 3 •• ~ ~r" ~~,,• -, ,, • J ..• ~. L,•l c.~~'i r~ 1 4 ~~k~fkt ~ r ~ ~ l r ,ti . r r -- ~ = ~ f - '~ .J :;~ 4.w •y•~ .~ Yr n •,~ ~, • ~.~ .• ~ .,.: ,r ., , f. Y, 1•~ ~` •'~yf ~ C~ -_.. ~ - ~- K .~ ~`' .,, r •~ - ---fit: ~+ti ti ?w ~•„ur~4.~trr- puff nr•,urnJ u1 ••q,• „/ rin• rn„rt• rluburntr ntrrrr~;„1/ r•urrr.r~. sk different people and ~•ou•11 get different =tories about the origin of mini- - eolf. Some :ac that it «•a~ a 1916. in~•ention of the idle rich- "postage-stamp'' course= on spra~t•ling estates. Others claim that it began in tie~~• Tork Cin•-pla~•ed on rooftop; and street corners durin: the difficult depression era. «'haterer its origin. mini-golf ha- sur~•ieed it. ups and dmcn: for morn than 60 ~•ea+•s. and. according to the experts. 'depending on the amount of research ~•ou im•e~t in..~hich man= agement practice; eou follo~e and ho~~• hard you're killing to .cork. there•~ no bett^r t+me to be in the bu~+ne~=. Mini-golf i~ a hand=-on bu;ine=~ ~~•hich t•equires a substant+al amount of daih• crutin}• and on-site partic- ipation. On the othet• hand. it can also be one of the most pleasurable enterprises to run. and if ~•ou like to golf. ~~•hich is nearl~• a nece~sit~•. it can be a dt•eam come tt•ue. ~'~'e questioned a number of 1:~~• Pa's.~•ell established mini-goH'cow•sr o~cner= and manager: a~ to chat it takes to get in and be succe==ful in the business. ~1lthoufrh mam• agreed upon certain aspects of cour=e getup and operation. there were al=o ~~•ideh• differing opinions on ho~~• =omr area= of operation should be handled. a~ a result. the ne~~• or prospecti~•e oper- ator ~~•ould du ~~•ell to stud~• the al- ternatire~ carefully and make deci- .r :~~+• :~~. • •~-s~.~ - : 4M- • . -~r - dons based upon hi: of her n~cn unique set of cit•cumstance=. Luuk 13c•fcit•c•.l•+n+ Loup The expert, agree: kno~~• ~•our hu=i• Hess before }•ou open ~•ou+• doot•~. That means market research-studying population. competition and tr:tttic patterns. Talk to people in and out ofthe business. Make sw•e ~•ou knmr ~~•hat to expect. "Lots of min+•~ro11 f;+• ciluie~ come and [`o yuicla~•.° -:+~•~ 1S-~•ear veteran Oscar Pettey: oi'~'il• lage Green 1liniature lull' in L:+n- caster. Penns~•l~•ania. "1 ~~•anted to kno~~• ~~•h~• people ~~•ere fretting aut. 1 spent t~'o ~•ears talking to people and considering all the details." Those details include sizing. Hoc ~~ F[ :'~ {~•URLU /lrrrml>rr• I N•w •Iununr~ !>~`r1r ~-~, =on can be and if you should consider a covered or indoor facility, Then there's maintenance, landscaping. and insurance requirements. Your.Site The alternatives include mini-golf or mini-golf plus arcades. batting cages and other attractions. Some ex• perts say that the serious mini-golfer wants only mini-golf. By investing your time and money.in one activity, you're likely to have a more sophis- ticated, well-run operation. Others claim that their customers want sev era) activities to satisfy a family's di- versified interests. Themeing and novelty obstacles must also be considered. Again, the experts take two positions. Some be- lievethat mini-golfers get tired of the gimmicks, and contend that serious golfers want challenging courses and "Keep everything sharp and clean; keep and don't let anything _ 1'J<III down'.' ~-- ~' '~ .. ... beautiful scenery that make them feel like they're playing "real" golf. Other operators claim that their customers, especially the kids, enjoy the themes and the novelty obstacles. Both are valid points and, again, you should know the demographics and zoning laws of your area. Some municipal- ities limit or prohibit such themeing and novelty obstacles. Food concessions can range from a single soft drink machine to an ex- tended menu grill and anything in between. The consensus here is to sell high quality at reasonable prices. Greg Florer advises, "Keep your menu limited; it's easier to maintain qual- ity that way and you don't confuse people or slow the line down. Food must be priced reasonably-~if prices are too high, customers will think that everything's too high." Some facilities selltee-shirts, hats, mugs, and other. imprinted items: Generally, the experts report that al• though these items are not big sell- ers, they are effective in generating name recognition. "~~'e putour name on everything -mugs, shirts. and pencils-to remind people that we're here even when we're closed." says Bob Dunn of Rainbow Recreation in Dingmans Ferry; Pennsylvania. Marketing Marketing includes radio, televi- sion. newspaper, and outdoor le.g. billboards, signs- advertising; cou- poning; direct mail; research; im- printed merchandising; and events sponsorship. The effectiveness of each medium depends on a number of fac- tors.. Look at your location. Are you. receiving drive-in traffic? Would signs or billboards along a main road work? Monitor broadcast or print advertis- ingprograms by working closely with station or publication sales represen- tatives. Track your leads and change your schedule or even your'medium if you're not getting projected results. Since results can vary, it's critical that you try different strategies to find the right one for you. Don't for- get to keep researching your market. Some facilities install turnstyles to generate customer counts for a given hour, day, or week. And customer questionnaires requesting zip code, age group, and attraction prefer- ences provide valuable marketing information. Timing is always critical to mar- ketingand promotion success. Grand openings, whether kicking off a new season, a new facility, or a new at- traction, should occur early in the season. Holiday weekends or weeks, (e.g. Memorial Day or spring break) are usually good times because the kids are home from school. Tying the opening into a special event (one fa- cility opened its doors during the muscular dystrophy fund-raising drive after donating mini-golf play to the cause), also works. And by be- coming asponsor, you can reap the benefits of local advertising for the event. Pricing is another important mar- keting strategy. Competitive prices, as well as discounts for seniors, stu- dents, groups, and off-peak players are effective. But expert opinions dif- fer on the issue of free, 2•for-1, or "all you can play" games for a fixed price. Oscar Petters believes that you don't give business away through free games. Customers at Petters' course can, however, earn free games if they 9 December 1989/January 1990 FUNWORLD much room is needed for one. t~vo. or three mini-golf courses'? What about concessions or other attractions like bumper boats or video games? How much acreage nor square footage if it's an indoor facility, will accom- modate present and future plans? Will expansion be possible? Will there be room for shrubbery, waterfalls, picnic tables, and parking? Sizing involves several factors. says Greg Florer of Blackbeard's Nlirii-Golf, Fresno. Cal= ifornia. "Initially, you want as much acreage as you can get at a reason- able price; then you can grow and improve over time. If you're the only operator in your area, you don't have to come in that big. If there are others, you must be as big as they are. On the other hand, you must be careful that you're not so vast that your park looks empty, yet big enough to move your customers through without crowding." Consider design alternatives. Should you buy a franchise where the design is established? Some do, but Oscar Petters did not. "I didn't want to give up control," he says. "It cost more money to design it myself, but I wanted the course my way." The current price to buy an exist- ing course or to design and build a course from the ground up is depen- dent upon where, how much and how big. Land in more rural settings can sometimes be had for a song, while acreage in populous city suburbs has been known to surpass the $150,000 per acre mark. While costs to build the actual courses do not fluctuate as widely, still, required lot size, ma- terials used, quality of obstacles and landscaping, and additional attrac- tions and facilities must be taken into account. The current price range ex• eluding land can run as low as $10,000 or, for more elaborate operations, as high as a million. There are established courses for sale. And, there are companies that manufacture and sell complete mini- golf courses for easy on-site assem- bly. Some of these "portable" courses can be moved, stored, and manipu- lated to fit indoor and outdoor facil- ities of various sizes (see thg current IAAPA International Directory and Buyer's Guide, page 39. for supplier details). Think about marketing. How will you promote your business before and after you open? What about climate? This determines how long your sea- make the last hole. "I keep challeng- ing my customers to come back and beat the course." he says. Some operators offer free games and 2-for-1 two people play for the price of one- and find that this approach works. Some recommend a flat fee for unlimited mini-golf play. This keeps the customers in the park longer. ~Ioreover, if customers feel that they'~•e gotten their money's worth. they may be inclined to spend money on other attractions. Myron Gilcher of Gulf Golf in Treasure Island. Florida has been in the business for 30 years. He believes that word of mouth is his most val- uable marketing tool. "We rely on word of mouth by making our cus- tomers our salespeople. We try very hard to have a park that our cus- tomers will talk favorably about. We make sure they leave smiling." ~~bstacles out at the same time. Shrubbery and greens must be care- fullytended so that they always look manicured. Wood and other surfaces must be clean and freshly painted. "Keep everything sharp 'and clean: keep everything painted, and don't let anything run down.".says Gilcher. "Itis better to have 10 perfect roses than 100 roses that are marginal in ,„ appearance.' You can always. tell when a course is headed down." he continues.."The wood is ragged, the weeds are all over the place, the grass isn't neatly manicured. This is all part of the appearance. If it looks sharp, people want to be part of it. If a cus- tomer sees a piece of paper lying on 'the ground, he thinks it alright to throw another piece down beside it. It's like giving him permission. But he doesn't want to be the first one." Don't cut corners on carpet. Shop HOW MUCH:DOES IT COST? The ranges of Pre Built Mini Golf Course figures given are 18-holes 510,000.00 to 522,000.00 guidelines only. Standard Mini Golf Course Costs listed are 18-holes 555,000.00 to 585,000.00 36-holes 5125,000.00 to 5160,000.00 for courses and 54holea 5185,000.00 to 5250,000.00 parking only and Themed Mini Golf Course do not include 18-holes 570,000.00 to 5125,000.00 building(s) or land. 36-holes 5145,000.00 to 5200,000.00 64holes 5225,000.00 to 5350,000.00 Elaborately Themed Mini Golf Course 18-holes 5150,000.00 to 5250,000.00 36-holes 3325,000.00 to 5475,000.00 54holes 5500,000.00. to 5750,000.00 Maintenance and Groundskeeping "Disney changed the amusement business for good," says Bob Miller of Mini-Golf America in Williams- burg, Virginia. "People are spoiled: they will not come to an attraction that isn't first class." That means courses, attractions, restrooms, and landscaping. And that means main- tenance and groundskeeping. The experts-say that this is an area that cannot be overlooked. In fact, the "care and feeding" of your obstacles, grounds, and indoor facilities must be done on a daily basis, with pre- vention apriority. Keep obstacles in good working or- der and inspect them on a rotational basis so that you don't have several around and ask questions about grain, piling, backing, and wear. Although higher quality carpet costs more ini- tially, you'll save in the long run by not having to replace it as often. As one operator points out, it can cost twice as much to install or remove carpet as it does to purchase it. Plus, better carpet means better play for your golfers and a more attractive appearance for your course. Insurance $uy the best liability coverage you can find. `"There's no financial limit when a person sues;'says Ed Pear- son, General Manager, Seattle Mini- Golf. "There are insurance com- panies that work specifically with park operators. Ask questions and talk to several companies, We saved. almost t«•o-thirds of our or»nai quote by taking time to ask yuest~ons and shop around." It's also important to reduce the likelihood that you'll be filing a claim. Keep your eye on potential trouble - customers swinging clubs.. run- ning on the premises. anything that might result in .injury. Some opera- tors are replacing metal clubs with rubber-headed equipment to mini- mize potential damage to both cus- tomersand facilities. They're also re- placing potentially dangerous obstacles where hard swinging may be required, Myron Gilcher recalls an incident where a ball hit hard into a loop 'd loop obstacle flew out the other end and right into a customer's face. He removed the obstacle the next day. Hard drives should generally be avoided, and as such, on longer run- ways rover 10 feet- where such drives may seem necessary, you'd be wise to position the green's hole away from people and property. Listening To The Industry Other tips? Take advantage of what the IAAPA has to offer. According to Bob Miller, an association member since 1968, "The association has al- ways been very helpful, and now it's really embracing mini-golf concerns. The information shared at the Con- vention workshops, plus the various market reports are especially useful " Ed Pearson likes IAAPA's mini-golf roundtables and also recommends the annual show, especially~to the new- comer. "It's a great tool for everyone. in all phases of the business ° he says. "Operators, manufacturers, and ser- vice people are sharing knowledge, products, and technology." Although opinions vary, the ex-. pens do agree that mini-golf can be an exciting and profitable undertak= ing. But it does require hard work and a strong commitment. Myron Gilcher summarizes his ad- vice to new and prospective. opera- tors, "Set ups 10- or 2~0-year plan to pursue this vocation to your very best. If you're not seriously committed, don't do it. You can't be off-site and make it work. It may appear to be easy money and slow-cost operation. but it requires an attention to detail and cost like any business. You must keep your feet solidly on the ground." ~.. 10 ~ FUNWORLD December 1989/January 1990 tJ~ Carets Regions Tlu. following is dtrived from tht 1990 U.S. Anrrrsenrent Consrinur Survey. IAAPA's recent National Amusement Consumer Survey provides the tus<clear picaae available to the amusement industry in general of who's playing miniattre golf in America And wow, what a picture! The Survey identified a minimum of KII rar ~~ MT ca t,K .~ MIM~w~ ~I M~wM~1/ YUIN 11N Y.f. 1-wY~MNnt CM~wN. ~Wr~Y FIND OUT WHO PLAYS MINIATURE GOLF 120,000,000 games of miniature golf played in 1989-three times larger thaw an earlier estimate. The Survey also turned up the interesting result that miniatue golf attracts a generally more affluent and better educated crowd than other attractions covered by the Survey. The following profile summarizes the results of the Survey as they apply w miniature golf. Miniature Golf in America Miniature golf attracted players across a wide geographic spectrum (Chart 1), but thttie regions hosted 6196 of aU attendance: MAT, ENC. and SAT. For region defuridons, see shaded box above. As is the case .with aU outdoor amusements, miniature golf amtdattce clusters pctdominanily into three summer months, however, miniature golf shows a somewhat stronger "shoulder" attendance than do. for example, go-kart tracks and waterparks (Chart 2). On the other hand. this points up the ability of one attraction to fill out the attendance weak spots of the other. Further homing. in on the peak months. Chart 3 examines how attendance in June, July, and August varies from region to region. No doubt weather is the strongest factor in this comparison. Don't forget that thisattendancerepresertts 1989on1y. Other years may show otherpatterns. However, comparing the attendance carves of the MAT versus the ENC otth SATregions, it is interesting to Chart 2: Peak Season Attendance Percentage of Total Amount aw 14Y J1.1. ~IrY. 11Y.IMt ~tsbMM se .~ m Mtt~r~Wlt O N-Yrb ~ w~i.clw ~«r Chart 1: Miniature Golf Attendance 1989 by U.S. Census Region note how attendance in the first case. actually builds through the thrte peals months. whereas. in the latter cases. attendance seems to fall off from an initial peak in June. June being the undisputed peak nationally, Chart 4 details the length of time players spent at miniature golf cotus~s in June 1989. Considering the relatively. short time it takes to play 18 holes. this Chart suggests the success that miniature golf courses are having inlengtheriing customers' stay by various means. including the addition of multiple 18-hole courses. and other ataactions. It also hints at Chart 3: Miniature Golf Attendance 1989 by U.S. Census Region ~~ ,M. ~~ ... ~.~ .~ ,.•••M N MW1.•M M•IS• tea... ®~w pMr•ws ~' 1fN Y.M 11w.i••w•wt CM•rw~r Wr•Y Chart 4: Length of Stay Miniature Goif Visitors June 1989 l e.r. « ~... { jii~i( s ~.~.. i ~ i ~ ~ + ~ 1 j :a•~w.. f f s.r.... ~ ; ~ ~ ~ i • _ t ~ _ • ~ t i• f i f• IOi•w• N tlw•M•Hs lffi Y.i. 11wr••w•wt C•ewr•, hrwY the social nature of the sport and players' fondness for enjoying the leisurely social aspect of the game rather than barreling through at full s While no one would dispuut: that miniature golf usually derives most of its adherents from a krcal population. Chart 5 provides a peak at the relative volume of miniature golfers coming fiom various distances. Fully 4696 claim to have travelled just five miles or less (during June 1989) to play miniature golf. Don't forget. this could mean a guest in a tourist market crowding out of his howl room and driving one mileto a local couuse. Of course, this also means that more than 2 million households travelled 25 miles or more during June of 1989. to play minisuue golf. Miniature Golf Demographcp One of the most frequent requests we receive at IAAPA is on the subject of miniature golf demographics. While statistics are always a poor second best to personal knowledge. they nevertheless provide an interesting, even encouraging picnae. Miniature golf attracts only 119'0 of its attendance nationwide from the lowest household income category studied (Chart 6). and s whopping. 2996 of atundance from the highest income category. Charts 7 and 8 provide a comparison ~ of the income demographics of miniature golf playing households versus family entertainment tenor and ~ go-kart patrons (Chart 'n. as well as amusement panic and watespark visitors (Chart 8). It is no doubt part of the Charm of amusement panics and waterparks that they attract visitors from across a broad economic spc~-~;,;1. However. miniature golf haspronouncedly thehighestincome Chart 5: Distance Travelled Minature Golf Visitors Juns 1989 w.w.~.w• r..r.w~..» • « w•• ww• i t• 1• w••• ll t. ,..w. li e• :s .w• ~l a l...w. ww• t0•n lM ww• ~ ~ : . li .,•.«,.....r.r.«.. liN u.•. ~•r,....ne C•e•rw•. w.wv Chart 6: Household Income Demographics Minature Golf Course Visitors •wwwl w.r...a• r.••w. M•/t..N t1L1N-~t1.f1f •,,......>w..•. ....... Itr~t•we•w M •.•M• •t..•• 1•N Y.i. •r•wwt e.w.r.. •ur..w/ Chart T: Household Income Demographics Attraction Comparison yw.111wwewW ww ii•tl1.•N ~ i; us.tw-t•..Nr ,~ °~ .s<...-.~•..t. :~ ~~: i....• • • 1•Ii 1. 1l A3l a hew~ew• ti w•... tw••• a..•/. f ~..~.1 d..~ ~•/•/.Orl . oo.i.n IfM Wi. ww,••w•wa tw.•.rr Mo•• i': ~„_: Chart 8: Household Income Demographics. Attraction Comparision .M.r t.».~. «.... tht~l..» t~t.t...a..t.. I tat.MPtN.tR .„.tt.-.a..a ttt.t..• t ~.at.at~.a. .......« w ..... •w. a' Ytrtsw orl o r.nntw~ ~ o wt«rrtt ,tw t.t. tw...«t t««w tww N i ~~ a. at /. ItM r.t. •.ww~t Ct•wntr thn•tt Chart 10: Family Household Size Attraction Customer Comparison / • aw ta.«wtttt w .w.. p tlttt.tYt O ~trtwt ttrY ~ Mw.tw ttM Ittt. w. t.rtwa Nwtw- Mr•tt demographics of any attraction surveyed.. Of cotuse. there is -also some regional variation to miniature golf players' income demographics. ,For example. the high-end segment (Itot~ettolds with annual ittcartte above SS0,000) comprises more than 20% in six of the nine regions, and more than 30% in four (Chart 9). -Otheraspects of the miniature golf playing household no doubt also have an effectors the current growth of the Sport Chars 10 shoW4 the relBtiVC size of households visiting several .attractions. Miniature golf is the lowest in the smallest bottsehold category and enjoys s S% lead in the Largest ttottseltold category. 'This may lead to larger family group participation. While miniature golf may not have the highest percentage of college giadttaus among its petrels (Chart 11), still, 70% of miniature golf patronizi:tg households are headed by individuals With at least sane college edut~tion. ve:stts a next bestof 62% foramusementparlcs.l'n age. miniatuue golf household heads tend to be marginally younger. too (Chart 12), dtalttaCCaUy fewer coming from the tS0-years-plus category. Lastly. miniature golf playing bottseltolds show a significantly higher incidence of credit card ownership nationwide (Chart 13), espxially as compared to Wate:park patrons. The attrvey goes inw considerable detail on this point. offering breakdowns on oil company credit cards. major stational retailers, and green. gold. and platinum American Express Cards. Tltiscanbehelpfulinlocating corporate sponsors and mailing lists When planning promotions. So then you have is s sttapshotof Who's playing miniawre golf in Amaica.aU in all. ttot a bad scenario. Chart 11: Education Level Head of Household IttR rtt.w t«.« ««. ...t.~t....t ..~.. p t..t...w O rw..Mt .... ~ wwtaw t«t 11N ~.tt tsw...twe e«..tw awty Chart 12: Age of Head of Household (Excluding non•tamily households) s at st-at ..... «-.. .» w«.t«. w ..... p wt..tw ~ t.r...wt tw t>• r+rtw.t •wr ttM r.t. w~r.~.w• tw•~~ tr.~r Chart 13: Howehoid Credit Card Ownership .I....ew tt.taws..t w .«.. • p rttt.ts.t O tww.t tt.r ~ 1wN./+ t.M /tM tN. tr~..t.t•e s+we•.. a..tt Chart 9: High~nd Income Demographics Minlaturo Gotf Visitor by iiegion